Oil Sands Chemistry and Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop

Oil Sands Chemistry and

Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop

June 6-7, 2005 Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

i

Oil Sands Chemistry and Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop

June 6-7, 2005

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

ORGANIZED BY:

Craig Fairbridge National Centre for Upgrading Technology

Natural Resources Canada

Greg Smallwood Institute for Chemical Process and Environmental Technology

National Research Council Canada

Kevin C. Stork Office of FreedomCAR & Vehicle Technologies

U.S. Department of Energy

F. Dexter Sutterfield National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)

U.S. Department of Energy

and

Len Flint LENEF Consulting (1994) Limited

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Oil Sands Chemistry and Engine Emission Roadmap Workshop was organized jointly by Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, and Fossil Energy, within the United States Department of Energy (US DOE), Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) and the National Research Council of Canada (NRCC). The workshop was held in Edmonton, Alberta on June 6th and June 7th 2005 and brought together experts from engine and fuels technology, refining, the oil sands industry and other related industries. The goal of the workshop was to identify knowledge gaps related to the utilization of future transportation fuels derived from oil sands sources in advanced combustion engine technologies. The workshop did not attempt to assign responsibilities for any follow up work. The meeting was organized to allow presentations by technical experts in oil sands development, transportation fuel chemistry, compression ignition engines and engine combustion, followed by breakout groups studying seven related topics. These include: advanced engine combustion with diesel-like oil sands derived fuels; advanced engine combustion with gasoline-like oil sands derived fuels; fuels processing; fuels characterization; emission control systems; fuels of the future; and the implications of oil sands derived fuels on existing engines. The main knowledge gaps will be discussed in detail in Sections 4 through 10, and combined with the input from a post-workshop survey, will also be summarized and prioritized in Section 2. Nonetheless, it is useful here to summarize the themes developed at the workshop. Oil Sands Products The rapid development of Canadian oil sands combined with its strategic importance to North America is more widely introducing a new class of crude oils to US refineries. These crude oils, whether shipped as unprocessed bitumen, or in upgraded form as synthetic crude, have different characteristics from conventional light and heavy crudes, and their introduction as a major proportion of the refinery crude diet will present certain challenges. With present quality synthetics, for example, most conventional refineries are limited to about 10-15% of this in their diets before fuels quality limitations begin to appear. In particular, the highly aromatic nature of these products is well known. The challenges to utilizing these crudes include overcoming higher process severity requirements for distillate and heavy gas oil conversion in order to duplicate fuel characteristics to which we have become accustomed. The technology to overcome these differences is largely known, but requires significant lead-time to install. In addition, as oil sands synthetic products increase in volume those oil sands producers who have recognized these quality limitations are either retrofitting existing facilities, or building-in increased quality in “grass roots” facilities. One challenge over the next ten to fifteen years will be to match synthetic crude product quality with receiving refinery developments, in such a way that upgrading between the oil sands and the refining industry is not duplicated. The principal focus in the shorter term for refiners will be to address these quality differences and ensure the current engines, both gasoline and diesel, are satisfied. As new

Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop – June 6-7, 2005 i

engine technology develops, we will gain a better understanding of the future fuel characteristics for those new engines that appear in production vehicles. The oil sands and transportation vehicle industry will then need to assess how oil sands products fit in. Will they represent new challenges or offer serendipitous synergies? For example, will cycloparaffins, of which the precursors are in abundance in oil sands products, become a preferred fuel component in new engines? Existing Engines Gasoline as we know it today is a blended product of streams that are processed in such a way that their chemical characteristics have been significantly altered, and are largely independent of the crude source. Hence, there are few if any differences between gasoline from oil sands products and from conventional crudes. It is generally recognized that the diesel fuels (and jet fuels) which come from current processing of synthetics present the greatest challenge compared to those produced from conventional crudes. They are typically high in aromatics, and this normally leads to higher tailpipe emissions. While much can be done to better understand their impact on engine performance, particularly as regulations are tightened, the onus will be on the combined efforts of synthetic crude producers and the receiving refineries to adopt additional processing capability to change with the incremental quality demands for these fuels. Another special need was identified: a better knowledge of the performance in current engines with what are essentially blends of conventional and oil sand derived fuels. New Engine Technology and Fuel Characterization Largely as a result of announced regulations on future tailpipe emissions, engine R&D has been experimenting with new combustion technology for some time. At this relatively early stage of research there are a number of different new engines being studied, most revolving around lower temperature combustion, and whatever other engine parameters are necessary to ensure complete combustion. Therefore, there is no clear winner at this time for preferred new engine technologies. Continued development of this new engine technology necessarily results in many technology gaps. In particular, this includes the marriage of the technology with the optimum fuel, and such other requirements as the impact on emission control systems. The major knowledge gaps identified include:

- Chemical characterization of preferred fuel types. - Modeling of different fuel types in new internal combustion devices. - The impact on emissions on emission control systems, and their further

development. - The eventual translation of optimum fuel quality into specifications based upon

physical or chemical characteristics that can be moved to refinery control labs. - The development of enabling devices, such as improved fuel quality sensors, and

possibly on-board reforming devices, and their integration with optimum engine performance.

Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop – June 6-7, 2005 ii

While not of itself a knowledge gap, a number of participants noted the need to involve the auto industry (OEMs) and key parts supply industries in the developments as they proceed. This is also true of the refining industry, which needs long lead times to address the logistics of improved process introduction and fuels distribution infrastructure. Emission Control Systems In existing engines, there is still a lack of understanding of how oil sand derived fuels impact the performance of emission control devices, such as soot filters, NOx and EGR system performance. The major concerns are for diesel-type (compression ignition) engines. In the future, there will be similar work required to identify differences between oil sand derived fuels and conventional fuels. However, as noted above, synthetic crude is subject to continued review of, and generally improving, quality. Therefore, any research that plans to use synthetics should attempt to use fuels that are representative of likely future average quality, rather than the standard synthetic crude oil that dominates the markets today. Fuels of the Future There was general consensus that, whatever the concerns for efficiency and emissions in future internal combustion engines, they will still be a significant presence in the transportation sector in the next 25 year time frame, and likely well beyond. Therefore, much of the discussion on future fuels covered alternatives that may be large volume components within traditional fuel types or variants to satisfy new engine technology. This includes the role and extent of bio-fuels as a diesel fuel component, both for existing diesel engines and future new engines. In gasoline, ethanol is already recognized as a growing presence. Longer term, the investigation of Fischer-Tropsch products from syngas may need to be investigated. Residues and coal are potential products for gasification to syngas. In addition, there was discussion on future enabling technology that might enhance the operating efficiency of existing and new internal combustion engines. One priority area was identified: the role of new sensors and electronic control technology, as well as on-board reformers, may play a role enhancing internal combustion performance in terms of both efficiency and reduced tailpipe emissions. There was also some discussion of new motive devices that are a radical departure from the present internal combustion concepts, as either stand alone units or as hybrids. These are not new concepts, and involve such things as electric drive and fuel cells. The full discussion of these was not part of the workshop objectives.

Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop – June 6-7, 2005 iii

This page was left blank intentionally to accommodate duplex printing

Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop – June 6-7, 2005 iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................................i 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background.................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Goal of the Workshop ................................................................................................. 2 1.3 Workshop Organization .............................................................................................. 3

2.0 KNOWLEDGE GAPS AND PRIORITIES FOR RESOLUTION.................................... 4 2.1 Oil Sands Derived Fuels (OSDF) with Existing Engine Technology ...................... 5 2.2 Oil Sands Derived Fuels with Advanced Engines.................................................... 5 2.3 Fuels Characterization and Implications for Refinery Production. ........................ 6 2.4 Emission Control Systems ......................................................................................... 7 2.5 Fuels of the Future ...................................................................................................... 7

3.0 PLENARY SESSIONS .................................................................................................. 8 3.1 Oil Sands Overview ..................................................................................................... 9 3.2 Upgrading & Refining Oil Sands Derived Crudes .................................................... 9 3.3 Chemistry and Analysis of Bitumen-Derived Crudes and Fuels .......................... 10 3.4 Impact of Oil Sands Derived Fuels on Emissions from Heavy-Duty Diesel

Engines....................................................................................................................... 10 3.5 Emerging Trends in Engine Combustion................................................................ 11 3.6 Future Fuels ............................................................................................................... 11

4.0 ADVANCED ENGINE COMBUSTION WITH DIESEL-LIKE OIL SANDS DERIVED FUELS........................................................................................................ 12

4.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 12 4.2 Seed Questions ......................................................................................................... 12 4.3 Summary of Main Discussion .................................................................................. 13 4.4 Key Questions and Knowledge Gaps...................................................................... 14

5.0 ADVANCED ENGINE COMBUSTION WITH GASOLINE-LIKE OIL SANDS DERIVED FUELS........................................................................................................ 16

5.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 16 5.2 Seed Questions ......................................................................................................... 16 5.3 Summary of Main Discussion .................................................................................. 17 5.4 Key Questions and Knowledge gaps ...................................................................... 18

6.0 FUELS PROCESSING................................................................................................ 21 6.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 21 6.2 Seed Questions ......................................................................................................... 22 6.3 Summary of Main Discussion .................................................................................. 22 6.4 Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps Identified......................................................... 26

7.0 FUELS CHARACTERIZATION................................................................................... 27 7.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 27 7.2 Seed Questions ......................................................................................................... 27 7.3 Summary of Main Discussion .................................................................................. 28 7.4 Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps Identified......................................................... 30

8.0 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS.............................................................................. 30 8.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 30 8.2 Seed Questions ......................................................................................................... 31 8.3 Summary of Main Discussion .................................................................................. 31 8.4 Key Questions and Knowledge Gaps...................................................................... 32

9.0 FUELS OF THE FUTURE ........................................................................................... 33 9.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 33 9.2 Seed Questions and Main Discussion Points Raised ........................................... 33 9.3 Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps Identified......................................................... 37

10.0 IMPLICATIONS OF OIL SANDS DERIVED FUELS ON EXISTING ENGINES ........ 38

Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop – June 6-7, 2005 v

10.1 Introduction................................................................................................................ 38 10.2 Seed Questions ......................................................................................................... 38 10.3 Summary of Main Discussion .................................................................................. 38 10.4 Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps Identified......................................................... 40

11.0 EPILOGUE .................................................................................................................. 41 12.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 41 13.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................... 41 14.0 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND TERMS.............................................................. 43 15.0 APPENDIX A1: PLENARY SESSION PRESENTATIONS ........................................ 45 16.0 APPENDIX A2: FEEDBACK FROM BREAKOUT SESSIONS AND

SUMMARY PRESENTATIONS ................................................................................ 133 17.0 APPENDIX A3: ASSESSMENT OF PRIORITIES FOR TECHNOLOGY AND

SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENTS............................................................................ 179 18.0 APPENDIX A4: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS....................................................... 183 19.0 APPENDIX A5: WORKSHOP AGENDA .................................................................. 189

Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop – June 6-7, 2005 vi

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background In transportation fuels, the long-term leadership of the US engine R&D community, through the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency, has made great strides since the 1970s to reduce tailpipe emissions from transportation vehicles and encourage greater fleet fuel economy. That drive continues, and new engine technology is the subject of ongoing research and may develop a new class of engines, for which the optimum fuel is not yet fully understood. A good example of this ongoing work is found in the report entitled “Invitational Workshop on Advanced Combustion and Fuels”1 (see References section) organized by the U.S Department of Energy through the FreedomCAR & Vehicle Technologies program. The marriage of the right engine technology and fuel composition is essential to the drive to lower emissions while improving fuel efficiency. In this regard, the growing importance of the new class of crudes from Canadian oil sands invites a review of how fuels from these crudes differ from those derived from conventional crudes for both existing and new engine technologies. Overlaying the requirements that oil sands crudes have placed on engine manufacturers and fuels refiners, the basket of crudes available worldwide are also becoming heavier. In addition, there are security of supply issues, especially for the US in terms of uncertain conventional crude reserves and production capability, as well as significant political upheaval. The growing economic power of the two Asian population-based giants, China and India, places even more future strain on recoverable reserves. At the present time, Canada is the largest import source for US transportation energy needs, supplying about 15% of US imported crude oil and refined petroleum products. The oil sands, owned and managed by the Province of Alberta, are a strategic resource, and a key opportunity for greater supply security in North America. Canada is second in proven reserve size to Saudi Arabia, with established reserves of 175 billion barrels of bitumen-derived crude recoverable by known technology today, and much larger additional potential with improved technology. Similar reserves are also being developed in Venezuela. Current production from the oil sands is approximately 1 million barrels per day. If all projects proceed as announced, production is expected to double within the next 10 years, in what is sometimes termed the “second wave” of oil sands development. Beyond that timeframe, the recently published Oil Sands Technology Roadmap2 has set an achievable vision of 5 million barrels daily by 2030, or some 15% of projected North American crude demand by 2030. Five million barrels daily should not be considered a limiting vision; the scale of the resource could support even greater production. Transportation fuels derived from oil sands could become one of the dominant fuels in North America for many years, especially in northern tier states. Oil sands production is expected to grow rapidly, and while there may be some offshore market developments, the bulk of the production above Canadian internal use will be consumed in a widening US refining market, especially in northern tier refineries in PADD II, IV and V. While some of the production will continue to be shipped unprocessed to specially equipped US coking refineries, the growing volume of synthetic crudes will need to address

Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop – June 6-7, 2005 1

certain processing limitations with current quality synthetics, which have a generally higher aromatic and cycloparaffin structure. In particular, distillate quality is poorer by the oft-quoted cetane specification, and highly aromatic gas oils present special challenges to fluid catalytic cracking conversion units, which are favoured by US refiners. For example, most conventional refineries are limited to about 10-15% of present quality synthetic crude in their diets before observable impact on distillate fuel quality or conversion unit performance. Newer synthetic crudes (both from existing and planned new producers) appear to be addressing this issue, however, it should also be noted that the higher ring structure is an asset in cold performance. Canadian refineries which process large quantities of synthetics do so by virtue of a high installed hydrocracking capacity. Shell Canada’s Scotford refinery is the ultimate in this regard, having processed 100% synthetic crude for more than 20 years, producing specification distillate fuels. Planned EPA regulations will place tighter specifications on tailpipe emissions, and the increasing proportion of oil sands derived fuels will likely present greater challenges for existing engines than is the case for fuels derived from conventional crudes. Regarding new engine technology, there is significant research underway to balance low emissions with high efficiency. Current prototype engines being researched lean towards low temperature combustion, but with a variety of ignition and other operating options. Consequently, fuels experts, and eventually the refineries that will produce appropriate new fuels, have significant work to do. This includes addressing incremental improvements to existing fuel needs, characterization of fuels for future engine technologies and developing refining process strategies that represent workable production and distribution solutions. All of these integrated needs also have to address ever-changing regulatory requirements designed to reduce emissions from the transportation sector. The vision is raised of a medium-to-long-term future where both existing and new engine types will need to be satisfied by what may be different classes of fuels. One presentation and subsequent discussion did point out that “designer fuels” for a variety of engine types place significant challenges on both the refining of crudes into fuels and their distribution and marketing. In particular, the refiner must still be able to convert as much as 85-90% of the combined crude diet into transportation fuels to remain economically viable. All of these drivers – current and new fuels technology, internal combustion technology, new crude sources, refinery and fuels distribution systems, and changing regulatory requirements – need significant integration of R&D in order to move forward in an organized way. 1.2 Goal of the Workshop The goal of the workshop was to identify knowledge gaps related to the utilization of future transportation fuels derived from oil sands sources in advanced combustion engine technologies. The workshop did not attempt to assign responsibilities for any follow up work, which needs to be addressed after a period of deliberation and coordination. The meeting was organized to allow presentations by technical experts in oil sands development, transportation


fuel chemistry, compression ignition engines and engine combustion, followed by breakout groups studying seven related topics. While the oil sands derived crudes and the special characteristics of derived fuels were a deliberate focus, much of the output derived for advanced engines in particular is equally relevant to conventionally derived fuels. 1.3 Workshop Organization This workshop was designed to derive feedback from technical experts through a series of plenary and breakout sessions. A plenary session was held on a number of related topics. Section 3 and Appendix A1 describe these presentations in some detail and they collectively provide a broad introduction to the workshop aims. The majority of the workshop was devoted to breakout sessions dealing with seven topics. Breakout group facilitators and rapporteurs were carefully chosen for their background in the subject matter and R&D practices. There were five separate breakout sessions for each topic, so not all participants were able to contribute to all seven. Nevertheless, the breakout groups afforded the opportunity to gain a broad cross section of opinion in each area. Breakout groups ran concurrently with approximately 6 to 10 people in each group to maximize feedback. There were seven breakout topics:

1. Advanced engine combustion with Diesel-like oil sands derived fuels: Facilitator C. Mueller, Rapporteur R.Pigeon

2. Advanced engine combustion with Gasoline-like oil sands derived fuels: Facilitator M. Musculus, Rapporteur T. McCracken

3. Fuels processing: Facilitator R.McFarlane, Rapporteur N.Billette

4. Fuels characterization; Facilitators P.Rahimi & A.Lemieux, Rapporteur P.Arboleda

5. Emission control systems: Facilitators B.Bunting & T. Johnson, Rapporteur J.Kelly

6. Fuels of the future: Facilitator S.Whitacre, Rapporteur C.Fairbridge

7. Implications of oil sands derived fuels on existing engines: Facilitators T.Gallant & J.Wang, Rapporteur N.Shea

These breakout discussions were facilitated by a number of seed questions. These are listed in Sections 4 to 10 as part of the detailed review of the breakout session discussions. Plenary feedback on the breakout sessions is reproduced in Appendix A2. An important part of the output for each breakout topic was a consensus on the key knowledge gaps. The identification of knowledge gaps was largely achieved during the workshop. In addition, as rapporteurs and facilitators edited their notes and summary sections for this final report, they will have used their experience to further elaborate or otherwise edit some of the original notes.


While much of the priority setting was achieved in the workshop, participants were given the opportunity to take a second look at priorities via an e-mail survey. Feedback from this priority assessment is summarized in Appendix A3. Section 2 summarizes the main knowledge gaps that arose at the workshop. For the purposes of the following discussion, low-temperature combustion (LTC) refers to a broad range of strategies that lower engine-out emissions by limiting in-cylinder temperatures. Homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) is one low-temperature combustion strategy that uses a premixed (usually lean) charge. Viable non-HCCI low-temperature combustion strategies also exist; for instance mixing-controlled combustion strategies that use high levels of exhaust-gas recirculation (EGR). A “mixed-mode” strategy uses low-temperature combustion over some subset of the operating map, and compression ignition direct injection or spark ignition over the rest. The term oil sands derived fuel is utilized to distinguish a generic type of fuel derived from oil sands processing from a generic conventional crude oil derived fuel. Of course, the actual fuel chemistry would be dependent upon the original source and the processing technology. Nonetheless, the term is used in a generic fashion in order to stimulate discussions and comparisons with conventional crude oil-derived fuels. Oil sands derived fuels may also be identified as an example of an extra-heavy crude oil derived fuel.

2.0 KNOWLEDGE GAPS AND PRIORITIES FOR RESOLUTION This section summarizes the main priorities for closing the knowledge gaps related to the utilization of future transportation fuels derived from oil sand sources in advanced combustion technologies, including some indication of the order of priority. In making this assessment, the priorities identified in the individual breakout groups, and reported in Sections 4 through 10, have been compared with the results of the priority assessment sought through the post workshop survey. The priorities in this section are subdivided under different headings from the breakout sessions themselves. In this summary, a high priority means that well planned R&D should be both discussed and initiated almost immediately, and almost certainly within two years. It is also noted that some of this planning is already well underway, and some of the R&D priorities are already being worked on. Before discussing the priorities for existing and advanced engine technologies it is also important to repeat that new engine technology will be introduced in such a way that the “engine technology distribution” at any future point in time, after the first introduction of new technology, will still include a significant but gradually declining number of vehicles using existing combustion technology. Therefore, refineries will need to satisfy both new and existing engine technology for an extended transition period. This is likely to be as long as fifteen or more years.


As a general observation, high priority was ascribed in many breakout sessions to involve the original equipment manufacturer community (OEM - the auto industry and component suppliers) and refiners at the earliest opportunity in the ongoing research. 2.1 Oil Sands Derived Fuels (OSDF) with Existing Engine Technology In general, gasolines derived from oil sands feedstocks differ little if any from those derived from conventional crudes. This is especially true for the majority of refineries processing oil sands derived crudes, because these crudes are typically a relatively small proportion of the full crude slate. Gasoline, as we know it today, is largely composed of components that have seen significant molecular rearrangement to produce specific hydrocarbon types. As such, these hydrocarbon types are largely independent of the source crude. Historically, the Scotford refinery (the only refinery processing 100% synthetic crude) did experience difficulties with their new gasoline product when the refinery started up in 1984, and with a few selected engines. Significant research was undertaken between Shell and affected OEMs to solve this problem and it is not expected that such difficulties will reoccur. Any concerns expressed with anecdotal evidence have been with distillate based OSDF. This includes jet fuel and diesel fuel, but the latter was the primary focus of discussions. The workshop determined these priorities for research and investigation at the operating level.

a) Resolve any diesel and jet fuel lubricity issue arising from deep hydroprocessing. b) Understand the role of additives in addressing fuel differences. c) Understand the impact of blending fuels from conventional and oil sands crudes, as

the OSDFs become a significantly larger proportion of the US diet. d) Understand the impact of any future diesel aromatics regulations on OSDFs.

2.2 Oil Sands Derived Fuels with Advanced Engines Breakout sessions at the workshop divided consideration of advanced engine technology for gasoline-like OSDF and diesel-like OSDF separately. However, there was significant commonality between issues identified, so as to group the key priorities under the single heading. In addition, the range of new combustion technologies undergoing research at this time means that there will be no clear “winner” in the near future. Research continues on a number of advanced combustion technology fronts, with the dual purpose of reducing tailpipe emissions and increasing fuel economy. The highest priority was accorded to the following requirements:

a) Understand the effects of various fuel species on the kinetics of combustion and develop integrated computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models of the combustion process role.

b) Develop new fuel specifications tailored to low temperature combustion in the various new combustion technologies.


c) Identify the differences in chemical composition between OSDF and conventional fuels in engine performance terms (e.g. soot formation).

d) Create a public database of thermodynamic properties of fuels. e) Extend advanced fuel technology to multiple cylinder engines and full cycle loads

(again the priority here is for diesel-like fuels). f) Involve OEMs in the future R&D and demonstration.

Somewhat lower priority was ascribed to the determination of the energy efficiency emission balance, and the impact of additive chemistry on advanced combustion. Other long term interests expressed will largely be addressed after extensive R&D in the above priorities. These include the desire for a single fuel type suitable for spark ignition or advanced engine types, the use of on-board reformers (which may be advantageous to bridge the gap between refinery capabilities and the ideal engine fuel), the exploration of niche opportunities for OSDFs, and the need in time to narrow down choices for advanced engine technology. With respect to “gasoline” versus “diesel” type fuels, with current engines the challenges are less for gasoline than for diesel, but future engines may require a review of this situation. It was suggested more than once, that an ideal fuel for advanced engines may turn out to be something between our current concepts of gasoline and diesel. 2.3 Fuels Characterization and Implications for Refinery Production. Two sets of breakout groups discussed fuel characterization and fuels processing (the latter meaning challenges to the refiner). Because of the technical links between understanding fuel characteristics and means to produce in the refinery, key priorities for future R&D are summarized together. In reviewing the priorities for work, it must be understood that refiners cannot “turn on a dime”. For refiners, and their associated fuels distribution systems, fewer fuel types are an objective. Secondly, because new engines will coexist “on the street” with existing engines for a substantial transition period, refiners are also responsible for satisfying both types of vehicles during that transition period. A good historical example is the introduction of unleaded fuels, which began in the early 1970s. Leaded fuels have only been fully replaced in North America within the last decade. Any discussion of priorities regarding potential new fuel formulations needs to keep this limitation in mind. While experimental engines may desire narrowly defined fuel specifications, including boiling range, the refiner still needs to be able to produce large quantities of transportation fuels without large volumes of unusable byproduct streams. Processes to selectively “redistribute the boiling range” are available, especially hydrocracking, but require long lead times for design, construction and startup. Highest priority was assigned to the following needs:

a) Understand the differences at the molecular level between OSDF and conventionally derived fuels. This is particularly important for existing diesel engines, as the introduction of more synthetic crude in the northern tier US refineries is accelerating.


b) Understand the preferred fuel molecular characteristics for advanced, low temperature combustion engines, and develop new laboratory analytical techniques for characterization.

c) Develop new fuel specifications relevant to new engine technology and confirm applicability of testing methods that can be adopted by refinery control laboratories.

d) Be prepared for future compression ignition (CI) fuels (for existing or new engine technology) that demand a higher cetane than is currently the norm in North America.

e) Current and future sulfur specifications in diesel fuels will require refineries to adopt the appropriate distillate hydrotreating technology to ensure oil sands based synthetic crudes (which have already been heavily processed) can be treated to new, ultra low sulfur levels.

Within these breakout sessions to discuss fuels characterization and fuels processing, there were few needs that were not ascribed a high priority. 2.4 Emission Control Systems As previously indicated, there will be a need to cater to a mix of existing and new technology engines for a long transition period once new engines begin to be introduced. This will also impact emission control system technology. The following were all considered to be high priority requirements in the provision and performance of emission control systems:

a) Understand the impact of increasing amounts of OSDF components in the gasoline pool on three-way catalysts, exhaust gas recycle systems, intake valve deposits and catalyst fouling.

b) Understand the impact of diesel based OSDFs on catalysts, exhaust gas recycle systems, soot filters, coolers, gaskets and seals and NOX traps.

c) Investigate these and any other emission control concerns for low temperature combustion engines in the future.

d) Examine how future use of onboard devices to measure fuel properties and combustion performance will affect, or be affected by OSDF and conventional fuels alike.

e) In the event that future engines may include some form of “onboard” pre-ignition reforming, the performance of such devices will need to take account of both OSDF and conventional fuels.

Of lesser priority at this time is the development of an understanding of performance in multi-cylinder new engines, which are still largely under research as single cylinder test units. 2.5 Fuels of the Future This breakout group recognized that fuels of the future obviously depend on decisions about engines of the future. These, in turn, might be a legislated mix of offerings from OEMs. There was general consensus that, whatever the concerns for efficiency and emissions in future internal combustion engines, they will still be a significant presence in the transportation sector in the next 25 year time frame, and likely well beyond. Therefore, much of the discussion covered alternatives that may be large volume components within traditional fuel


types or variants to satisfy new engine technology. Within this category of future fuels the following high priorities were identified:

a) Understand the role and extent of bio-fuels as substitute diesel fuel components, both for existing diesel engines and new engines in the future. (In gasoline, ethanol is already recognized as a growing presence).

b) Investigate Fischer-Tropsch products as future fuels. Residues and coal are potential resources for gasification to produce synthesis gas.

In addition, there was discussion on future enabling technology that might enhance the efficiency of the operation of existing and new internal combustion engines. One priority area was identified:

c) Examine the role of new sensors and electronic control technology to enhance internal combustion performance.

There was also some discussion of new motive devices that are a radical departure from the present internal combustion concepts, as either stand alone units or as hybrids. These are not new concepts, and involve such things as electric drive and fuel cells. The full discussion of these was not part of the workshop objectives.

3.0 PLENARY SESSIONS In a brief introductory presentation, Len Flint referred to the oil sands vision of 5 million barrels daily by 2030. Currently announced plans, but not factored for possible cancellations or delays, covering the period to 2020 are ahead of this vision. Plenary presentations were used to bring the diverse audience to a common level of understanding to help subsequent breakout session discussions. Topics included an oil sands overview, upgrading and refining, chemistry of bitumen and fuels, impact of oil sands derived fuels on existing engines, emerging trends in advanced combustion strategies, and speculation on the impact of fuels properties on advanced combustion. Plenary Session Presentations

1. Oil Sands Overview -------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Wise 2. Upgrading & Refining Oil Sands Derived Crudes-------------------------Tom Halford 3. Chemistry & Analysis of Bitumen Derived Crudes -----------------------Murray Gray 4. Impact of Oil Sands Derived Fuels on Existing Engines -------------------Stuart Neill 5. Emerging Trends in Advanced Combustion Strategies --------------- Charles Mueller 6. Speculation on the Impact of Fuel Properties

on Advanced Combustion--------------------------------------------------------Tom Ryan The presentations are reproduced in Appendix A1. Here is a summary of the topics covered.


3.1 Oil Sands Overview Tom Wise

Tom Wise of Purvin & Gertz discussed the future potential for Alberta’s oil sands. He also talked about oil sands crude transportation issues. Also covered were the value-added chain from bitumen to oil sands products and the opportunity to target several niches, from unprocessed bitumen, medium-sour and light sweet synthetics. This was followed by discussing market expansion, which confirmed the increasing opportunities to market increased volumes into the largest current market – the Northern tier refineries – and the potential to move deeper into the US and explore offshore markets via proposed western BC ports. This outlet could also serve California. In his conclusions Tom noted that bitumen and synthetic crude oil (SCO) production from Canada’s oil sands are expected to grow rapidly and increase market share. More pipeline capacity and diluent (for transporting unprocessed bitumen) will be needed. To date, Canadian oil sands producers have been able to sell most of their product in the US Northern Tier, Western Canada and Ontario. Pipelines to new markets would expand sales potential, but higher tariffs for longer distances could reduce netback prices. On the other hand, new outlets could stabilize the market value of the unprocessed (the so called “light-heavy differential”) or of a potential new suite of partially upgraded bitumens. Finally, Tom noted that Asia, particularly China, may develop into a new long-term market outlet for oil sands products, as well as California and the US Gulf Coast. 3.2 Upgrading & Refining Oil Sands Derived Crudes

Tom Halford Tom Halford of Petro-Canada discussed the oil sands in the North American crude market. He noted that conventional US and Canadian crudes are declining, and that the world crude slate is getting generally heavier and more sour. Improved transportation logistics are needed for Alberta crude penetration into the US. Large volumes of bitumen and/or synthetic crude are likely in the future with the announced Fort McMurray projects. However, bitumen and bitumen-derived products (crude and derivative fuels) are different from the bulk of conventional crudes available to North American refiners today. Comments were made on refineries in general, and Tom talked about their high replacement value and the fact that operating flexibility is limited (“they can’t turn on a dime”). Business dictates refineries run at high utilizations (>90%) and at the limit of the operating envelope. Changes to product specifications can cause large capital expenditures and operating expenses. Examples of this are high-pressure hydrotreating with high hydrogen consumption. There is a 2-4 year cycle on new units, even as expansions to existing facilities. Tom went on to summarize the distinctive nature of the bitumen products, both from the unconverted bitumen cuts and current quality synthetics. The nature of gasoline production, where virtually all blend cuts are reformed at the molecular level, renders oil sands derived gasoline-blending stocks that are very similar, if not indistinguishable from those derived from conventional crudes. On the distillate side, however, less intrusive conventional processing does lead to distinctively different blending stocks. Largely, the combustion-


related performance specifications are inferior to conventional stocks; jet fuel smoke point and diesel cetane are the most obvious comparison points. In these products, the inherently larger aromatic content is the culprit. This aromatic nature also extends into the heavy gas oils, which (if uncorrected by deep hydroprocessing) impose significant conversion penalties on the fluid catalytic cracking (FCCU, or FCC units), which are the gas oil conversion unit of choice in US refineries. Any loss in conversion level also adds more light cycle oil (LCO) to the distillate pool, further impacting the pool cetane. To date, sulfur levels in these cuts from sweet synthetic crudes have been one advantage, since the upgrading involves hydrotreating, with consequent sulfur (and nitrogen) reduction. In addition, the higher aromatic and naphthene ring content imparts better cold flow properties. 3.3 Chemistry and Analysis of Bitumen-Derived Crudes and Fuels

Murray R. Gray Murray Gray of the University of Alberta talked about the origin of the oil sands, and that long-term biodegradation played a large part in their chemical characteristics. The shallower reserves and inherent temperatures (below 80°C) favour biodegration. Essentially, most bacteria prefer the same kind of paraffinic diet that diesel and jet engines prefer. So, biodegradation of bitumen over time has removed the most desirable components for diesel fuel. Murray explained the transformation during primary and secondary upgrading. The nature of the processes and bitumens favours hydrocracking over thermal or FCC units, where the cracking occurs in a hydrogen-deficient environment. Thermal and catalytic cracking processes give aromatic and naphthenic rings, and highly branched products. Murray also mentioned the characteristics of middle distillates from the oil sands bitumen and the methods used for chemical analysis. Quality fuels in the distillate range can be manufactured from oil sands, but their molecular makeup is inevitably determined by their geological and process history. Finally, it was pointed out that suitable analytical methods are becoming available to understand these mixtures. 3.4 Impact of Oil Sands Derived Fuels on Emissions from Heavy-Duty Diesel

Engines W. Stuart Neill

Stuart Neill of the National Research Council Canada began by confirming the previous presentation; oil sands derived crude oils tend to have a higher cycloparaffin (naphthene) content than conventional crude oils due to the requirement to crack and hydrogenate the higher boiling point fractions. Analytical methods for characterizing cycloparaffins are not as well established as those for aromatics. This makes it difficult to design experiments that relate oil sands fuel chemistry to engine exhaust emissions. Stuart noted that oil sands and conventional crude oils are blended at most refineries so there is no “typical” (100%) oil sands diesel fuel marketed today, except as produced at Shell Canada’s Scotford refinery. The fuel properties will also change somewhat with the switch to


ultra-low sulfur diesel fuels, but in different ways depending on the nature of processes used. Neill commented on NRCC’s research into the roles of fuel origin and ignition quality on exhaust emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines using test fuels derived from oil sands and conventional sources. In his summary, he noted that particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from two representative heavy-duty diesel engines were affected by key fuel properties, but not by the crude oil source. Research is required to develop and validate improved analytical methods for characterizing cycloparaffins. These analytical methods could be used to evaluate the effect of hydroprocessing severity on fuel chemistry and emissions, or fuel chemistry on performance of advanced diesel emission control systems, and also to develop a better understanding of fuel chemistry effects on low temperature combustion. 3.5 Emerging Trends in Engine Combustion

Charles J. Mueller Charles Mueller of Sandia National Laboratories set out to establish a common foundation of engine-combustion knowledge. Namely, first providing the current status of reciprocating engine technology and discussing factors that are driving changes in engine technology. Charles then explained low-temperature combustion (LTC) and its importance, discussed some research tools available to help answer questions about engine combustion modes, and summarized where engine technology appears to be heading. In his summary he said that changes in engine technology are being driven by a desire for higher efficiency, low emissions and high power density. Low-temperature combustion shows great potential for high-efficiency clean engines, but significant technical challenges remain. Experimental and computational R&D are playing critical roles and the final solution will likely involve synergies among engine technologies, fuel properties and after treatment strategies. 3.6 Future Fuels

Tom Ryan Tom Ryan of Southwest Research Institute observed that all new engine combustion technologies are converging to the same general characteristics of delayed ignition and rapid burn rate. Seven variations of new engine technologies were cited, one of which is LTC. Others are several adaptations of existing compression ignition (CI) and one of the spark ignition (SI) variety used in gasoline vehicles today. At their current state of development, there are some common characteristics, such as the use of exhaust gas recycle (EGR) and lower NOx, but higher hydrocarbons (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions. Tom then described the combination of theory and practical experimentation being used to evaluate the fuel appetite for the new engine technology, and to explore the strong relationship between aromatics (or fuel hydrogen) and NOx emissions, but the absence of such a trend based on cetane. HEDGE is representative of new SI engines, and the gasoline octane requirement (ON) is broader than for existing engines.


4.0 ADVANCED ENGINE COMBUSTION WITH DIESEL-LIKE OIL SANDS DERIVED FUELS

Facilitator: Charles Mueller, Sandia National Laboratories Rapporteur: René Pigeon, Natural Resources Canada

4.1 Introduction The objective of this discussion group was to identify the most important research questions related to the in-cylinder combustion and emissions-formation processes of diesel-like oil sands derived fuels in advanced engines (i.e., high-efficiency engines that are compliant with US EPA 2007-2010 heavy-duty regulations, or with US EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 light-duty regulations). 4.2 Seed Questions The following questions were provided to help initiate discussion: 1. Do synergies exist between diesel-like OSDFs and LTC strategies?

a. What types of fuel molecules and properties are well suited to premixed LTC strategies (e.g., HCCI)?

b. What types of fuel molecules and properties are well suited to mixing-controlled LTC strategies (e.g., dilute clean diesel combustion)?

c. How could the answers to these questions be used to help identify an informed and efficient path for upgrading heavy oil to diesel-like fuels? For instance, how important will high-cetane fuels be in the future, and why? Could the requirement of mixed-mode operation change this outlook?

2. How do the chemical and thermodynamic properties of diesel-like OSDFs differ from those

of conventional diesel fuels? How do these property changes map to changes in efficiency, emissions, and other aspects of performance? Can upgrading and/or combustion processes be modified in such a way as to turn a negative trait into a positive one?

a. Soot formation: Are particular compounds (e.g., mono-aromatics, poly-aromatics, cycloparaffins) “bad actors” in terms of increased soot formation? How bad are they? Can they be altered during the upgrading process?

b. Ignition delay: Diesel combustion is well suited to high-cetane fuels, but HCCI isn’t. c. Cool-flame chemistry: Potentially important for moderating HCCI heat-release rates. d. Volatility: Impact on wall impingement and fuel-air mixing in both HCCI and non-

HCCI LTC strategies. e. Density: Impact on fuel-injection process.

3. What in-cylinder and combustion modifications can be made to facilitate the use of diesel-

like OSDFs? Can higher injection pressures, multiple injections, swirl flows, or smaller orifice diameters help? Different bowl shapes? Ignition-assist techniques? How important are transients? Should the research include control strategies?


4. Which of the above questions are best answered using experiments? Modeling? What experiments and models of in-cylinder processes are needed?

4.3 Summary of Main Discussion The seed questions for this session focused on fuel effects on combustion processes and engine technologies, but the session participants’ backgrounds were primarily in fuel production, upgrading, and refining. As a result, many of the detailed questions about combustion processes and engine technologies were left unanswered (e.g., the topical area of engine hardware changes to facilitate LTC was left largely untouched). Nevertheless, discussion was lively within all five groups of participants in this session, and a number of recurring themes emerged. These are summarized in the following three sub-sections. Accepted Truths. A number of over-arching “accepted truths” continually resurfaced during the discussions. While these do not address the seed questions directly, they reflect a consensus mindset that is the foundation upon which a successful research program can be built. It was generally agreed that diesel and gasoline fuels will remain in more or less their present forms for perhaps ten more years; hence, research into optimal fuels for LTC applications should have a long-term focus and not be over-constrained by current processing norms. Furthermore, any new fuel must be backward-compatible with existing engines until existing engines are phased out. Many of the technical issues related to LTC fuel introduction are already being addressed by energy companies whose primary feedstock is conventional crude. Hence, the differences between OSDFs and conventional fuels should be identified and focused on to avoid a duplication of effort. There is no single obvious fuel property that, if changed, would enable high-efficiency, clean, high-power-density engine operation over the full speed/load map. It is clear that emissions regulations are currently setting the timetables and deadlines for engine/fuel research efforts, and it was believed by most participants that vehicle emissions regulations will continue to grow more stringent (with the next level of on-road vehicle regulations in perhaps 2015). Engine manufacturers and fuel suppliers should work together on research projects to identify optimal fuel/engine systems because engine technologies and fuels are evolving in parallel. This philosophy of “co-evolution and collaboration” (as stated by rapporteur René Pigeon) was one of the most resonant themes of this discussion session. The optimal engine technology depends on the availability of a suitable fuel, but this fuel is currently unspecified because the optimal engine technology has not yet been identified. The energy companies have some long-term flexibility due to a number of techniques for economical production of a desired fuel, but they need to know the desired fuel specifications in order to plan for the future. History has shown that energy companies will resist fuel changes until credible legislation is in place to secure a market for the new product. Finally, many technologies that were initially thought to be “disruptive” have been accommodated (e.g. unleaded gasoline and port fuel injection), so there is reason for hope that it may be possible to bring a new fuel that is optimized for LTC applications to the market.


HCCI Issues. Octane and cetane numbers are inadequate for characterizing the HCCI ignition quality of a fuel. The composition of an “ideal” fuel for HCCI is not yet known, but it seems clear that conventional diesel fuel autoignites too readily to be optimal. Perhaps naphtha would make a better HCCI fuel due in part to its higher volatility, but the effects of different normal (n-) and iso (i-) paraffins, and fuel molecular-structure effects on ignition and cool-flame chemistry in general, are also important. Physical and chemical property variations among fuels that meet current specifications can be large; specifications such as distillation range, and perhaps hydrocarbon type distribution will likely need to be tightened for robust HCCI operation. The barrier to HCCI engines is lower in the light-duty market than the heavy-duty market because power density is not as critical for light-duty engines. Furthermore, a dramatic reduction in diesel fuel flash point is a safety problem for distribution and use (not just an education issue) that will possibly preclude the use of high-volatility fuels in heavy-duty applications. It was noted that full-time HCCI operation would be required to satisfy US EPA 2010 heavy-duty emissions regulations. The temperature sensitivity of ignition delay and cold-starting issues are much more important for HCCI engines than diesel engines. Mixed-Mode Issues. There are challenges with HCCI operation at light loads (incomplete combustion) and at high loads (knocking combustion, high NOx emissions). One strategy for mitigating these problems is for the engine to revert to traditional diesel operation at loads that are too low or too high for desirable HCCI operation. The fuel requirements for this mixed-mode strategy present challenges. A high cetane number fuel (e.g., 50-55 as in Europe and Japan) is desired for diesel operation at light load, but it has been shown that such high-cetane fuels are not well-suited for HCCI applications due to their tendency to autoignite too early. There was considerable discussion of various approaches to address the different fuel needs of HCCI vs. diesel operating modes, including carrying two fuels on board, on-board fuel additization, and on-board distillation of a single fuel into two fractions with selective injection depending on operating mode. 4.4 Key Questions and Knowledge Gaps

Key questions and knowledge gaps were identified, and are listed below. They were not at this stage ascribed to any specific discussion theme. However, they can be divided between those that are largely targeted to OSDF issues, and those that are of a more general nature.

OSDF fuel issues

Unlike gasolines, diesel fuels (historically produced from crudes via less invasive technologies) maintain characteristics that are more closely tied to their origins. A number of gaps were identified that need to be addressed, but were not prioritized during the breakout sessions.

1. Better identification is needed of compositional differences between OSDFs

and conventional fuels.

2. Develop and refine chemical-kinetic ignition and combustion models of representative OSDF compounds (e.g., cycloalkanes).


3. Conduct detailed experimental and computational studies of in-cylinder

combustion processes of OSDFs.

4. Study variation of ignition delay with in-cylinder conditions (temperature and pressure) for a range of representative OSDF compounds.

5. Produce and store several reference OSDF batches to help ensure fuel

consistency in engine experiments over multiple years.

6. Public database of representative OSDF compound thermodynamic properties is desirable for future modeling purposes.

7. There may be some unique, niche opportunities for OSDFs based on their

dominant characteristics. General Issues of Importance to New Engine Technology

8. Define a parameter (other than cetane or octane number) to characterize the ignition quality of a fuel for HCCI applications.

9. Develop new fuel specifications tailored to LTC applications.

10. Investigate potential of “mixed mode” combustion at different loads.

11. Determination of the energy efficiency and emissions balance.

12. Narrow down “advanced engine choices” via expanded research and

development.

13. Explore sensor-based closed-loop control strategies

14. Extend R&D on advanced combustion technology to “full cycle” loads.

15. Extend R&D on advanced combustion technology to multiple-cylinder engines.

16. To provide flexibility in developing lighter diesel-like fuels, there is a need to

investigate and potentially resolve the "low flash" issue with future fuels in the diesel truck market.

17. Involve engine OEMs in future R&D programs.


5.0 ADVANCED ENGINE COMBUSTION WITH GASOLINE-LIKE OIL SANDS DERIVED FUELS

Facilitator: Mark Musculus, Sandia National Laboratories Rapporteur: Thom McCracken, National Research Council

5.1 Introduction The objective of this discussion group was to identify the most important research questions related to the in-cylinder combustion and emissions-formation processes of gasoline-like oil sands derived fuels (OSDFs) in advanced engines (i.e. high-efficiency engines that are compliant with USA EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 light-duty regulations). 5.2 Seed Questions Prior to convening the breakout groups, four seed questions were posed to help stimulate discussion.

1. Do synergies exist between gasoline-like OSDFs and LTC applications?

a. What types of fuel molecules (e.g., aromatics, paraffins, olefins) and properties (e.g., volatility, octane number, sensitivity) are well suited to lean premixed LTC strategies (e.g., HCCI)?

b. What types of fuel molecules and properties are well suited to other LTC strategies (e.g., stoichiometric spark ignition with EGR)?

c. How could the answers to these questions be used to help identify an informed and efficient path for upgrading heavy oil to gasoline-like fuels? For instance, how important will octane number and sensitivity (RON-MON) be in the future, and why? Could the requirement of mixed-mode operation impact this outlook?

2. How do the chemical properties (e.g., RON, MON) and thermodynamic properties (e.g., volatility) of gasoline-like OSDFs differ from those of conventional gasoline fuels? How do these property changes map to changes in efficiency, emissions, and other aspects of performance? Can upgrading and/or combustion processes be modified in such a way as to turn a negative trait into a positive one?

a. Autoignition/knocking: How do temperature and pressure affect autoignition of OSDFs compared to conventional gasoline? Compression-ignition characteristics are critical.

b. Cool-flame chemistry: Potentially important for moderating HCCI heat-release rates.

c. Volatility: Impact on wall impingement and fuel-air mixing, potentially in high swirl environments, for both HCCI and non-HCCI LTC strategies.

d. Oxygenates/additives: How are requirements for detergent/additives and antiknock/clean burning oxygenates different for OSDFs?

3. What in-cylinder and combustion modifications can be made to facilitate the use of gasoline-like OSDFs? Can changes in compression ratio, EGR, or turbocharging help? Different combustion chamber shapes? Ignition-assist techniques, especially for HCCI?


4. Which of the above questions are best answered using experiments? Modeling? What experiments and models of in-cylinder processes are needed?

The above seed questions were intended to address in-cylinder aspects of the utilization of gasoline-like OSDFs. Identification of the key knowledge gaps related to the in-cylinder issues listed above requires some expertise in engines, combustion, and emissions formation. The technical expertise of most participants in the workshop, however, was more closely tied to the processing and chemistry of oils and fuels, rather than to the mechanical and engineering aspects of engines. Accordingly, the discussions in the breakout groups did not strictly follow the above seed questions, but rather focused on the knowledge gaps related to the properties and chemistry of the gasoline-like fuels that would be used in engines. 5.3 Summary of Main Discussion

The breakout discussions are summarized into four main topical areas, and in addition, a number of miscellaneous issues and knowledge gaps were raised. Discussion around the four keys areas is summarized first.

OSDF vs. Conventional Gasoline. The consensus in the breakout groups, although not universal, was that highly-processed oil sands derived gasoline is nearly indistinguishable from highly-processed conventional gasoline by normal specification tests. This occurs because many refining processes are required to reconstruct the hydrocarbon molecule, so the original chemical composition of the feedstock is almost irrelevant to the final fuel. Excepting for normal butane added for RVP control, and any oxygenated components, refinery-based gasoline stocks are largely iso-paraffinic in the C5-C6 range (from “isomerate”), some additional isoparaffins in the C7-C8 range (from “alkylate”) and predominantly olefins and aromatics in the full range (from “fluid cat cracker gasoline”) and high aromatics in the C6-C12 range (from “reformate”). This is equally true for gasoline from the heavy oil sands stock, although processing severity in some of the individual processes may differ from conventional crude stocks.

However, in practice, OSDF gasoline can perform differently from conventional gasoline. In one example, OSDF gasoline has been observed to produce significantly higher particulate matter emissions (PM) (by a factor of 10) from direct injection (DI) gasoline engines. The explanation for the above observation is unknown, but it is possible that although the components may be essentially the same, the ratios may be different, especially for less processed or straight-run OSDF gasoline, which may have naturally higher aromatic or cycloparaffin content. Due to some similarities, however, many of the questions about performance and in-cylinder combustion and emissions formation processes of OSDF gasoline are essentially the same as for conventional gasoline. The most significant questions raised were:

Alternative to Octane Number. The general consensus, taken from the plenary presentations and discussions, as well as the breakout discussions, was that octane number descriptions, i.e. research octane number (RON), motor octane number (MON), or derived quantities like (RON+MON)/2, are not sufficient to describe fuel performance in all advanced gasoline-fuelled engines. The problem is that unlike the single engine technology for use of gasoline-like fuels that has persisted for the past century, future engine technologies are


numerous, so the effects of chemistry on engine performance are much more complicated. Because of the multitude of potential engine technologies and the unconventional nature of the combustion regimes employed, the conventional octane number description for fuels does not appear to be sufficient for future engines. Therefore, a new quantification of fuel performance is needed. This issue is common for all gasolines.

Knowledge of Speciation Effects: Most participants expressed a desire to better understand which species in fuels are desirable for better fuel performance. A fundamental understanding of the chemical kinetic pathways by which various species control autoignition, combustion, and emissions formation, especially for LTC processes, is needed. However, there is a need to simplify the dataset. Using modern analysis techniques, an overwhelming set of speciation data can be made available, but it needs to be simplified to the set of (as yet unknown) controlling parameters. A better description of the “optimum” fuel speciation is required, which could follow from a better understanding of fundamental kinetics. In more than one session, an empirical approach was advised. That is, by trial and error, a fuel that performs well could be identified. This is similar to how the “driveability index” specification was developed. Of course, certain political issues and regulations (volatility, benzene, ethanol, etc.) should be carefully considered in developing such a test fuel. Then, through experiments and modeling, the chemical components and kinetic mechanisms that affect fuel performance could be identified. Such a process could lead to an improved scientific understanding of the best way to tailor fuels for advanced engine combustion. As an additional benefit, the required components for an OSDF gasoline reference fuel might be defined, which could then be used by multiple entities to ensure uniformity in research activities. The following knowledge gaps related to speciation were identified.

Single Fuel Desires: Many participants expressed the opinion that multiple fuel streams and/or multiple gasoline grades (especially lower octane numbers for HCCI engines) tailored to specific engine technologies should be avoided, due to huge required changes in refineries and marketing infrastructure, and other issues. It is important to draw a parallel with the transformation from 100% leaded to 100% unleaded gasoline over a 15-20 year span. Both fuels at their peak demand were marketed in three grades. But at no time did the normal full service gas station offer more than three grades of gasoline in total. For the same reason, multiple on-board fuel supplies to support mutli-mode operational strategies (e.g., part-time conventional spark-ignition, part-time HCCI) should be avoided due to delivery, infrastructure, storage, and cost issues. It would be extremely beneficial if the necessary speciation and/or property set for a single fuel to run on both current and advanced engines could be identified. Also, a better understanding of the engine technology variables that could reduce sensitivity to fuel properties is needed. Backward compatibility with current fuels is also an issue. 5.4 Key Questions and Knowledge gaps Key questions and knowledge gaps are most easily identified under the same four sub-headings, and added to by a number of other, miscellaneous issues raised. They are not therefore in any order of priority.


OSDF vs. Conventional Gasoline

1. How is OSDF gasoline chemically different from conventional gasoline, and how do refinery processes affect this difference?

2. Can OSDFs be useful in advanced engines without significant (or additional) processing?

3. Can OSDF gasoline be superior to conventional gasoline (e.g., high octane from aromatic content, potential on-board reforming capabilities)?

4. How does OSDF gasoline compare to conventional gasoline from heavy crude (e.g., Venezuelan) and/or shale oil?

Alternative to Octane Number

5. What are the necessary elements of a fuel performance metric to replace the octane number? Volatility to include potential mixing effects? Speciation, to include kinetics and interactions? Elevated pressure autoignition temperature and magnitude of cool flame heat release? Sensitivity of autoignition time to temperature?

6. Can an alternative to the engine test be developed to provide a more fundamental description of fuel autoignition and/or combustion quality? An analog of the Ignition Quality Tester, which may replace the engine test for diesel cetane number, was offered as an example to follow.

Knowledge of Speciation Effects

7. Do low-temperature combustion (LTC) processes and operating conditions favor high H/C ratios or other fuel parameters?

8. How important are exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) interactions for LTC operation, especially kinetic interactions with fuel species?

9. How do components contribute to fuel autoignition quality, and what characteristics are desirable in the fuel?

10. Which fuel components are important?

11. Which chemical kinetic steps are dominant, especially for LTC processes with non-stoichiometric mixtures (equivalence ratio from 0.1 to 0.5)?

12. Can an OSDF reference fuel be identified? What are the important components?

13. How will blending strategies affect fuel performance? What nonlinear interactions between components exist?

Single Fuel Desires

14. What can be done during transition from current fuel to widespread adoption of new fuel? (This is somewhat analogous to the transition from leaded to unleaded fuel.)


15. If HCCI/LTC is the more demanding application, can a fuel be developed for HCCI/LTC and then modified with additives to suit conventional spark ignition (SI) engines, or, perhaps can SI fuels be modified with additives for HCCI?

16. Can compression ratio, EGR, port- versus direct-injection, knock-feedback or other engine operational strategies be utilized to reduce fuel sensitivity?

17. Can single fuel be tailored to tolerate mode switching?

18. Could a fuel be designed so that varying fuel composition to support mixed-mode operation (e.g., part-time HCCI and part-time conventional spark-ignition operation) could be achieved using an on-board fuel reformer? Are OSDF gasolines well suited for this approach?

Miscellaneous Issues

In addition to the four broad topical areas described above, knowledge gaps were also identified for single, specific issues. 19. Management of rate of pressure rise: Are there any kinetic controls on the rate of reaction

at high temperatures (T>1400K) for either conventional or OSDF gasoline?

20. Computational Time: Under what circumstances can kinetics be separated, to some degree, from CFD to speed modeling results?

21. Deposit formation: How does OSDF gasoline compare to conventional gasoline, especially for direct-injection engine technologies? Will the same deposit-reducing additives used for conventional gasoline work with OSDF gasoline?

22. Research vs. Production: How do observations in the research environment compare to real production engines in practical applications?

23. Fuel Description: What exactly is a “gasoline-like” fuel for advanced LTC/HCCI engines?

24. Transition Fuel: Can a currently available intermediate between diesel and gasoline (e.g., locomotive diesel fuel, CN=32?) be used in HCCI/LTC engines?

25. Low Octane Fuels: Can low-octane fuels that would otherwise be further processed be useful for LTC?

26. Non-regulated emissions: In addition to PM, NOx, UHC, CO, etc., are there any other potential emissions problems with OSDF fuels, especially ground level ozone chemistry, that should be considered?

27. Chicken and Egg: Should fuels be tailored to meet the needs of engines, or should engines be designed to utilize the unique properties of OSDF fuels?


6.0 FUELS PROCESSING

Facilitator: Richard McFarlane, Alberta Research Council Inc. Rapporteur: Noël Billette, Natural Resources Canada

6.1 Introduction In the US, cars and light trucks account for 45% of the 20 million barrels per day of oil currently consumed. US energy security, engine emissions and energy efficiency are some of the inter-dependent factors that are leading to new engines and potentially new fuel requirements. Just over one half of US oil demand is being met by imports. As a contiguous neighbour and strategic partner, Canada is an important supplier of heavy crudes (conventional heavy and bitumen) and synthetic crude oil (SCO) derived from upgrading of oil sands. In western Canada, production of oil sands bitumen is increasing at a rapid rate, more than offsetting the decline of conventional light and heavy crude production. Heavy crudes are blended with diluent (natural gas condensate and naphtha) mainly to reduce viscosity and density for pipeline transportation (Dilbit). Due to current and foreseen shortages and costs of condensate, heavy crudes and bitumen will increasingly be diluted with SCO for shipment (Synbit), or by other as yet unspecified diluents. Current SCO production was originally consumed mainly in Canada, with some shipments to PADD II and IV (Petroleum Administration District for Defense). Projections are that SCO production will triple by 2015 and that most of this increased production will flow to refineries in PADD II, IV and V. SCO will be an important part of future US energy requirements, making up perhaps as much as 10-15% nationally, and a much higher proportion in some refineries in PADD II and PADD IV.

Distillate Distribution

0%

20%

40%

80%

SCO WTI Synbit (50/50SCO/Bitumen)

60%

100%

resid gas oil distillate naphtha

Current quality SCO differs from conventional light crudes in terms of boiling-point distribution (distillation yields of naphtha, distillate, gas oil and resid) and hydrocarbon-type composition (paraffins, cycloparffins and aromatics). It contains more middle and heavy distillates and it has a substantially higher proportion of cyclic hydrocarbons than conventional crudes. For a given refinery configuration, the chemical composition of SCO and diluted bitumen determines the quality and distribution of refinery product streams. For example, currently the gasoline to distillate ratio (G/D) is about 1:1 in Canada whereas it is about 2.3:1 in the US. This has clear implications for the blend of feedstocks used in Canadian and U.S. refineries, should such


differences in fuel mix persist with future engine technology. Although bitumen and SCO yield a high percentage of light distillate, bitumen upgrading as currently practiced produces SCO with a diesel fuel fraction having a cetane index of only 32 to 42, and mainly weighted to the lower cetane levels at this time. However, current and many planned new producers are addressing this “cetane deficit”. The requirements for future fuels will have a significant impact on how diluted bitumen and SCO are perceived in the US market. 6.2 Seed Questions The five breakout group sessions were held to examine issues and questions around the processing (upgrading and refining) of oil sands bitumen to produce diesel fuels for use in advanced engines, i.e., high-efficiency engines that are compliant with US EPA 2007-2010 heavy-duty regulations, or with US EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 light-duty regulations. A common context for the discussions was provided through prior posing of five seed questions: 1. How does the composition of bitumen and synthetic crude derived from Canadian oil sands

differ from that of conventional crude oil? Are new (or modified) refining processes required to make future fuels out of these materials?

2. Given that 85vol% of US refinery conversion capacity is represented by fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) and only 15vol% by hydrocracking and that hydrocracking may be the preferred conversion process for bitumen-derived heavy distillates; what steps are required to bridge the gap between the quality of bitumen-derived distillates and the quality of feedstocks preferred by the FCC-based refining infrastructure, so as to economically make future fuels from bitumen-derived materials?

3. More and more, catalysts are relied on to adjust the molecular composition of refining and upgrading streams. Are there any new relevant developments in catalysis?

4. What is the general trend in the required modifications of the molecular makeup and boiling range of fuels for HCCI engines? How different is this from the current direction to improve diesel quality (e.g., higher cetane, limited aromatics content, etc.)? Where are we going in this respect?

5. Are these questions best answered by experiments or modeling? What experiments and models of hydrocarbon processing are needed?

Given the limited time for the sessions, these questions alone proved sufficient to sustain vigorous discussion. 6.3 Summary of Main Discussion Impact of bitumen and SCO composition. Hovering over most of the discussions was a high degree of uncertainty about what future fuels may look like and, therefore, what specific processes would be required to produce them. Processing bitumen to produce today’s fuels requires more hydrogen than that needed to process conventional crudes. Currently, the required hydrogen is generated from steam methane reforming (SMR) but, given tight supply and increasing cost of natural gas, future hydrogen production may come from gasification (of coal, coke, residuum or asphaltenes) which will involve higher capital and operating costs, but lower feedstock cost compared to SMR. Due to its high aromaticity, upgrading of bitumen produces SCO which has a high concentration of cycloparaffins (naphthenes) from the


Cetane Number for Diesel Range Compounds

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Carbon number

Cet

ane

num

ber

n-paraffins

isoparaffins

alkyl-cyclohexanes

n-alkyl-benzenes

decalins

tetralins

naphthalenes

R

R

n-paraffins

(n-alkyl-benzenes)

(decalins)

(alkyl-cyclohexanes)(naphthalenes)

(tetralins)

isoparaffins

tre for Upgrading TechnologyH. Yang, National Cen

saturation of aromatics and, because the alkyl side chains on the aromatic rings are relatively short and there are very little n-paraffins, this results in a low cetane diesel, but one with a low cloud point. While some specific ring-opening reactions of cycloparaffins would increase cetane number (see figure), participants were somewhat divided on whether current technologies for ring opening were selective and efficient enough. Ring opening may not produce a n-alkyl side chain but rather iso-alkyl side chains, which would limit attainment of higher cetane. Several participants questioned whether 50-plus cetane, like that in Europe, Japan and California is actually required. It was even suggested that the higher cycloparaffin content of bitumen derived fuels may turn out to be advantageous in future LTC engine technology. We do not have the base of research as yet to know. Bridging the gap with current refineries. The 5-year average G/D ratio for US refineries is 2.3:1, favouring gasoline production. This G/D ratio is naturally reflected in the conversion capacity, which is on average 85vol% FCC and 15vol% hydrocracking. A new generation of engines using a diesel-like fuel would necessarily involve lowering the refinery G/D ratio. Increased demand for diesel-like fuel in the U.S. would need more middle-distillate processes, such as hydrocracking capacity, to convert heavy gas oils, and in turn decrease reliance on gasoline-selective FCC. Taking into account that hydrocracking is better


suited for conversion of synthetic feedstocks, this would also remove some of existing limitations on processing of bitumen-derived heavy gas oils in U.S. refineries. It appears that in bridging the current gap between Canadian upgraders and US refineries the challenge for refining technology providers is to create two kinds of ring-opening catalytic processes: one for selective opening of cycloparaffinic rings in synthetic light distillate to make n-alkyl substituents on the remaining cyclic structures to improve cetane; the other for opening cycloparaffinic rings in synthetic heavy distillate, for improved FCC feed quality. For economic reasons, the former could be achieved with ultra-low-sulfur and nitrogen feedstocks while the latter would have to be achieved with feedstocks containing sulfur and nitrogen at the current level of SCO’s heavy gas oil component. Both processes would have to limit conversion to lighter materials. When such processes are available, the feedstock quality gap would be significantly reduced, or removed completely without major changes in the U.S. refining infrastructure. It was noted that, for a future scenario including lower G/D, SCO and Synbit have apparent advantages over conventional crudes in that their G/D ratios are considerably lower. In the case of SCO, about 45% of the crude is distillate and 35vol% is gas oil that can be hydrocracked to produce diesel-like fuel. It was further noted that upgrading oil sands bitumen to SCO requires significant amounts of hydrogen while FCC decreases the H/C ratio of liquid products through production of some hydrogen, light hydrocarbon gas and olefins. Production of diesel requires less energy compared to gasoline, and diesel production from SCO would more efficiently utilize the hydrogen added during upgrading. Investment in new hydrocracking capacity for gas oil conversion requires strong regulatory or economic drivers. Typical lead times for new capacity installation can be four years. If higher cetane is required for future fuel, then selective ring opening would be the silver bullet for Synbit and SCO crudes. Without such ring opening, the cycloparaffins with short side chains will at most provide about 40 cetane diesel. Importance of catalysis. Catalysts were viewed by most panel members as key enablers in the efficient production of future fuels. Opinions differed somewhat on whether existing catalytic processes were sufficient for the task. Some thought that ring-opening technologies were already well advanced, whereas others thought that better selectivity for hydrogen addition and hydrocracking (e.g., less gas make) was needed. It was acknowledged that there have been steady improvements in catalysts, which have lead to longer run lengths and lower operating temperatures. It was, however, recognized that most of these improvements have been directed at hydrotreating catalysts for production of low-sulfur gasoline and diesel. One observer cited that the major trend in catalysis over the past fifteen years has been amalgamation of the catalyst companies. Hydrocracking and ring opening require good prior nitrogen removal and/or nitrogen-tolerant catalysts. One superficially positive attribute of SCO is its relatively low nitrogen and sulfur contents compared to conventional crudes, making it a potentially good hydrocracking feedstock. However, it should be noted that the nitrogen and sulfur species remaining in SCO are the most difficult to remove through hydrotreating. The main issue with SCO is its high


content of cyclic hydrocarbons, which limits the cetane number even at high degrees of hydrogenation. Many panel members saw ring opening as a major target for new catalysts. Others were not so sure that ring opening would be a panacea for low cetane. Some thought that ring opening would result in modest gains in cetane overall because opening one ring at a time would result in more that one side chain and produce branched paraffins, i.e., good for octane but less effective for diesel. A few panel members opined that if n-paraffins for high cetane were the objective then one should go via syngas (from SMR of natural gas or gasification) and Fisher-Tropsch, but at a higher cost. It was suggested that there might be a potential synergy between cycloparaffins from Canadian oil sands and n-paraffins from U.S. oil shales. A related suggestion was the use of an extraction-type process rather than catalytic process to remove nitrogen from hydrocracker feedstock based on the observation of efficient nitrogen extraction from U.S. shale oil. However, this would produce a significant waste stream. Molecular composition of future fuels. While diesel fuels are heading towards higher cetane and lower aromatics and sulfur, the only accepted commonality with HCCI fuels was the need for lower sulfur as an enabler for after-treatment. Parameters needed to define the fuel for HCCI engines was the foremost challenge. It was not clear to most panel members whether high cetane is the simple solution or even whether cetane number was the right parameter to describe HCCI fuels. A new set of parameters may be needed. With respect to mixed-mode HCCI, the fuel requirements appeared to be contradictory: low load may require low cetane or gasoline-like fuel whereas high load may require high cetane diesel. What happens when operating mode shifts and our tank has a single fuel? One musing was that the new fuel might be a combination of the top end of the gasoline range and bottom end of the diesel range, i.e., intermediate to present product lines. Other fuel characteristics may be affected by HCCI fuels formulation and should not be neglected. Some participants thought that it might take as many as 10 years to figure out future fuel specifications. It was thought that the market could not support another fuel in addition to the existing ones. However, given EPA requirements, HCCI will emerge as a reality because no other currently available technology can give low NOx and PM. Initially, the older technology engines will out number the new engines. Perhaps future engines such as HCCI will have to work with current fuels, i.e., forward compatibility of today’s fuels. The alternative is that the new fuels will need to be backwards compatible with the majority of engines on the road, which are of older, conventional types. This may involve blending of existing refinery streams or cycloparaffinic diesel from oil sands bitumen with paraffinic diesel from oil shales. Some panel members expressed the opinion that oil sands derived diesel, with its cycloparaffinic content, may be okay for HCCI. It was noted that, in engine tests, the exhaust temperatures were 10ºC lower for oil sands derived diesel compared to high quality US diesel for the same injector settings, yet the power output was the same or higher. Experiments and Modeling. There was uncertainty regarding the relationship between fuel properties, fuel composition and engine performance. It was thought that resolving this uncertainty would require good communication and collaboration between engine developers/manufacturers and refineries to determine the changes in fuel specs to meet new


engine requirements. Overall, panel members felt confident that refiners would be able to produce the fuels required by the new engines but that they need data for these fuels from engine developers, sufficient lead time to make refinery changes, and a way to bridge existing fuels and engines to future fuels and engines. Empirical engine test data are required to develop a set of specifications for the new fuels. These specifications may themselves require the development of new descriptors other than cetane or octane. These descriptors could relate to, for example, reaction initiation temperature, energy of the cool flame reaction, and in turn relate to fuel composition on at least a boiling point basis, or better yet on a molecular type or structural basis. Good refinery process models already exist that can be used to predict products yields from given feedstocks. These refinery models may need to be tweaked to extract information that can be related to the new fuel specification. Refiners can then determine what processes and conditions are required to produce optimum yield of new fuels that meet the specs. 6.4 Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps Identified While there were some obvious knowledge gaps, some panel members felt that there was also a gap in knowledge-exchange between engine developers and refiners. This “communications gap” may be just as important as the knowledge gaps. Indeed, some knowledge gaps may not be bridged if the communications gap is not closed. Within the areas of technology, the following knowledge gaps dominated the discussion.

1. Clear relationships are lacking between fuel properties (cetane, boiling point, etc.) and composition (n-paraffins, cycloparaffins, aromatics, etc.) and the HCCI engine performance. Such relationships are required by refiners to determine optimum processing of available crudes to efficiently produce fuels that meet the future specs. New measures other than octane and cetane numbers may be required.

2. Except for perhaps sulfur and aromatics content, it is not known which of the current diesel specifications will be transferred as specifications for the new fuel. For diesel, other fuel properties such as cloud point have a complex relationship with cetane and fuel composition. It is expected that for the new fuels other inter-related properties and specifications will need to be managed at the refinery level.

3. While other jurisdictions have moved to 50-plus cetane, we need to determine whether higher cetane will be required for LTC engines such as HCCI. If high cetane is required then ring opening of cycloparaffins may be a key technology for the refiner or upgrader using oil sands derived feedstocks. The efficiency of ring opening (e.g., amount of gas make) and its efficacy (straight chain vs. branched chain) need to be explored.

4. The transition process from existing fuels and engines to new fuels and engines has to be considered from a refinery perspective. The market for the new fuels will grow as older engines are phased out and replaced. It appears that new refining technologies are needed to facilitate this shift in fuel quality Production and distribution of new fuels will offer challenges in the interim.


7.0 FUELS CHARACTERIZATION

Co-facilitators: Parviz Rahimi, Natural Resources Canada and Andre Lemieux, Omnicon Rapporteur: Patricia Arboleda, Natural Resources Canada

7.1 Introduction As noted in previous sections, the chemical and related engine performance characteristics of gasoline-type fuels are relatively well known. So most of the discussion on fuels characterization here centred on the more complex characterization challenges inherent in diesel fuels. Production of bitumen and synthetic crude from Alberta oil sands is increasing and oil sands derived diesels will have a major contribution to the North American diesel pool in the near future. In most cases, these will be in blends with conventional stocks, but in one case (Shell’s Scotford refinery) the fuels are produced solely from unconventional bitumen derived stocks. In some other Canadian refineries (Petro-Canada in Edmonton; Suncor in Sarnia) the synthetic intakes are processed in dedicated unit trains. New low-temperature combustion engines such as HCCI may require new specific fuel formulations. Fuel characteristics affect engine performance and have a direct impact on engine emissions. Distillate quality is known to differ in terms of bulk properties and some chemical characteristics. The chemical make up of oil sands derived diesel fuel depends on the degree of processing. With or without added processing, the combined aromatic and cyclo-paraffin content of oil sands derived distillate fuels is higher than for conventional stocks. For future compression ignition engines, however, high cetane fuels may not be required and diesel derived from oil sands may be a better match for new engines fuel specifications. It is then important to identify in detail the chemical differences between the oil sands and conventional diesel fuels and to correlate fuel chemistry with the performance of the new engines. The objective of this breakout group was to identify the most important research questions on the characterization of transportation fuels for use in advanced engines—in particular, high efficiency engines that are compliant with US EPA 2007-2010 heavy-duty regulations, or with US EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 light duty regulations. 7.2 Seed Questions 1. How does the composition of distillates derived from Canadian Bitumen differ from

conventional petroleum distillates? 2. How critical is it to get a full matrix of components? What are the computational limits,

and what methods can be used to focus on the molecular information critical to the success of combustion simulations?

3. What fuel matrices are required in future engine programs? Do some of these matrices benefit from the unique components in oil sands derived fuels?


4. What further characterization research is required on future fuels for HCCI applications? What chemical and physical analyses of fuels are needed for low temperature combustion strategies?

7.3 Summary of Main Discussion The summary of the wide-ranging discussion did not follow the lines of the seed questions, and can be summarized under four derivative headings. Canadian Bitumen Distillate versus Conventional Distillate It is generally believed that bitumen-derived diesel has characteristics reflecting the properties of bitumen, i.e., high aromatic and cycloparaffin content. However, depending on the processing conditions, diesel fuels similar in quality to those obtained from conventional crudes are created. It was pointed out that in future engines the issue of vapor versus liquid, which significantly affects the thermodynamics of combustion processes, may be more important than the source of fuel, whether from bitumen or conventional distillate. Also, if bitumen and conventional distillate were processed similarly, one would expect to get similar quality in terms of sulfur and nitrogen content. Another important point is that, if the reproducibility between different laboratories in terms of detailed chemical characterization is poor, direct comparison between bitumen-derived and conventional distillates is difficult. Some other points that were discussed:

• Bitumen having less paraffin is ideal for certain HCCI engines. • Which engine should we be modeling? There are five modified types under

consideration, and there is still the belief that engines determine the fuel type. • Fuel quality will change depending on the blend. • There is a significant variety of OSDF distillates, as upgrading schemes will differ

from “carbon rejection” and “hydrogen addition” philosophies. • Feedstocks – conventional or unconventional – are getting consistently heavier and

worse. What Fuel Matrices Are Needed? Are These Available from Oil Sands? There was a lot of debate on the requirement of fuel matrices for advanced engines and it was obviously not the mandate of this workshop to define that at this stage of new engine research and development. It was pointed out that the fuel for advanced engines will likely desire higher volatility than diesel as we know it. Fuel matrices change constantly, for example due to environmental restraint. Sulfur is reduced during the hydrodesulferization process, and at the same time some aromatics are saturated, depending on the level of process severity. The question becomes: can new engines handle these variations in fuel chemistry? It was suggested that a range of fuel matrices be run in several new-technology engines. This will then require a round robin program to measure emissions and performance. R&D is then needed to determine the number of “molecular types” to represent the ideal fuel matrix.


Chemical and Physical Tests - Characterization Techniques There was much discussion around the importance of cyclohexane in fuels and its characterization. In general cycloparaffin characterization is not very reproducible. In terms of fuel characterization in general it is easy to characterize naphtha peak by peak using a gas chromatographic (GC) technique known as DHA (detailed hydrocarbon analysis). However, the diesel fraction is more difficult to characterize because of the higher boiling components. New techniques such as two-dimensional GC and ionization with time of flight mass spectroscopy are promising for diesel fuel characterization. The other aspect of characterization discussed in detail was reproducibility between different laboratories. Other points that were discussed:

• Combustion requirements must be stated in order to develop a characterization technique, but we do not need to wait before developing characterization methodology, and gaining industry agreement.

• Bridge the communication gap between fuel characteristics and how this translates to the refinery’s ability to make such fuels.

• In research, full characterization is important, but on a commercial production scale specifications normally are “broader”.

• In combustion, minor components might be more significant and should be characterized.

• Is detailed speciation of cycloparaffins important, or is a broad characterization acceptable?

• There will need to be some new ASTM standards (8-10 years requirement) for refiners to get the desirable fuel for LTC engine technology.

Computational Limits of Molecular Simplification The following points were discussed:

• At present, models require hundreds of inputs so bulk chemical property is not enough.

• Can we make fuel combustion modeling simpler (like coal combustion which simplified to 4 equations) recognizing that with more input the model gets better?

• Should run Quality Control, and perform full chemical characterization with a test method, and then reduce the number of parameters to the simplest equations necessary to model.

• Sharing of results is important but companies may not be too anxious to share information.

• Fuel additives may complicate things because of the competitive nature of the fuel business.

• Can we define a surrogate fuel - choose component that gives a desirable characteristic?

• Can we encourage dialogue between fuel producers and engine manufacturers? • Bulk cycloparaffin analysis - is it sufficient? • Speed of computational results; are you limited by the hardware or input data?


• Can we identify the minor components that drive the kinetics of combustion and model these?

• Share knowledge of HCCI engines to get those key components. • Fuel characterization today is only broad hydrocarbon speciation/characterization but

will modeling require more input than that? • Too many pathways; don’t have kinetic rates; don’t know the fuel only a

representative fuel average. • Kinetics - can you model temperature 950-1600 K with the impact of fuel composition

in global kinetic rates under those conditions? • Use chemical representative extremes to do the modeling of kinetic temperature, then

if temperature kinetics make big differences, do further characterization. 7.4 Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps Identified There were four key gaps identified, but no priority was assessed during the discussion. 1. There needs to be better identification of differences between OSDF fuels and conventional

fuels. 2. Develop correlations between molecular structure and engine response. 3. In time, develop new fuel specifications relevant to the new engine technology and

confirm applicability via round robin testing. 4. In this regard, there is a need for better characterization and analytical techniques for all

components, including cycloparaffins. While that can be at a very detailed level in the initial stages, the long term will require the development of surrogate tests more suited to refinery control labs.

8.0 EMISSION CONTROL SYSTEMS

Co-facilitators: Bruce Bunting, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Tim Johnson, Corning Rapporteur: Jim Kelly, Natural Resources Canada

8.1 Introduction Oil sands derived fuels may have a positive or negative impact, or no impact on present engines and combustion systems. They may also affect the development of future fuels, engines, or emissions controls by presenting new fuel related opportunities or issues which need to be understood before advanced technologies can enter the marketplace. For diesel fuels, OSDF often possess higher aromatics and cycloparaffins, may have lower sulfur, and may have lower cetane number and high dosages of cetane improver additive. For gasoline fuels, OSDF may inherently tend to higher aromatics and cycloparaffins and lower sulfur than conventional fuels. The same chemistries that contribute to lower cetane in diesel fuels (aromatics, cycloparaffins, and olefins) will generally contribute to higher octane in gasoline. The exact blend of properties and chemistries in OSDF will depend on the


upgrading and refining process used, the degree of hydrotreating or hydrocracking applied, and the degree of blending with other crude oil sources or finished fuels. Generally, gasoline-based OSDF will have less property variations that diesel-based OSDF, compared to their respective conventional crude equivalents, for reasons already discussed in Section 9. One can expect that any crude upgrading and refining processes will be applied to achieve the goal of maximum product yield and product value while meeting required crude or product specifications. There is a considerable degree of flexibility as to how oil sands derived crude oil is being utilized. The increased production of oil sands derived crude is indicative of the general trend towards utilization of heavier crude oils as petroleum consumption increases worldwide. OSDF can contain a different hydrocarbon (HC) mix. Generally, diesel fuels derived from oil sands will contain more aromatics or more cycloparaffins. Cetane number will be lower and large doses of cetane improver may be used. This different hydrocarbon mix may affect engine-out emissions or may interact differently with emissions control devices or systems. It may also act differently with different combustion strategies, such as conventional diesel, low temperature combustion, and HCCI. These performance differences may provide challenges or opportunities with today’s engines and with future engines. 8.2 Seed Questions The seed questions provided to help lead discussions for emissions controls can be arranged in several groups: 1. Effects on aftertreatment devices (lean NOX traps, soot filters, oxidation catalysts, urea

SCR, and HC SCR catalysts). 2. Effects on engine out emissions (particulate and hydrocarbons). 3. Effects on fuel reforming through in-cylinder reforming and on-board reforming

(combustion modification, catalyst light-off, and LNT regeneration). 4. Effects in EGR loops and potential for EGR cooler fouling. 8.3 Summary of Main Discussion OSDF can contain heavier fuel components or more aromatics and cycloparaffins. These components may affect catalyst performance in the areas of plugging or fouling, lightoff or warm-up. This impact can be on existing catalysts, catalysts proposed for the 2007 and 2010 production release, and possible emerging catalyst technologies, which might provide even better emissions performance. In addition to possible negative effects, OSDF may provide opportunities for improving catalyst performance or enabling new emissions control catalyst technology. Examples of catalysts discussed include automotive three-way catalysts, diesel oxidation catalysts, diesel soot filters, urea and HC SCR, NOX reduction catalysts, and lean NOX traps. Catalysts, which utilize hydrocarbons for their functioning, might be affected by fuel chemistry. These include HC SCR catalysts, lean NOX traps, on-board reformers, and actively regenerated soot filters. Heavier fuels may produce more coking and reduced activity in these


catalysts, while lower sulfur and more saturation of aromatic content may improve performance. Combustion engines have areas where fuel related deposits may affect engine performance and subsequently emissions performance. Intake valve deposits can affect in-cylinder swirl and mixing. Injector tip deposits can affect fuel spray patterns and spray penetration. Combustion chamber deposits can affect octane requirements. EGR loop, valve, or cooler deposits can affect precise control of EGR. Finally, OSDF may affect engine out emissions in the areas of particulate and hydrocarbons. If these increase or change significantly, then catalysts may have to work harder or be modified to meet these new requirements. The possibility for improvements in catalyst and emissions performance may come about because of several potential features of OSDF, which might be exploited. These fuels may contain higher levels of cycloparaffins, which might be selectively broken down to lighter hydrocarbons, hydrogen, or olefins. These fuels might also have lower sulfur, since sulfur is removed by the hydrotreating or hydrocracking that the oil sands crude is subject to in upgrading it to pipeline specifications. In addition, if one considers potential new fuels for the future, a general shift in crude type might also enable the development of a new fuel specification or grade for advanced combustion engines or advanced emissions control devices. Environment Canada has completed an evaluation of many OSDF diesel fuels in conventional diesel engines and has found that performance relative to criteria pollutants generally matches with the cetane number and aromatic content of the fuels, independent of crude oil source. 8.4 Key Questions and Knowledge Gaps The focus group discussions were filtered and classified based on concerns, priorities, and opportunities. Six key research priorities were identified and are discussed in approximate priority starting with the most important as expressed at the workshop sessions. 1. Do diesel OSDFs have any impact on existing diesel engines, vehicles, or aftertreatment.

Will they affect soot filter or oxidation catalyst behavior? Will they affect deposits in EGR loops, EGR coolers, or EGR valves? Will they have any effect on engine seals or deposits elsewhere in the engine such as intake valve deposits?

2. What challenges or opportunities do OSDF present for emissions control for mixed mode,

LTC, or HCCI engines? Will large amounts of aromatics or cycloparaffins affect advanced combustion? Will large doses of cetane improvers perform the same in advanced combustion? Do any OSDF fuel components, such as cycloparaffins, provide unique chemical opportunities for improving advanced combustion?

3. How does OSDF affect diesel lean NOX trap, urea SCR, or HC SCR catalysts and system

performance? Will the fuel chemistry affect exhaust HC composition for use by lean NOX


reduction catalysts? Will there be a detriment to catalyst performance? Do OSDF possess any unique chemistries that can be exploited to improve system performance?

4. Do OSDF reform differently in in-cylinder or on-board reformers? How will these

differences affect engine or catalyst system performance? Will fuels with more aromatics or cycloparaffins be more difficult to reform or more prone to coking? Do OSDF possess any unique chemistries that can be exploited to improve system performance?

5. How important is it to confirm OSDF emissions related results with multi-cylinder

engines and extended tests? Most tests to date have been relatively short-term back-to-back comparisons.

6. Do gasoline OSDF have any impact on existing gasoline vehicles? Will there be any

effects on three way catalysts, EGR systems, or intake valve deposits?

9.0 FUELS OF THE FUTURE Facilitator: Shawn Whitacre, National Renewable Energy Laboratory Rapporteur: Craig Fairbridge, Natural Resources Canada

9.1 Introduction The objective of this breakout group was to speculate on a longer-term progression towards an ideal fuel, with specific emphasis on how oil sands might fit into that progression. Some of the questions were devoted to hardware as well as fuels since developments in both engine/vehicle and fuels/energy carriers will occur over the same timeframe. The proposed timeframe was post-2030 and meant to transition beyond today’s technology. In general, participants were uncomfortable to speculate much beyond the technologies with which they were familiar. The discussion often considered evolutionary rather than revolutionary technologies. 9.2 Seed Questions and Main Discussion Points Raised Output From these breakout groups were most easily summarized by reference to the seed questions. 1. From your industry’s perspective, what will be the major drivers for fuel and- vehicle

technology developments over the next 25 years? (e.g. environmental regulation, climate change, fuel scarcity, population growth) Can we realistically anticipate how the market will adapt to these demands?

There was no consensus on the primary driver for future fuel/vehicle system developments in personal mobility over the next 25 years. Participants speculated that the rapidly increasing fuel demand in China and India will continue to impact the global energy market. We can expect to witness a large growth in the number of vehicles in the world and a concomitant growth in world crude oil consumption and emissions. Should this occur on the scale imagined whereby each household in China and India attains the number of vehicles as North


American households in the next 25 years, then the world will receive a rude wake-up call. Uncertainty of supply, therefore, may become a public concern. In the same timeframe, we could reach peak oil production rates. Consumer behavior was identified as a key problem. It is ironic to think that the participants at this workshop, who have a vested interest in engines and fuels, were puzzled at the proliferation of trucks and SUVs in North America. Where emissions and regulations have been the driver over the past 25 years, many participants noted that efficiency would be a driver over the next 25 as energy supply and demand continue to spiral out of balance. Most believed that emissions of criteria pollutants from conventional engine/vehicle/fuel systems were approaching a minimum and that further reductions may not be possible or may not be achievable without severe compromises in efficiency. Internal combustion engine efficiency will extend the supply of petroleum as heavy non-conventional supplies slowly supplant conventional light crude oil over this timeframe. Consumer attitudes towards conservation will be driven largely by economics (i.e. higher cost of petroleum). Fuel properties may evolve to facilitate engine development (the prize is low NOx) and at this time, it is not clear that future internal combustion engines will be fuel-sensitive. The transportation of goods via heavy-duty vehicles and public highways will continue to be a major component of our transportation system over this time frame. The concept of unit trains was discussed, as were aspects of light weighting for this sector. The engine manufacturers are self-described ‘power providers’ and similarly, oil refiners are ‘energy carrier providers’ so this indicates that both groups are thinking beyond current technology. Technology in a number of areas was often seen as a potential driver to personal mobility. Breakthroughs in nanotechnology and material science, solar/photovoltaics, or fields of science not envisioned yet could very well drive engine/fuel systems in the future. 2. What role will the internal combustion engine play in transportation in the 2030

timeframe? Fuel cells?

The internal combustion engine plus aftertreatment will be a very important component to personal mobility for several decades. A progression to low temperature combustion technologies with intermediate mixed mode combustion is envisioned. Participants anticipate that as the combustion process is better understood, smart engines will make adjustments based upon fuel chemistry to maximize efficiency and minimize emissions under various loads for both light and heavy-duty systems. This will incorporate more/better sensors, more engine management software, and more engine hardware. Some participants envisioned an on-board fuels analysis that would control the combustion process through engine hardware and even some on-board reforming or fuels processing or blending with significant engine control systems. Hybrids were envisioned as a growth area where, ultimately, one could envision the internal combustion engine simply acting as a generator set that recharges batteries to run electric motors by 2030. This scenario was envisioned as a slow progression, along with that above, with a greenhouse gas driver. Advances in solar panels/energy were discussed with respect to this scenario.


The transport of goods and heavy-duty engines will continue to play a dominant role in transportation systems in North America over this time frame. This sector has a slow fleet turnover and is concerned with fuel or energy density and safety issues such as flash point. With these concerns, we anticipate that the trucking industry will prefer diesel boiling range fuels. There is no doubt that the existing infrastructure will be difficult to supplant in this sector. Many participants did not see a large role for hydrogen fuel cells in transportation in this time frame as long as hydrogen was derived from hydrocarbon resources. Fundamental issues in hydrogen production, purification, storage and transportation and membrane/catalyst poisoning were seen as major barriers at this point in time. Participants anticipated niche roles for fuel cells in stationary areas. Most participants were also prepared for some breakthroughs in technology over this time frame; perhaps in the fuel cell arena but also in solar and photovoltaics and materials.

3 What significant advancements in fuel technology are required to enable the necessary

improvements in hardware technology? How can oil sands derived products be positioned to address these demands?

There was no consensus that fuel quality change alone can affect engine change. Fuel and engine technologies will need to advance together. We have seen new DOE initiatives, for example, in which engine companies and energy companies are being asked to collaborate. Participants agreed that we need to re-think the process of getting a better understanding of engine/fuel interactions. New and detailed knowledge of fuel chemistry will be required but both engine and fuel providers together should be involved in determining what measurement types are needed. More and more detailed hydrocarbon type analyses may not be enough because minor components may be very important in different combustion regimes. Additional knowledge of both hydrocarbon classes and some specific individual compounds may be important in the future. This is where/why both future engine and future fuel providers should work together in identifying issues on fuel chemistry and its effect on combustion. Fuel and crude sources are becoming heavier and we are seeing oil sands as a very important source in the near future with the potential to supply 5 million barrels per day in this time frame. The future could also include coal or shale oil. One concern was the question of what is a typical fuel (say from conventional petroleum or oil sands)? Many specifications are based upon physical properties and some individuals feared that more detailed analyses would lead to more fuel specifications based on new analytical procedures. Participants envisioned more fuels or a larger variety of fuels and/or fuel sources in the future. One point to consider here is that if a new engine/fuel paradigm is found, old engines will still be on the road and these would still require existing fuels for a period of time unless any new fuels for this paradigm are backwardly compatible.


4. With the recent proliferation of renewable fuels in mind, how significant will they be in meeting energy demands in 2030?

Renewable fuels will be generally available as blendstocks in this time frame and will be very important in select regions and/or for specific fleet applications. Participants expect renewable fuels to be utilized more in a supplemental role to make petroleum fuels perform better (but not a proven concept) or from an energy security vantage point to reduce reliance on petroleum sources. Generally, participants thought that there is not enough of a resource base for bio-fuels to meet a major percentage of future transportation fuel supplies in North America. Most participants could envision bio-fuels as 5-10% of total fuel supplies and believed that bio-fuels should be derived from a wide variety of feedstocks, not only from deliberately grown crops but also from waste materials and other non-food sources. There are issues with respect to cloud point and cold weather properties so the use of bio-fuels in northern regions in the winter may be restricted, unless developments are made to improve their performance. There may also be issues in blending renewable fuels with petroleum, oil sands, Fischer-Tropsch products, or other fuel blends. 5. What can be done now to stimulate this long-term development? What is already being

done? What capabilities would be required?

Research is required to make sure that several technical options are available in the future, based on both cost-effectiveness and energy efficiency. Mission-oriented R&D is important, as opposed to curiosity-driven R&D. The government imperative is to make sure that technical options are available and not to try to pick future commercial technologies from today’s research topics. Therefore, R&D directed at technology diversity seems to be important for the future such that a distribution of energy carriers and energy technologies is funded. Participants saw the need to foster original equipment manufacturer / oil industry collaboration. Although health care, education, and security are government priorities, energy and transportation energy in particular are vital to the North American economy. Decisions on transportation research priorities today should be on a no-regrets basis with funding provided for robust fundamental and applied energy science. Education and public communication is becoming very important since it is only knowledge that can affect behavior. This is a public good aspect of government science and technology, and a useful role. The future of North American transportation may be to balance demand with supply. Up until this point in time, our society was doing the opposite, balancing supply with demand, and this is not sustainable. Uncertainty on the supply side will continue. The future may see specific refineries making specific blendstocks with fuel blending occurring elsewhere. All liquid synthetic fuel options may play a role at some time in the future, including nuclear-derived steam for heavy oil production, Fischer-Tropsch from gasification, bio-fuels, energy from waste. Liquid fuel characterization will remain important and this includes both chemistry and physical property measurements of fuel quality.


6. Military Fuels

There is a U.S. Department of Defense driver for mobility fuels where the cost of transporting a finished fuel from production to use site is very high. A single fuel for all vehicles (modified JP-8 or Jet-A, for example) made from a number of blending stocks and made anywhere in the world is desirable. It is also imperative that a stable, domestic fuel supply be available to support military options in case foreign supplies are suddenly inaccessible. The chemistry of the blended fuel is more important than the chemistry of any single source. Alternative fuels including coal, Fischer-Tropsch fuels, oil shale and bio-fuels are all options over the next 30 years. As a small percentage of a large fuel supply, alternatives could still be big business. 9.3 Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps Identified Many of the concepts discussed in this breakout session were consistent with those covered in the other sessions, but with a broader focus. In general, the following represent the areas identified as key knowledge gaps that may require research investment:

1. Investigate new sensor and electronic control technologies that could enable more robust and efficient use of internal combustion engines

2. Determine the status of fuel cells and solar cells that could be used in the transportation sector in the post-2030 timeframe

3. Stimulate continued cooperation between hardware suppliers and energy companies in proactive, databased, pre-competitive research that allows for significant concurrent development of technology

4. Continue to develop hybrid and other energy recovery technologies that, when coupled with modern engines, could significantly improve vehicle efficiency

5. Expand research that would allow a greater fraction of North American energy supply to be derived from renewable resources. This includes broadening the portfolio of available feedstocks and ensuring that these fuels are compatible with new and existing engines/vehicles, suitable for use in a variety of climates, and compatible for blending with conventional oils without significant infrastructure changes.

6. Investigate Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) liquids, derived from a variety of sources (natural gas, coal, biomass), as future fuels and blending components.


10.0 IMPLICATIONS OF OIL SANDS DERIVED FUELS ON EXISTING ENGINES Co-facilitators: Tom Gallant, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Jerry Wang, Cummins Rapporteur: Natalie Shea, Natural Resources Canada

10.1 Introduction This breakout topic had the goal to identify engine compatibility issues and research areas related to fuel properties and chemistries of oil sands derived fuels in pre ’07 heavy duty engine technologies meeting HD regulations, and Tier 2 Bin 5 light-duty regulations. 10.2 Seed Questions

1. What are the systems, components, or processes affected by fuel properties or chemistries?

2. How does fuel chemistry affect these systems? 3. What are the barriers to predicting backward compatibility of new fuels? 4. What role should the national labs, industry and standard-setting organizations

play to backward compatibility? 10.3 Summary of Main Discussion Fuel is obviously in contact with the fuel system, which includes injectors, pumps, fuel lines, filters and tanks. Within these systems there are components comprised of different metals, ceramics and polymers, e.g., seals, which are in contact with the fuel. What is less obvious is the interaction of fuel with in-cylinder components, i.e., ring, liner, piston and oil. When considering the fact that a significant amount of heavy duty diesel engines remain in service for 10-20 years and fuel systems/materials have changed over that period of time to meet customer and regulatory demands, the number of existing systems and components to be considered is an enormous task. The durability and reliability of fuel systems are validated on the fuel properties and chemistries that existed at the time of the development. In most cases the fuel chemistry that is used to develop engine components closely simulates the EPA fuel specification to certify engine emissions. This fuel may not accurately represent the range of fuel properties and chemistries in the fuel market at the time of introduction. As an example, failures for specific fuel systems became a major issue with the introduction of low sulfur fuel. In one case, heavy-duty diesel engines with as little as 250,000 miles were disabled by a leaking fuel pump within hours after fueling with the low sulfur fuel. Fuel chemistry/fuel system incompatibility was eventually identified as the problem. The low sulfur fuel used to conduct engine and extensive field tests prior to full-scale production was artificially derived from various refinery streams and chemically did not represent the fuel being produced for the market. In regards to the fuel system and components, lubricity is the most controversial and still seems to be the least understood in regards to fuel chemistry. Fuel chemistry and viscosity


have been identified as having a major influence on wear and scuffing; however, the specific mechanism by which fuel chemistry interacts with materials under different conditions (e.g., temperature and loads) to prevent wear or scuffing is not well understood. Recent experience suggests that current specifications and industry knowledge may not adequately describe the complexity of fuel chemistry and materials interaction as designs, materials and fuels change. The effect of fuel chemistry on polymers (e.g. in seals) is reasonably well understood; however, the problem of translating the effect into potential problems is difficult because static and dynamic seals may have different functional requirements. Characteristics such as seal swell may be critical to acceptable durability of a seal, whereas, in a different seal design, swell may be considered detrimental. Fuel chemistry effects on lube oil are a result of fuel dilution and its effect on physical property changes. Even though the amount of fuel dilution may not be detrimental to performance, it can result in inaccurate oil analysis by routine methods, such as IR. It has also been associated with filter plugging as a result of incompatibility with lube oil additives. Paraffins, cycloparaffins, dicycloparaffins and aromatics in fuel have been shown to have a relationship to lubricity and seal performance, but it is very specific to the design and materials. For example, a fuel injector may be sensitive to diaromatics; whereas a fuel pump may be heavily influenced by viscosity or a different class of organic compounds. Therefore, new fuel specifications, such as lower aromatics to support emissions, along with process upsets and changes in crude sources can result in sporadic problems. In addition to fuel chemistry, additives used to improve low temperature properties, cetane or emissions, can have an adverse effect on polymers as well as incompatibility with fuel chemistry, and become ineffective. As the use of additives increases to correct for deficiencies in basic fuel properties, more opportunities for compatibility problems exist. This also includes blending with biodiesel, FT fuels or ethanol to boost physical properties or when mandated by law. In regard to emissions, it has been reported that oil sands derived gasoline produces an increase in particulate emissions. These particulate emissions are still within regulations, but it shows the effect fuel chemistry may have on the combustion process. Fundamental chemistry is key knowledge for understanding these interactions. Bench tests, such as for lubricity, are empirically derived from field problems and relate to a specific set of conditions at the time the problem occurred. Therefore, relating these tests to predict future acceptability of new fuel chemistries, materials or design can be very risky. The cost of being wrong has an immediate impact on a company’s financial balance sheet, and may have serious ramifications on future sales that can last years. In addition, failure associated with an engine manufacturer or attributed to a fuel producer is highly competitive information and is rarely provided in a public forum. Therefore, what knowledge is available on fuel/engine compatibility is rarely provided to other engine or fuel producers. There is no easily identifiable path for addressing these issues. Processes for developing performance specifications can be incredibly political, due to the competitive marketing implications that can be attributed to acknowledging a problem by an engine or fuel company. Because of the financial implications, in conjunction with the basic lack of understanding between fuel chemistry and material interaction, introduction of new fuels or fuel system


technologies rely on extensive engine and field testing, under conditions which are considered applicable by the engine manufacturer or fuel producer. The ability of the engine and field tests to identify problems still requires a good understanding of the interaction of fuel chemistry and components. Without the fundamental understanding of this interaction, it is difficult to plan a robust design of experiments to provide a high degree of confidence and predict the future fuel compatibility. The fundamental research required to gain this understanding is difficult to get funded by industry. The general process for determining compatibility issues, be it engine or fuel, is to send product into the market and see what happens. In the case of heavy-duty diesel engines the expected service life before overhaul is greater than 500,000 miles (3-4 years). The expense of conducting a field test to identify problems is too expensive and products may not be sufficiently developed to conduct a viable long-term field test. Fuel suppliers want to minimize fuel specifications to optimize processing of various crude oils and expect the engine manufacturer to make the engine system robust. Engine manufacturers want to minimize cost and complexity of the fuel system and expect the fuel supplier to produce a fuel compatible to all fuel system components. The answer to supporting their common customer lies somewhere in between, but there is not enough information on the fuel systems, fuel chemistry and interactions to make an accurate assessment. In the future, the fuel chemistries required to enable or improve HCCI or mixed mode combustion technologies could be radically different from current fuel chemistries. The future looks as though both engine design and fuel chemistry will be getting less uniform among manufacturers, which will increase the potential for problems with compatibility. Cooperation between engine and oil companies will be required to do the kind of testing required to understand potential problems and then share knowledge to minimize the impact to their common customer. The National Laboratories could be the focal point to establish this communication channel between engine and oil companies. Also, it is possible for the National Laboratories to have the role of performing pre-competitive research. Long-term issues could be funded by a central pool of resources in which all interested groups contribute. For example, computational tools combined with fundamental understanding of fuel chemistry and material interaction could be developed to assist in fuel system designs. 10.4 Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps Identified The following six knowledge gaps were identified, and are listed in order of the provisional priority discussed in the breakout sessions.

1. Fundamental understanding of diesel lubricity issue in all fuels. 2. Relationship between physical properties and fuel chemistry for all diesel

fuels. 3. Mutual understanding of engine manufacturer and fuel producer issues. 4. The role of blending between high volumes of OSDF and conventional crudes.

However, in this case, co-processing is a fact in many refineries today. 5. The role of additives and compatibility issues in all fuels. 6. Understand the future regulations, such as aromatics, in US transportation

fuels on OSDF chemistry.


11.0 EPILOGUE The various R&D organizations in Canada and the US will need to address the knowledge gaps identified in this report, and this will require considerable coordination of the basic and applied research that will underpin long-term solutions. The workshop did not attempt to assign responsibilities for any follow up work nor did it deliberate on how these knowledge gaps should be addressed. While the oil sands derived crudes and the special characteristics of derived fuels were a deliberate focus of the workshop, the identified knowledge gaps are equally relevant to conventionally derived fuels and to blends of these with synthetics, including bio-fuels and fuels that might derive from technologies such as syngas conversion to hydrocarbon fuels.

12.0 REFERENCES

1. “Invitational Workshop on Advanced Combustion and Fuels”. Freedom Car & Vehicle Technologies Program. June 16-17, 2003

2. “Oil Sands Technology Roadmap”, Alberta Chamber of Commerce. January 31, 2004. (adobe version available at: www.acr-alberta.com)

13.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Partial funding for the National Centre for Upgrading Technology has been provided by the Canadian Program for Energy Research and Development (PERD), the Alberta Research Council (ARC) and the Alberta Energy Research Institute (AERI). The Workshop organizers would also like to acknowledge the support of:

United States Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies

United States Department of Energy, Fossil Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory

National Research Council Canada, Institute for Chemical Process and Environmental Technology, and Enhanced Representation Initiative

Natural Resources Canada, CANMET Energy Technology Centre Natural Resources Canada, Office of Energy R&D

The Oil Sands Chemistry and Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop’s Steering Committee consisted of the following members (e-mail addresses are provided):

Name Affiliation E-Mail Address

Wendy Clark National Renewable Energy Lab [email protected] Henry Cialone Battelle Memorial Institute [email protected] Dawson Natural Resources Canada, NCUT [email protected]


http://www.acr-alberta.com/

Name Affiliation E-Mail Address

Craig Fairbridge Natural Resources Canada, NCUT [email protected] Flowers Lawrence Livermore National Lab [email protected] Gallant Pacific Northwest National Lab [email protected] Graves Oak Ridge National Lab [email protected] Kass Oak Ridge National Lab [email protected] McCormick National Renewable Energy Lab [email protected] Chuck Mueller Sandia National Lab [email protected] Neill National Research Council Canada, ICPET [email protected] Patten Battelle Memorial Institute [email protected] Ring Natural Resources Canada, NCUT [email protected] Siebers Sandia National Lab [email protected] Greg Smallwood National Research Council Canada, ICPET [email protected] Stork DOE, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [email protected] Dexter Sutterfield DOE, Fossil Energy [email protected] Taylor National Renewable Energy Lab [email protected] Shawn Whitacre National Renewable Energy Lab [email protected]

The organizers wish to provide a special acknowledgement of Dr. Len Flint of LENEF

Consulting Limited ([email protected]) for his expert facilitation at the workshop and for

preparing the draft report.


mailto:[email protected]

14.0 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND TERMS

CI Compression Ignition CO Carbon Monoxide CO2 Carbon Dioxide Condensate The light C5-plus by-product of gas recovery, predominantly naphtha DCDC dilute clean diesel combustion DHA direct hydrocarbon analysis DI Direct Injection Dilbit A blend of condensate and bitumen, typically from 20-30% condensate DOE US Department of Energy EGR Exhaust Gas Recirculation EPA Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.) FCC(U) Fluid Catalytic Cracking (Unit) FT Fischer-Tropsch GC Gas Chromatography G/D Gas to Distillate ratio HC acronym for HydroCarbon HCCI Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition HCU Hydrocracking (Unit) LCO Light Cycle Oil (FCCU by-product) LTC Low Temperature Combustion NCUT National Centre for Upgrading Technology (Devon, Alberta) NRCan Natural Resources Canada NRC National Research Council, Canada NOX Nitrogen Oxides OEM Original Equipment Manufacturers (the auto industry) OSDF Oil Sands Derived Fuel PM Particulate Matter emissions RON,MON Research Octane Number, Motor Octane Number RVP Reid Vapour Pressure SCO Synthetic Crude Oil SI Spark Ignition Synbit A blend of SCO and bitumen, typically 50/50 SMR Steam - Methane Reforming




15.0 APPENDIX A1: PLENARY SESSION PRESENTATIONS




.

Thomas H. WiseVice President403/266-7086www.purvingertz.com

Presented at:


Edmonton, AlbertaJune 6, 2005

Oil Sands Market Overview

Prepared by:

.Buenos Aires-Calgary-Houston

London-Los Angeles-Moscow-Singapore

2 .

Outline of Discussion Today

Potential of Alberta’s Oil Sands

Transportation

Oil Sands Products

Markets For Oil Sands Productsh Bitumen Blendsh Upgrading and Synthetic Crude

Market Expansion

Conclusions

47

3 .

Purvin & Gertz and Oil Sands

International Energy Consultancyh Private and Independent

Established in 1947h In Canada since 1973

30 years in oil sandsh Economic feasibility, technical evaluations, market studiesh Canada and Venezuela

Refining and upgrading h Technologies h Costsh Economics

Independent Engineer for banks/investorsh Initial project reviews and project reportsh Project monitoring and certification of progressh Performance monitoring and certification

4 .

Canadian Oil Sands Potential is Huge

Canadian oil sands recoverable reserves rank second only to Saudi Arabia, but has considerable upside.

Billions of Barrels

Cumulative Production (1967-2003) 4 Billion BarrelsRecoverable Reserves 174 Billion Barrels

Initial Oil in Place 1.6 Trillion Barrels

Potential upside through technological gains

48

5 .

Oil Sands Production Will Surpass Declining Conventional Production

Oil sands supply includes synthetic crude (SCO), bitumen and diluent.Oil sands is forecast to increase by nearly 3 times by 2015.Oil sands will increase from 42% of Western supply in 2002 to 78% in 2015.With conventional crude declining, total supply from Western Canada will increase by over 1.2 million B/D by 2015.Some SCO will be needed as diluent in heavy blend.

Western Canadian Crude Oil SupplyWestern Canadian Crude Oil Supply

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

20150

500

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Upgraded Bitumen/SCONon-Upgraded BitumenConventional HeavyConventional Light

Thousands of Barrels per Day

6 .

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Thousand Barrels per Day

U.S. and Canadian Markets for Crude Oil

Actual Forecast

US Crude Production

Canadian Bitumen/ Synthetic

Canadian Conventional Crude Production

US and Canada Crude Demand

Crude Oil Imports

49

7 .

0

250

500

750

1,000

1,250

1,500

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

SynBitDilBitConventional Heavy

Thousand Barrels per Day

SynBit Likely to Grow Due to Condensate Shortage

8 .

Transportation Issues

More diluent is needed

More pipeline capacity will be needed with product segregation

hIntra-Alberta:• To Edmonton or Hardisty• Competing plans for different products• Hot bitumen, or diluted bitumen with diluent recycle

hEx-Alberta:• More capacity needed by 2008• East and South: Enbridge (Southern Access), Express expansion,

Keystone (TCPL) and reversals of Spearhead to Cushing and ExxonMobil to USGC

• West: TransMountain expansions and new Enbridge Gateway P/L

50

9 .

Upgrading, Transportation & Refining are Needed for the Clean Fuels Market to Utilize Alberta Bitumen

S.U.V

Bitumen

% Upgrading

$/B

Upstream Upgrading

Refinery Upgrading

S.A.G.D

Transportation

RefinedProducts

Synthetic Crude

10 .

Oil Sands Products and Market Outlets

UpgradingLight

Synthetic Crude Oil

(SCO)

LightCrude

Refineries

(Mining or In-Situ)

Refining

DilBit

Condensate

HeavyCrude

Refineries

BitumenProduction

SynBit MediumCrude

RefineriesLight SCO

SynDilBit

SCO/SynBit Blend

Heavy SCO

51

11 .

Distillation Comparison – Light Sweet Crude

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Condensate SCO MSW LLS WTI BonnyLight

Resid Vac Gas Oil Distillate Naphtha

Note: Missing fraction is light ends

12 .

Distillation Comparison – Heavy Sour Crude

SynBit blends have a distillate / VGO “bubble” compared to conventional heavy sour crude oils

Note: Missing fraction is light ends

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Bitumen DilBit(31.6%Cond)

SynBit(50/50)

SynDilBit(19%

SCO, 16%Cond)

LloydBlend

Bow River Maya

Resid Vac Gas Oil Distillate Naphtha

52

13 .

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Volu

me

Perc

ent

Vacuum Resid Vacuum Gas Oil Distillate Naphtha/LPG

AthabascaSynBit

19.9 API2.6 %S

OS MWMedium20.4 API 2.4 %S

ArabMedium30.9 API2.6 %S

OS WCMedium22.3 API2.0 %S

ANS

31.0 API1.0 %S

Arab Light

33.3 API2.0 %S

Syn-DilBit

20.7 API2.5 %S

BowRiver

21.0 API2.9 %S

19% SCO16% C5+

50%SCO

56%SCO

64%SCO

Custom Blends Could Potentially Replace Declining US Domestic or Other Import Crudes

14 .

Comparison Of Heavy Crude Properties

In general, sulphur increases with density

DilBit sulphur distribution is similar to Maya

SynBit sulphur is lower than competitors except in resid

Cold Lake DilBit is a normal heavy crude with high sulphur and poor cat feed quality.

Athabasca SynBit has poor diesel, jet fuel and cat feed properties.

Athabasca blends have high TAN while Cold Lake blends are OK.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Naphtha Distillate VGO Resid

Cold Lake DilBit (3.6 %S)Maya (3.4 %S)Arab Medium (2.6 %S)Athabasca SynBit (2.6 %S)

SULPHUR DISTRIBUTION

%Sulphur

OTHER PROPERTIES

Density

Maya

Cold Lake DilBit

Athabasca SynBit

Arab Medium

Gravity o API 21.9 19.1 19.9 30.4Sulphur % 3.4 3.6 2.6 2.6TAN <1 <1 1.9 <0.5

Diesel Cetane 46 39 36 47Jet Smoke Pt. 22 20 15 23VGO K Factor 11.6 11.2 11.4 11.8

53

15 .

Refinery Constraints & Modifications

- Hydrocracking - Hydrocracking- Aromatics saturation

- % VGO- % Distillate- Diesel aromatics

Light SCO (Sweet bottomless)

- larger FCC, ancillaries- More HDS, and

S recovery (2) with coking- Metallurgy- Blending- Aromatics saturation

- % VGO- % sulfur

- TAN(3)

- Asphalt (4)

- Diesel aromatics

SynBit

- larger cokers, ancillaries- More HDS, S recovery (2)

- Metallurgy- Blending

- % resid- % sulfur- TAN(3)

- Asphalt (4)

DilBitModificationConstraint(1)Product

Notes: (1) Refinery constraints may also include product blending and environmental emissions(2) Refineries must reduce the sulfur content of gasoline and diesel(3) High TAN for Athabasca, not Cold Lake(4) Asphalt from mined bitumen may be poor quality. SynBit asphalt quality uncertain.

16 .

Markets and Major Pipeline Systems For Western Canadian Crude Oil

To Asia

Existing Pipelines

Proposed Pipelines or Routes

Traditional Market

Mid-Continent

U.S. Gulf Coast

California

Marine

54

17 .

Oil Sands Product Disposition

Synthetic Crude

Most SCO has been used in Canada

Most of future SCO growth will go to the US Northern Tier

Asia may emerge as an incremental market

Canadian Heavy Crude

Most heavy crude blends go to the US Midwest (PADD II)

This market will continue to grow

New markets in California, U.S. Gulf Coast and Asia probable

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1990 2000 2010

PADD V/OtherPADD IVPADD IIPADD ICanada


0200400600800

1,0001,2001,400

1990 2000 2010

PADD VPADD IVPADD IICanada


18 .

U.S. Midwest Refinery Crude Runs by Type

Light Sweet market should take substantial amount of SCO

Light Sour market may take some SynBit or SynSynBit blendsh perhaps light sour SCO

Light Sour market has refineries that could be converted to heavy blends

Heavy crude market is nearly full - needs more refinery conversion projects

0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

1.6

LightSweet

LightSour

Hvy Sour

Other SourcesCanadian

44% 34% 22%

Millions of Barrels per Day

55

19 .

U.S. Markets Should Absorb More New Canadian Bitumen Supplies

Future price environment should provide a strong incentive to add conversion capacity.

As confidence builds that new Canadian heavy supplies will become available, new conversion capacity is expected to occur in existing U.S. refineries.h In traditional U.S. Midwest Marketsh In California as Alaskan crude declines.h In Gulf Coast market if pipelines are extended.

Use of SCO as diluent rather than C5+ may change market acceptability

20 .

Upgrading to Synthetic Crude is Also Needed

Large mining projects come on stream in single steps; local upgrading provides better market entry for such large blocks of production.

Upgraded crude will provide another source of diluent for other heavy and bitumen supplies.

Adding upgrading capacity in Alberta frees up markets for other heavy crudes.

Existing refineries should be able to absorb more SCO before major investments are needed.

56

21 .

Not All Synthetic Crudes Are the Same

Light sweet bottomless SCO’s are produced at 5 Canadian sources. More expected.h Distillation ranges vary

Generally low naphtha and high gas oil contenth Diesel cetane ranges from 33 to 40

Future cetane could exceed 45

Heavier SCO with resid produced by Suncor and Albianh In 2003, Suncor produced 73,000 B/D of several sour and heavy

SCO grades vs. 112,000 B/D of light sweet SCOh Albian heavy has 2.1% sulphur and 23% vacuum bottomsh 3 Venezuela Orinoco projects produce heavy sour SCO

22 .

Upgrading Adds Value to Bitumen: How Much? Which Products?

Margin

Illustrative

Price of Product

BitumenUpgraded

Heavy CrudeUpgraded

Medium CrudeUpgraded Light SCO

Synthetic Diluent

Refined Products

Dollars per Barrel

Direct Cost

Degree of Upgrading (eg. API)Capital Cost

Returnon

Capital?

Marketability?Petro-

Chemicals

57

23 .

Upgrading to Refined Products and Petrochemicals Has Merit

Incremental economics of producing refined products and petrochemicals are more favorable than standalone upgrading.

Upgrading in Alberta is not as economically attractive as upgrading refineries.

High capital costs in Alberta are a major issue and risk.

Pipeline expansions need to be configured to accommodate refined products.

Both California and Midwest markets appear to be good outlets for product exports from Canada.

Not dependent on limits of existing refineries.

Petrochemicals may be relatively small in volume but have very high values.

24 .

Upgrading: Where? Why?

Large ScaleUpstream Integration

Diluent RecycleFeedstock FlexibilityLarge scale (vs. In-Situ)Infrastructure depends on location

Diluent RecycleExisting InfrastructureFinished Product

Feedstock FlexibilityExisting InfrastructureLess CapitalFinished ProductAvoid Kyoto costs outside

Canada

@ Resource Siteeg. Suncor, Syncrude

@ Central Siteeg. Husky BPU

@ Edmonton Refineryeg. Shell/AOSP

@ Refinery ex Albertaeg. Flint Hills expansions

BP Toledo

58

.

Oil Sands Upgrader Processes

Operators Primary Conversion Secondary Processing

Hydrogen

ExistingSuncor Delayed Coking Hydrotreating SMRSyncrude Fluid Coking/LC-Fining Hydrotreating SMRHusky, Lloydminster H-Oil/Delayed Coking Hydrotreating SMRAOSP (Shell) LC-Fining Hydrotreating (Integrated) SMR

ProjectsOPTI/Nexen Thermal Cracking/De-asphalting HYDROCRACKING Pitch gasificationCNRL, Horizon Delayed Coking Hydrotreating SMR

PlanningBA Energy De-asphalting/Pyrolysis none noneNorthwest Upgrading Resid Hydrocracking HYDROCRACKING Pitch gasificationSynenco De-asphalting/Delayed Coking HYDROCRACKING Pitch gasificationPetro-Canada/UTS Delayed Coking Hydrotreating SMR

25

26 .

Oil Sands Market Expansion Options

Downstream (Refining)

Refinery changes to allow higher consumption at refineries which already use oil sands crudes.

Pricing to attract new refinery customers in existing market.

Deliver to new, more distant markets.

Upstream (Upgrading)

Upgrader conversion and secondary processing (desulphurization, etc) to increase marketability of SCO and bitumen.

Upgrading reduces diluent needs ex. Alberta.

SCO quality can range from partially upgraded heavy crude to bottomless light sweet crude, or combinations.

59

27 .

Deliveries to More Distant Refining Markets

Eg. - Southern Midwest - California- Asia- U.S. Gulf Coast

Higher transportation costs reduce netback prices vs. Chicago.

Would need new or expanded pipeline and marine terminal capacity to West Coast for California or Asia.

28 .

Access to Refining Capacity for Western Canadian Crude

0

5

10

15

20 (Million Barrels per Day)

Existing Markets

California

Japan, China,

S.Korea

Addition of California would increase refinery access by one third.

Addition of Asia-Pacific market would double existing refinery access and exceed North America access by 50%

Refinery markets are already supplied with crude, so Canadian crude must compete

60

29 .

California Crude Market

Most California refineries have coking

Many refineries use heavy California crudeh CA production is falling, so

heavy imports are rising

Many refineries use Alaska North Slope (ANS) crude.h ANS production is declining,

so light sour imports are rising.

Canadian crudes which contain resid for coker feed could compete with other imports.2 million B/D

Refinery Crude Capacity

30 .

Asia-Pacific Crude Markets

Asia refineries have less cracking and coking capacity than North America

Most of crude supply is from Middle East.

With growth in China, Asia refineries are interested in diversifying crude supplies

Heavy blends would produce more high sulfur fuel oil unless upgrading is added

SCO would compete with African light crude, and VGO might be used for low sulfur fuel oil unless more cracking is added.

JapanChina 4.7S. Korea 2.6Total 12.0 Million B/D

4.7

TOTAL CRUDECAPACITY

61

31 .

West Coast Could Be A Close Crude Supply To Asia-Pacific

Long haul from Africa & Mid East raises crude prices in Asia-Pacific

Canadian crudes must compete, and shorter voyage helps netback

Marketing Canadian crudes in Asia-Pacific could affect netback pricing unless volumes & terms are fixedh Exports to Asia will compete with exports to U.S.h Outlet to Asia could stabilize Canadian prices

Vancouver

Lagos

Ras Tanura

Yokohama

10,906 mi

8,284 mi

4,264 mi

32 .

Price

Refinery investment will support a minimum price level

% of Refinery Crude Slate

$/B Refinery constraints (process, product blending, environmental emissions, etc.)

Lower value product slate

Substitution against other crudes with lower cost, or for which refinery is optimized

Expanding U.S. Market for Heavy and Synthetic Crude May Require Price Discounting

As % feed to a refinery increases, value against other crudes may fall due to:

62

33 .

Long Term Pricing Strategy for Bitumen BlendsRisk Management Strategy

Long term supply arrangements required so that refiners can modify and expand their plants, and producers can develop resources.

Large upgrading investments required; some coming from producers.

Develop price mechanism that reduces exposure to both parties.Venezuela and Mexico have been active at Gulf Coast with “upgrading” projects for their heavy crude.

Protection to Producer

Protection to Refiner

Pric

eB

and

Time

Ligh

t/Hea

vy P

rice

Diff

eren

tials

($/B

)

Oil Sands Price Drivers Are Volatile

Netback is price driver for producer

Light/Heavy differential is price driver for upgrader and refiner

Both are volatile

Long term arrangements between producers and refiners and/or upgraders may facilitate more investments to process more Canadian heavy crude or SCO.

(US Dollars per Barrel)

0.005.00

10.0015.0020.0025.00

30.0035.0040.00

45.0050.00

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Cold Lake Netback Price

MSW-CLB, Chicago

34 .

Conclusions – There are Market Solutions

Bitumen and SCO production from Canada’s oilsands are expected to grow rapidly and increase market share.hMore pipeline capacity and diluent will be needed.

To date, Canadian oil sands producers have been able to sell most of their product in the U.S. Northern Tier, Western Canada and Ontario.

hMarket expansion will be needed.

Pipelines to new markets would expand sales potential. hHigher tariffs for longer distances could reduce netback

prices but new outlets could stabilize the market.

Asia, particularly China, may develop into a new long term market outlet for oil sands products.h Also, California and USGC

63

35 .

Conclusions (Continued)Upgrading beyond SCO to refined products represents a new market outlet that remains to be tapped.

Light/heavy differentials should remain wide until bitumen blendmarkets can be expanded.h Wide differentials provide an incentive to build more upgrading.

Lighter blends of bitumen and SCO might expand bitumen markets to compete with medium sour crudes.

Light sweet SCO may have to move further, thus reducing netbacks.

The market needs to balance the incentives for producers to increase production and refiners/upgraders to expand conversion capacity. h With the large capital required, producers are seeking market

solutions.

Purvin & Gertz is an independent, employee owned, international energy consulting firm providing sound and objective strategic, commercial, and technical advice to the energy sector.

INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSULTANTSwww.purvingertz.com

About This PresentationThis analysis has been prepared for the sole benefit of the client. Neither the analysis nor any part of the analysis shall be provided to third parties without the written consent of Purvin & Gertz. Any third party in possession of the analysis may not rely upon its conclusions without the written consent of Purvin & Gertz. Possession of the analysis does not carry with it the right of publication.Purvin & Gertz conducted this analysis utilizing reasonable care and skill in applying methods of analysis consistent with normal industry practice. All results are based on information available at the time of review. Changes in factors upon which the review is based could affect the results. Forecasts are inherently uncertain because of events or combinations of events that cannot reasonably be foreseen including the actions of government, individuals, third parties and competitors. NO IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE SHALL APPLY.Some of the information on which this analysis is based has been provided by others. Purvin & Gertz has utilized such information without verification unless specifically noted otherwise. Purvin & Gertz accepts no liability for errors or inaccuracies in information provided by others.

.

64

Upgrading and Refining of Bitumen Derived Crude Oil

T. L. Halford

Petro-Canada

June 6, 2005

2

Oil Sands in the North American Crude Market

• Conventional US & Canadian crudes declining

• World crude slate getting heavier/more sour

• Large reserves of Athabasca bitumen recognised

• Improved logistics for Alberta crude penetration into USA

• Large volumes of bitumen and/or synthetic crude in the future with announced Fort McMurray projects

Bitumen and bitumen derived feedstocks are different to conventional NA crudes

65

3

What is Oil Refining?

• Crude oils are mixtures of complex hydrocarbons

• Crude oils from different fields differ in terms of detailed hydrocarbon speciation (paraffins, olefins, naphthenes, aromatics), contaminants and boiling range

• The refining that a crude oil needs is determined by the productslate the refinery makes (volumes and qualities, G/D ratio) and the properties of the crude oil

• The value of a crude to a refinery is determined by the price ofthe crude, the refining needed, the processing units available

• Refining crude oil utilises physical separation steps and chemical conversion steps

Recent trends are increased coking capacity, more hydrogen used

4

Refineries produce various products

• Transportation fuels … primary products and focus of this conference

4gasoline, diesel, jet fuelPlus other secondary products

• Heating fuels4 propane, butane, furnace oil, bunker, petroleum coke

• Asphalt4 paving, roofing

• Lubricating oil & waxes

• Petrochemical feedstocks4 ethylene cracker feed, BTX, propylene

• Miscellaneous

4 Carbon black feedstock, solvents

66

5

Simplified View of Fuels Refinery

Crude Fractionator

DelayedCoker

C5/C6 Isom

Alky

FCCU

Naphtha HTU Reformer

FCCU GasHTU

KeroseneDiesel HTU

G

Coke

Lt Naphtha

Heavy Naphtha

i-C4

J

Gas Oil

Middle DistLCO

Vac Residue

Olefins

CrudeOil

H2 S

D

6

Comments on Refineries

• High Replacement Value

• Operating Flexibility Limited

4Can’t turn on a dime

• Business dictates running at high utilizations (>90%) and at limit of operating envelope

• Changes to product specs can cause large capital expenditures and operating expenses

4High pressure hydrotreating

4Hydrogen consumption

• 2-4 years cycle on construction of new units

67

7

Gasoline Specifications

• Octane

4Processes to enhance octane are “Reforming”, Alkylation, Isomerisation and to a lesser extent Cat Cracking of Gas Oil (increasing octane lowers cetane of LCO)

4MMT, MTBE, Ethanol also increase octane

• RVP – determined mainly by butane content (butane high octane)

• Distillation/volatility

• Sulphur

4 recent change, handled by hydrotreating of Cat Cracker naphtha (reduces octane) or Cat Cracker feed (octane neutral, more expensive technology)

8

Diesel Specifications

• Cetane

4 Impacted by boiling range (high end point is good), paraffinsin diesel (high is good), hydrotreating improves cetaneslightly due to saturation reactions

• Cloud point

4 Impacted by boiling range (high end point is bad), paraffinsin diesel (high is bad, iso-paraffins better than normal paraffins),

4Northern issue rather than Southern issue

4Low cloud specs problematic re cetane

• Sulphur

4Change in 2006, large amount of new hydrotreating capacity under construction

• Lubricity

• Viscosity

68

9

Jet A Specifications

• Smoke point

4Paraffins improve smoke point

• Freeze Point

4Controlled by distillation range

10

Crude Characterisation

• Crudes differ due to

4Speciation … type of hydrocarbons

4Boiling range

4 Impurities … sulphur, nitrogen, metals (Fe, Ni, V)

• Common crudes to a North American audience are WTI (US), Brent (North Sea), Isthmus/Maya (Mexico), ANS (US)

• For pricing, benchmark crudes are WTI (39.6 API, 0.24%S) and Brent (38.3 API, 0.37%S).

• For comparison, Athabasca bitumen is about 8.5 API and 4.3%S.

69

11

Federated Pipeline Crude and Athabasca Bitumen compared

Federated Bitumen

Gravity A PI 38.6 8.5

Sulphur w t % 0.34 4.3

Viscosity cstokes 3.04 @ 40C 29116 @ 37.8C

Vacuum Residue Properties995F+ 950F+

Vol% 8.7 57.5

Sulphur w t % 1.3 5.10

Violates pipeline spec

Electrical desaltingchallenging

Small cokerResid crack in FCCU

Large cokerSevere hydroprocessing

Direct substitutionproblematic

• Crude and vacuum residue properties are very different

12

Indicates more naphthenic/aromaticless paraffinic

Federated Bitumen

Diesel properties 581-671F 510-650F

A niline Point F 183 127

C etane Index 60.5 N/A expect 38-40

C loud Point C N/A expect -5 <-60

Sulphur W t % 0.3 1.8

Gas oil Properties671-995F 650-750F

A niline Point F 194 121

Same story

• So are the Diesel and Gas Oil Properties

Federated Pipeline Crude and Athabasca Bitumen compared

70

13

Versus a traditional paraffinic sweet crude, raw bitumen

• cannot be transported by pipeline

4 Dilbit, synbit, heated pipelines are required

• contains no naphtha

4 resolved by diluent

• makes lower cetane diesels

• makes lower smoke point Jet fuel

• needs residue upgrading

• makes more low cetane LCO ( cetane 20, another cetane hit) and more decant oil from the low aniline point gas oil in the FCCU

• requires more severe hydrotreating to meet sulphur specs

To summarise,

14

Syncrude, Suncor Business Model to Handle Bitumen

Syncrude and Suncor upgrade bitumen in-situ and make a synthetic crude

4 Remove residue via coking – primary upgrading

4 “Minimally” hydrotreat bitumen products and coker products (sulphur spec only) – secondary upgrading

4 Sell as bottoms-free, low sulphur, naphthenic/aromatic product (with excellent reformer feed quality)

Still have concerns with

4 Jet smoke point - traditionally limited synthetic crude to 10-15% crude slate

4 Diesel cetane .. May need cetane additive

4 FCCU yield structure … LCO and decant both increase- Petro-Canada mild hydrocracks before FCCU, Shell Scotford hydrocracks only

- Some options to optimise FCCU catalyst to minimse impact

4 Current “UE-1 Project” at Syncrude tries to address some of these concerns by making SSB1

- Market will determine if incremental investment gives return

71

15

Announced Projects use various Business Models

• Shell upgrades dilbit ex-situ and recycles diluent4 Internal use and sell synthetic, Upgrader expansion will make various grades of

crude

• Petro-Canada will upgrade synbit ex-situ for internal use, currently sells synbit

• Suncor now makes sour synthetic

• CNRL will upgrade in-situ to synthetic crude

• Opti-Nexen will upgrade in situ to a premium synthetic crude

• BA-Energy will upgrade dilbit ex-situ to a light sour crude

• UTS/Petro-Canada at Fort Hills …. TBD

• Conoco-Phillips plans to sell dilbit

• Etc.

Each producer has a different view of bitumen economics … as examples1. Sell dil/syn-bit, capture production value at minimum capex

2. Sell “minimally” treated synthetic crude oil, capture upgrading value

3. Sell premium quality synthetic, get premium price

16

Impact of Bitumen & Synthetics

• Athabasca production will be bitumen or synthetic crude

• Bitumen processing requires vacuum residue upgrading

• If SSB is proxy for future product, impact of Athabasca products on US refiners will tend to impose strains on cetane (at current specs) and Jet smoke point as SSB replaces paraffinic crudes

• Yield impact also possible, i.e. less gasoline, more distillate, depending on refinery configuration

Federated SSB

Diesel properties 581-671F 350-650

Aniline Point F 183 117

C etane Index 60.5 41

Pour Point C N/A expect -5 N/A

Sulphur W t % 0.3 0.03

Gas oil Properties671-815F 650+F

Aniline Point F 194 147

Y ields vol% Federated SSB

Naphtha 34 18

Distillate 28 44

Gas O il 29 35

Residue 9

G /D 1.7 0.9

72

17

What can be done to increase paraffinic nature of synthetic crudes or bitumen?

Conventional answer is to Add hydrogen via commercially available technologies

Diesel/Jet

• Selective diesel hydrotreating for aromatic saturation, ring opening

4 Capex/Opex high

4 Precious metal catalysts

4 High hydrogen uptake

4 Loss of diesel to naphtha

4 Cetane increase depends on speciation

Gas oils

• Hi-conversion hydrocrack vs. cat cracking

4 Capex/Opex high, reformer feed make increases at expense of cat gasoline, alkylate

• Severe hydrotreat of FCCU feed

4 Capex/Opex high

73



1

Chemistry and Analysis of Bitumen-Derived Crudes and Fuels

Murray R. Gray

Department of Chemical and Materials EngineeringUniversity of Alberta

NCUT Oilsands Chemistry and Engine Emissions Roadmap WorkshopJune 6 and 7, 2005

Summary

• Origin of the oilsands• Chemical characteristics of bitumen• Transformation during primary and

secondary upgrading• Characteristics of middle distillates from

oilsands bitumen• Methods for chemical analysis

75

2

The Origin of the Oilsands

Edmontosaurusannectens

From http://www.marshalls-art.com/pages/ppaleo/paleo16.htm

Cretaceous AlbertaRivers deposit sedimentsin deltas along the coast

Uplifiting of the RockyMountains drives

migration of oil fromsouthern sediments

76

3

1- 5

Oil sand deposits in Alberta(Courtesy of Syncrude Canada Ltd.)

Province of Alberta

Calgary

Lloydminster

Edmonton

Syncrude

Suncor

Fort McMurray

Surface mineable

Athabasca Oil Sand Deposit

Athabasca

Cold LakePeace River

Province of Alberta

Calgary

Lloydminster

Edmonton

Syncrude

Suncor

Fort McMurray

Surface mineable

Athabasca Oil Sand Deposit

Athabasca

Cold LakePeace River

Albian

• Oil biodegrades slowly in shallow reservoirs (< 600 m)

• Temperatures < 80 oCallow biodegradation

• Degradation occurs during migration

• Bitumen highly biodegraded80 µm

Rhodococcus S+14He

Dorobantu et al., 2004

Bacteria and Oil

77

4

Engine Versus Bacterial Diets

Fair food for some bugs

Bad, cetane# = 0Unsubstitutedaromatics e.g. naphthalene

Fair - food for a range of bugs

Poor, cetane # ca. 22

Alkyl aromatics, e.g. C8-tetralin

Poor - toxicPoor, cetane# ca. 25

Naphthenes (e.g. decalin)

Excellent food for rapid growth

Excellent, cetane# = 100

n-alkanes, e.g. n-hexadecane

BacteriaDiesel Engines

Naphthenes = cyclo-paraffins

Biodegradation of Saturates

Sterile control (abiotic weathering)

Rhodococcus S+14He

Alberta Sweet Mix Blend incubated at 28 oC for 14 d with shaking

Data from J Foght, U of AInternalstandard

n-alkanes

78

5

Biodegradation of Aromatics

Number of rings

Changes due to Bacteria

Saturate Aromatic Polar Asphaltene

Non-degraded Oil 55% 23% 21% 2%

Moderately Biodegraded Oil 25% 21% 39% 14%

Heavy Biodegradation (Bitumen) 20% 21% 41% 21%

Data for an Oklahoma crude series with a common source rock, from Miller, D. E., A. G. Holba, and W. B. Huges, 1987, Effects of biodegradation on crude oils, in R. F. Meyer, ed., Exploration for Heavy Crude Oil and Natural Bitumen. AAPG Studies in Geology #25: Tulsa, Oklahoma, AAPG, p. 233-241.

79

6

Concentration of Undesirables

API Gravity

Sulfur (wt%)

Vanadium (ppm)

Nickel (ppm)

Non-degraded Oil 32 0.6 30.6 16.4

Moderately Biodegraded Oil 12 1.6 224 75.1

Heavy Biodegradation (Bitumen) 4 1.5 137.5 68.5

Data for an Oklahoma crude series with a common source rock, from Miller, D. E., A. G. Holba, and W. B. Huges, 1987, Effects of biodegradation on crude oils, in R. F. Meyer, ed., Exploration for Heavy Crude Oil and Natural Bitumen. AAPG Studies in Geology #25: Tulsa, Oklahoma, AAPG, p. 233-241.

Light Crude Oil versus Bitumen

Temperature, oC

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Cum

ulat

ive

dist

illat

e, w

t%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80Atmospheric distillate VGO

Vacu

um R

esid

ue

Light SweetCrude

AthabascaBitumen

80

7

13C NMR Spectra of Virgin Distillates(BP 204 to 524°C)

ppm20406080100120140160180

Conventional Crude

Athabasca Bitumen

Aromatic Region Aliphatic RegionHeather Dettman, NCUT

Solvent

13C NMR Spectrum of UTF AthabascaBitumen Asphaltenes (BP + 524oC)

• Peak positions in the spectrum give carbon type information

• Integration of peaks gives the relative quantities

Aromatic Region Aliphatic Region

ppm20406080100120140160180

Slides courtesy Heather Dettman, NCUT

81

8

Representation of an Asphaltene Molecule

SS

S

S

S

S

O

NH

O

NH

S

O

NN

N

N

VO

S

C419H498N6O4S8VMol. Wt.: 5989.94

A different view of upgrading of bitumen residues

Hokusai

1817

82

9

Thermal Cracking

Predicted yield – Wide range of boiling points

Primary Upgrading Processes

83

10

Conventional HGO vs. Oilsands

7.44.63.1Polars7.82.40.5Aromatic sulphur1.50.80.3Penta-aromatics2.81.80.6Tetra-aromatics5.33.81.5Tri-aromatics13.610.43.8Di-aromatics23.616.47.4Mono-aromatics90.881.858.9Naphthenes + aromatics55.436.114.5Aromatics35.445.744.4Naphthenes1.813.637.9Paraffins

OilsandsHGOHGO“Paraffinic”

HGOComposition

Data courtesy Z Ring, NCUT

Benefits of Hydrotreating and Aromatic Saturation

S

+2H2

+H2S

Dibenzothiophene, b.p. 332 oC Biphenyl, b.p. 256 oC

Cyclohexyl benzene, b.p. 235 oC Bicyclohexane, b.p .217 oC

+3H2

+3H2

84

11

Hydrotreating Oilsands HGO

01.12.7Polars0.832.323.49Aromatic sulphur0.10.621.17Penta-aromatics0.561.72.78Tetra-aromatics0.863.14.95Tri-aromatics4.3410.8614.29Di-aromatics8.4825.8322.85Mono-aromatics91.6592.7691.64Naphthenes + aromatics15.4945.2551.08Aromatics76.1647.5140.56Naphthenes8.366.155.67Paraffins

HeavilyHydrotreated

Hydrotreated

OilsandsHGOComposition

Data courtesy Z Ring, NCUT

13C NMR Spectra of Diesel Blends(Aliphatic Regions)

ppm102030405060

Conventional

Synthetic

Heather Dettman, NCUT

85

12

Cracking Oilsands Gas Oils• FCC is not effective for naphthenic and aromatic

structures in oilsands HGO• Hydrocracking can produce high quality fuels

from oilsand blends for current engine technology: diesel (cetane # 40-55) and jet fuels

• Low sulfur due to extensive hydrogenation• Costs for hydrogen addition• Very little control over product structure

Hydrocracking Gas OilVacuum gas oil component

After Quann and Jaffe, 1992

Hydrogenation + Cracking+ Isomerization

+

+ dozens of other product types

Further cracking todiesel-range

products

86

13

Isomerization of 4,6-DMDBT

4,6-DMDBT

T = 430°C, t = 30 s

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120Retention Time (min)

Sign

al

DBT-C1, DBT-C2, DBT-C3

isomeric distribution is mostly determined by processing route

Z Ring, NCUT

Process Limitations on Fuel Composition

• State of the are is blending of virgin, hydrotreatedand cracked distillates

• Increased oilsands feed gives a narrower range of molecular types from available processes– Good control of aromatics– Limited control over iso-paraffins vs naphthenes

• Long straight chains only available from Fisher-Tropsch synthesis

• Ideal engine for oilsands feeds: tolerant of aromatics and naphthenes

87

14

Detailed Characterization of Middle Distillates

• State-of-the-art modeling (process or engine) requires molecular information

• NCUT analytical methods provide detailed distributions by boiling point and carbon number: - sulphur and nitrogen containing compounds by

GC with element-selective detectors- hydrocarbon type and molecular mass by GC-

FIMS

Z Ring, NCUT

Representative Diesel Structures

Sato et al., Fuel, 83, 1915, 2004.

(Side chains contain more branches, and many more isomers are likely)

88

15

Molecular representations give physical properties

Mw, amu ρ@15.6°C, g/ml RI @25°C Deviation in SimDis, °C ample Property

Number of molecules Meas. Calc. Meas. Calc. Meas. Calc. IBP 5-95% FBP

S1 801 150 148.4 0.7985 0.7986 1.4436 1.4449 9.2 2.0 7.8 S2 1588 188 187.8 0.8291 0.8361 1.4593 1.4653 4.8 3.0 14.2 S3 1531 176 171.2 0.8357 0.8434 1.4584 1.4619 18.2 2.4 2.2 S4 1716 176 175.3 0.8476 0.8477 1.4652 1.4672 11.8 3.8 7.2 S5 1416 175 179.9 0.8537 0.8533 1.4755 1.4767 2.7 2.6 2.6

Simulation of Sample 1

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100wt%

BP

°C

SimulationSimDisFIMS-gen SimDis

Determined by Quantitative Structure-Property Relationship; Z Ring

Analytical Limitations and Needs• Determination of hydrocarbon types by GC-

FIMS has limitations–No information on isomers, which is required for combustion–poor precision for minor types may affect combustion properties and physical properties (e.g. lubricity, cloud point)

• Sulphur and nitrogen containing compounds are important for fuels processing (e.g. hydrotreating), so need better databases

Z Ring, NCUT

89

16

Conclusions

• Biodegradation of bitumen removed the most desirable components for diesel fuel

• Thermal and catalytic cracking gives ring and highly branched products

• Quality fuels can be manufactured from oilsands, but their molecular makeup is determined by their geological and process history

• Suitable analytical methods are becoming available to understand these mixtures

90

1

Impact of Oil Sands Derived Fuels on Emissions from Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines

W. Stuart Neill

Oil Sands Chemistry and Engine Emissions Roadmap WorkshopJune 6, 2005

Outline

• Introduction• Objective• Experimental Set-up• Results

Crude oil sourceFuel ignition quality

• Summary• Future Research• Acknowledgements

91

2

Introduction

• Oil sands derived crude oils tend to have a higher cycloparaffincontent than conventional crude oils due to the requirement to crack and hydrogenate the higher boiling point fractions

• Analytical methods for characterizing cycloparaffins are not as well established as those for aromatics

• This makes it difficult to design experiments that relate oil sands fuel chemistry to engine exhaust emissions

• Oil sands and conventional crude oils are blended at most refineries (no “typical” oil sands diesel fuel)

• Fuel properties will change with switch to ultra-low sulphurdiesel fuels

Objective

• Investigate the roles of fuel origin and ignition quality on exhaust emissions from heavy-duty diesel engines using test fuels derived from oil sands and conventional sources

Caterpillar 3401E engine equipped with cooled EGR, tuned to meet the 2004 emissions standardRicardo Proteus engine, tuned to meet the 1994 emissions standard

92

3

Experimental Set-up

2.44Volume (liters)16.25:1Comp. Ratio

74.6Power (kW @ 1800 rpm)4Valves

MEUIFuel InjectionCooledEGR

Caterpillar 3401E engine

NoEGRIn-line pumpFuel Injection

2Valves44.7Power (kW @ 1900 rpm)17:1Comp. Ratio2.00Volume (liters)

Ricardo Proteus engine

Test Procedure

• Emissions measured at eight steady-state engine operating conditions and weighted:

Speed (%)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Load

(%)

0

20

40

60

80

100

1

2

3

4

8

7

6

5

3.34%

2.91%

6.34% 8.40%

35.01%

10.21%

10.45%

7.34%

( )

8

18

1i

i ii

b ii

E WFBSE

P WF

•

•=

=

× =

×

∑

∑

93

4

Test Fuel Design

• A 12 fuel matrix was blended from Canadian refinery streams6 derived from oil sands sources6 derived from conventional sources

• Total aromatics were varied from 10-30% by mass• Cetane number was maintained at 43±3

Nitrate-type CI was used to raise the CN of 3 oil sands fuels• Sulphur content limited to 500 ppm by mass• Other fuel properties maintained within the typical range of

commercial diesel fuel in Canada

Test Fuel Properties

49332319Total Paraffins (LC-GC/MS, % m/m)

45346947Total Cycloparaffins (LC-GC/MS, % m/m)

11

8

40

40

3

805

min

Conventional

30

270

46

46

-70

835

maxmaxmin

12

2

40

37

-25

827

31Total Aromatics (SFC, % m/m)

85Sulphur (D5453, ppm mass)

43Final Cetane Number (D613)

43Base Cetane Number (D613)

-44Cloud Point (D2500, ºC)

841Density (D4052, kg/m3)

Oil Sands

94

5

Sulphur Doping Experiments

• Sulphate emissions increase linearly with fuel sulphur content, but do not depend on the type of sulphur compound

• Estimate sulphate emissions by multiplying fuel sulphur content by regression line slope

Fuel Sulphur Content (ppm)

0 100 200 300 400 500

PM E

mis

sion

s (g

/hp-

hr)

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

DECSE base fuel + 4-compound sulphur dopantOil sands base fuel + di-tertiary butyl disulphide

Fuel Sulphur Content (ppm)

0 150 300 450 600 750

PM E

mis

sion

s (g

/hp-

hr)

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

Oil sands base fuel + di-tertiary butyl disulphide

Caterpillar 3401E with cooled EGR Ricardo Proteus

PM vs. Total Aromatics

• Sulphate-corrected PM emissions increase as fuel total aromatics increases• Fuels derived from oil sands and conventional sources had similar sulphate-

corrected PM emissions at a given total aromatic content in newer technology engine

Total Aromatics (SFC, % mass)5 10 15 20 25 30 35Su

lpha

te-C

orre

cted

PM

Em

issi

ons

(g/h

p-hr

)

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

Reference fuel

Conventional crude sourceOil sands crude source

Regression fit to test fuel data95% confidence interval

Total Aromatics (SFC, % mass)5 10 15 20 25 30 35Su

lpha

te-C

orre

cted

PM

Em

issi

ons

(g/h

p-hr

)

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

Conventional crude sourceOil sands crude sourceReference fuel


95

6

PM Emissions- Ricardo Proteus

• There was a statistically significant relationship between fuel density and PM emissions from the older technology engine

• Advances in fuel injection technology have reduced the effect of fuel density in new technology diesel engines

Fuel Density (kg/m3)

800 810 820 830 840 850Sulp

hate

-Cor

rect

ed P

M E

mis

sion

s (g

/hp-

hr)

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

Reference fuel


Regression fit to test fuel data95% Confidence interval

Ricardo Proteus

PM Emissions Regression– Caterpillar 3401E

• A statistically significant relationship exists between PM emissions and two fuel properties: total aromatics and sulphur content

• The model effectively predicts the PM emissions for test fuels derived from oil sands and conventional sources

• There was no statistically significant relationship between PM emissions and crude oil source

6.3E-033.29E-5Sulphur

2.7E-034.19E-4TotalAromatics 2.4E-030.82

6.1E-105.65E-2Constant

Root MSE

Adj. R2P-valueCoefficientEffect

Measured PM Emissions (g/hp-hr)0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09

Pred

icte

d PM

Em

issi

ons

(g/h

p-hr

)

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

Conventional crude sourceOil sands crude sourceReference fuelOil sands base fuelDECSE base fuel

Caterpillar 3401E with cooled EGR

96

7

NOx vs. Total Aromatics

• NOx emissions increase with increasing fuel total aromatic content• Higher density of oil sands derived fuels advanced fuel injection timing

in older technology engine, which led to higher NOx emissions

Total Aromatics (SFC, % mass)5 10 15 20 25 30 35

NO

x Em

issi

ons

(g/h

p-hr

)

2.0

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.0

Reference fuel


Regression fit to test fuel data95% confidence interval

Total Aromatics (SFC, % mass)

5 10 15 20 25 30 35

NO

x Em

issi

ons

(g/h

p-hr

)

4.0

4.2

4.4

4.6

4.8

5.0

Conventional crude sourceOil sands crude sourceReference fuel


NOx Emissions Regression– Caterpillar 3401E

• A statistically significant relationship exists between NOx emissions and two fuel properties: total aromatics and density

• The model effectively predicts the NOx emissions for test fuels derived from both oil sands and conventional sources

• There was no statistically significant relationship between NOxemissions and crude oil source

4.5E-45.00E-3Density

1.8E-47.48E-3Total Aromatics 2.4E-20.95

3.3E-2-1.89Constant

Root MSE

Adj. R2P-valueCoefficientEffect

Measured NOx Emissions (g/hp-hr)2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8

Pred

icte

d N

Ox

Emis

sion

s (g

/hp-

hr)

2.0

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

Conventional crude sourceOil sands crude sourceReference fuelOil sands base fuelDECSE base fuel

Caterpillar 3401E with cooled EGR

97

8

Multi-Cylinder Engines- Same Test Fuels

• A subset of the fuels were tested in multi-cylinder engines at Environment Canada and Southwest Research Institute

DDC series 50 (MY 1996)Caterpillar 3406E (MY 1995)Cummins N14-460F (MY 1995)Caterpillar 3176 with EGR

• The multi-cylinder engine test data confirmed that fuel origin does not significantly affect exhaust emissions

• See SAE paper 2000-01-2890 for further details

Fuel Ignition Quality

• Cetane number is an important property that relates to fuel quality

• Fuel specifications for cetane number are established to meet the requirements of satisfactory engine performance and reliable operation

• Fuel refiners can adjust the ignition quality of diesel fuels by:Product blending HydroprocessingAdding nitrate and peroxide cetane improversBlending high-cetane components

98

9

Cetane Improvers

• In general, nitrate- and peroxide-type cetane improver additives provided similar improvements in cetane number for fuels derived from oil sands and conventional sources

Nitrate Cetane Improver (% vol)0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

Cet

ane

Num

ber I

ncre

ase

0

5

10

15

20

25

Conventional crude source (CN=43.9)Oil sands crude source (CN=44.2)Oil sands crude source (CN=36.5)

Peroxide Cetane Improver (% vol)0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

Cet

ane

Num

ber I

ncre

ase

0

5

10

15

20

Conventional crude source (CN=43.9)Oil sands crude source (CN=44.2)

ASTM D613 ASTM D613

PM vs. Cetane Number

• Nitrate- and peroxide-type cetane improver additives increased PM emissions from both engines


Cetane Number (D613)40 45 50 55 60

PM E

mis

sion

s (g

/hp-

hr)

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

Oil sands crude sourceNitrate CI additivePeroxide CI additiveReference fuel

Cetane Number (D613)30 40 50 60 70

PM E

mis

sion

s (g

/hp-

hr)

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

Oil sands crude sourceOil sands + nitrate CIConventional crude sourceConventional +peroxide CIConventional + nitrate CI

99

10

NOx vs. Cetane Number

• Nitrate- and peroxide-type cetane improver additives decreased NOxemissions from the older technology engine


Cetane Number (D613)40 45 50 55 60

NO

x Em

issi

ons

(g/h

p-hr

)

2.0

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.0

Oil sands crude sourceNitrate CI additivePeroxide CI additiveReference fuel

Cetane Number (D613)30 40 50 60 70

NO

x Em

issi

ons

(g/h

p-hr

)

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

5.0

Oil sands crude sourceOil sands + nitrate CIConventional crude sourceConventional +peroxide CIConventional + nitrate CI

Effect of H/C Ratio- Blending Paraffinic Components to achieve 10# Boost in Cetane Number

• Both PM and NOx emissions from the Caterpillar 3401E engine were reduced by the addition of high-cetane paraffinic blending components

Hydrogen/Carbon Ratio

1.75 1.80 1.85 1.90 1.95 2.00Sulp

hate

-Cor

rect

ed P

M E

mis

sion

s (g

/hp-

hr)

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

Conventional crude sourceOil sands crude sourceOil sands + nitrate CIOil sands + 14%m SuperCetaneOil sands + 20%m F-T dieselReference fuel

Hydrogen/Carbon Ratio

1.75 1.80 1.85 1.90 1.95 2.00

NO

x Em

issi

ons

(g/h

p-hr

)

2.0

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.0Conventional crude sourceOil sands crude sourceOil sands + nitrate CIOil sands + 14%m SuperCetaneOil sands + 20%m F-T dieselReference fuel

Caterpillar 3401E with cooled EGR Caterpillar 3401E with cooled EGR

100

11

Summary

• PM and NOx emissions from two representative heavy-duty diesel engines were affected by key fuel properties, but not by the crude oil source

Caterpillar 3401E with cooled EGR• For PM emissions, the statistically significant fuel properties

were total aromatics and sulphur content• For NOx emissions, the statistically significant fuel properties

were total aromatics and density• Cetane improver additives did not reduce PM or NOx emissions• There was a trend towards decreasing PM and NOx emissions

as fuel H/C ratio increased

Summary (cont’d)

Ricardo Proteus• Increasing fuel density negatively impacted the fuel injection

process, which led to higher PM and NOx emissions• Cetane improver additives reduced NOx emissions

101

12

Future Research

• Develop and validate improved analytical methods for characterizing cycloparaffins

• Evaluate the effect of hydroprocessing severity on fuel chemistry and emissions

• Evaluate fuel chemistry effects on performance of advanced diesel emission control systems

• Develop a better understanding of fuel chemistry effects on low temperature combustion

Acknowledgements

• Government of Canada – PERD/AFTER Program• Suncor Energy Inc. • Syncrude Canada Ltd.• Canadian Petroleum Products Institute• Shell Canada Ltd.• Imperial Oil Ltd.• B.C. Clean Air Research Fund• U.S. DOE/National Renewable Energy Laboratory• National Centre for Upgrading Technology• National Research Council Canada

102

13103



Emerging Trends in Emerging Trends in Engine CombustionEngine Combustion

Charles J. MuellerCharles J. MuellerSandia National Laboratories

Research Supported by:Research Supported by:US DOE Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle TechnologiesUS DOE Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies

Program Managers: Kevin Stork, Stephen Goguen, Gurpreet SinghProgram Managers: Kevin Stork, Stephen Goguen, Gurpreet Singh

Oil Sands Chemistry and Engine Emissions WorkshopEdmonton, Alberta, Canada

June 6, 2005

2

●● Provide current status of reciprocating engine technologyProvide current status of reciprocating engine technology

●● Discuss factors that are driving changes in engine technologyDiscuss factors that are driving changes in engine technology

●● Explain “lowExplain “low--temperature combustion” (LTC) and its importancetemperature combustion” (LTC) and its importance

●● Discuss some research tools available to help answer questions Discuss some research tools available to help answer questions about engine combustion modesabout engine combustion modes

●● Summarize where engine technology appears to be headingSummarize where engine technology appears to be heading

Presentation Objectives Presentation Objectives

Primary Goal:

Establish a common foundation of engine-combustion knowledge for productive discussions during break-out sessions

105

3

Current Engine Technologies: SICurrent Engine Technologies: SI●● SparkSpark--ignition (SI) enginesignition (SI) engines

▬▬ Port fuel injected gasolinePort fuel injected gasoline▬▬ NonNon--optimal efficiencyoptimal efficiency

Low compression ratioLow compression ratioPumping lossesPumping losses

▬▬ Very low emissionsVery low emissionsThreeThree--way catalyst (TWC)way catalyst (TWC)removes NOremoves NOxx, UHC, CO, UHC, CO

▬▬ Good power density, especially Good power density, especially at high speedat high speed

▬▬ Dominates lightDominates light--duty (LD) marketduty (LD) marketin USin US

Low emissionsLow emissionsLower peak cylinder pressure Lower peak cylinder pressure →→ cheap to manufacturecheap to manufacture

4

Current Engine Technologies: CICurrent Engine Technologies: CI●● CompressionCompression--ignition (CI) enginesignition (CI) engines

▬▬ Turbocharged, direct injection Turbocharged, direct injection of diesel fuelof diesel fuel

▬▬ 3030--40% more efficient than SI40% more efficient than SIHigher Higher comprcompr. ratio. ratioLoad controlled by Load controlled by amount of fuel injectedamount of fuel injected

▬▬ EmissionsEmissionsHigh NOHigh NOxx and sootand soot

LD fails CA LEV II (2004) and LD fails CA LEV II (2004) and Fed. Tier II, Bin 5 (2007)Fed. Tier II, Bin 5 (2007)

TWC doesn’t work (OTWC doesn’t work (O22 in exhaust)in exhaust)▬▬ Better lowBetter low--end torque than SIend torque than SI▬▬ Dominates heavyDominates heavy--duty marketduty market

Highly efficient and reliableHighly efficient and reliable

106

5

Factors Driving EngineFactors Driving Engine--Technology ChangesTechnology Changes

Global Global Climate Climate ChangeChange

Source: N. Lewis, CaltechSource: US DOE Transportation Energy Data Book, 24th Edition

Energy Energy SecuritySecurity

US petroleum imports

Emissions Emissions LegislationLegislation

6

●● Higher efficiencyHigher efficiency▬▬ Enhances energy securityEnhances energy security▬▬ Cuts greenhouseCuts greenhouse--gas emissionsgas emissions▬▬ Favors CI engineFavors CI engine

●● Lower emissionsLower emissions▬▬ Seen as enabler for Seen as enabler for

highhigh--efficiency efficiency enginesengines

●● Enhanced Enhanced power density power density and accelerationand acceleration▬▬ Drivers appreciate Drivers appreciate

lowlow--end torqueend torque▬▬ Size does matter Size does matter

Bigger Bigger isn’tisn’t better when packaging an enginebetter when packaging an engine

Factors Driving EngineFactors Driving Engine--Technology ChangesTechnology Changes

HIGH POWERHIGH POWERDENSITYDENSITY

LOWLOWEMISSIONSEMISSIONS

HIGHHIGHEFFICIENCYEFFICIENCY FUEL

AFTERTREATMENTSYSTEM

ENGINE TECHNOLOGY

107

LowLow--Temperature Combustion (LTC)Temperature Combustion (LTC)

8

HCCI Is One Example of LTCHCCI Is One Example of LTC

●● LTC can take many formsLTC can take many forms▬▬ Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI) Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI) →→ premixedpremixed▬▬ Dilute Clean Diesel Combustion (DCDC) Dilute Clean Diesel Combustion (DCDC) →→ nonnon--premixedpremixed

108

9

●● HCCI HCCI →→ premixed, premixed, φφ ≤≤ 11, volumetric reaction, volumetric reaction▬▬ Kinetics, temperature/mixture fields control combustion timingKinetics, temperature/mixture fields control combustion timing▬▬ Mixture preparation: early injection or late injection with highMixture preparation: early injection or late injection with high swirlswirl▬▬ Potential limitationsPotential limitations

Difficult to control combustion timingDifficult to control combustion timingLiquid fuel impingement on inLiquid fuel impingement on in--cylinder surfacescylinder surfacesIncomplete combustion at light loads (misfire, high UHC and CO) Incomplete combustion at light loads (misfire, high UHC and CO) Knock, high NOKnock, high NOxx at high loadsat high loads

●● DCDC DCDC →→ nonnon--premixed, premixed, φφ ≥≥ 11, mixing, mixing--controlled reactioncontrolled reaction▬▬ Traditional diesel + high EGR Traditional diesel + high EGR ▬▬ Injection timing controls combustion timingInjection timing controls combustion timing▬▬ Potential limitationsPotential limitations

Requires high EGR levelsRequires high EGR levelsMay hit “smoke limit” with EGR before attaining May hit “smoke limit” with EGR before attaining req’dreq’d NONOxx emissions emissions →→ fuel can help prevent thisfuel can help prevent this

HCCI and DCDC: Two LTC StrategiesHCCI and DCDC: Two LTC Strategies

10

Graphical Summary of CI, SI, and LTC ModesGraphical Summary of CI, SI, and LTC Modes

Adiabatic flame temperaturein air

CO to CO2conversiondiminishes

1000 1400 1800 2200 2600 30000

1

2

3

4

5

6

Temperature [K]

Equi

vale

nce

ratio

Soot li

mit

Soot

NOX

Akihama et. al, SAE 2001-01-0655Diesel (CI) combustion

– controlled heat release (mixing)– controlled combustion timing– wide load range– high efficiency (relative to Sl)– NOx and PM emissions

Spark ignition (SI) combustion– controlled heat release

(flame propagation) – controlled combustion timing– wide load range– three-way catalyst– low efficiency

(relative to diesel)

LTC– offers diesel-like efficiency (high CR & no throttling)– low NOx and particulate emissions– load range?– combustion timing?– heat release rate?– transient control?– fuel?

HCCICombustion

HCCIAdiabatic flame temperature 10% O2

DCDC

109

11

Engine Combustion Research ToolsEngine Combustion Research Tools●● Experimental approachesExperimental approaches

▬▬ Optical engine Optical engine Realistic operating conditionsRealistic operating conditionsRealistic engine geometry withRealistic engine geometry withoptical access through:optical access through:

Piston, cylinder liner, exhaust portPiston, cylinder liner, exhaust port▬▬ Const. volume combustion vesselConst. volume combustion vessel

Excellent optical accessExcellent optical accessHigher charge pressures and temperaturesHigher charge pressures and temperaturesStudy mixing and combustion Study mixing and combustion processes independent of:processes independent of:

PistonPiston--bowl geometrybowl geometryPiston motionPiston motion

▬▬ 1414C isotope tracingC isotope tracingSootSoot--formation characteristics of formation characteristics of specific carbon specific carbon atom(satom(s) in fuel molecule) in fuel molecule

12

1 Hour

1 Month

1 Decade

1 Day

Kinetics only

CFD only

1 Year

●● Computational approachesComputational approaches▬▬ KIVA is industry standard, solves KIVA is industry standard, solves

Reynolds Averaged Reynolds Averaged NavierNavier--Stokes Stokes (RANS) equations, often with (RANS) equations, often with simplified chemistrysimplified chemistry

Widely used: robust design tool, Widely used: robust design tool, modest computational costmodest computational costLargeLarge--eddy simulation (LES) eddy simulation (LES) codes becoming availablecodes becoming available

▬▬ Best model = detailed Best model = detailed chemistry + fully resolved chemistry + fully resolved fluid dynamicsfluid dynamics

Not possible for most Not possible for most practical systems given practical systems given current computer powercurrent computer power

Engine Combustion Research Tools (cont’d)Engine Combustion Research Tools (cont’d)

Cycle simulation, 1 CPU, ~2 GHz, axisymmetric grid, 200 species Source: D. Flowers, LLNL

KIVA results: CO and velocity (from R. Reitz, Univ. of Wisconsin)

110

13

●● Engine technologiesEngine technologies▬▬ LTC strategiesLTC strategies

New fuelNew fuel--injection capabilities (higher pressures, multiple/rateinjection capabilities (higher pressures, multiple/rate--shaped shaped injections, smaller orifices for enhanced mixing)injections, smaller orifices for enhanced mixing)Sensors and closedSensors and closed--loop controlsloop controlsVariable valve actuation (internal EGR, variable compression ratVariable valve actuation (internal EGR, variable compression ratio)io)VariableVariable--geometry and electrically assisted turbochargersgeometry and electrically assisted turbochargers

●● New aftertreatment technologiesNew aftertreatment technologies▬▬ Lean NOLean NOxx catalysts, NOcatalysts, NOxx adsorbersadsorbers, urea SCR (?), urea SCR (?)▬▬ Catalyzed diesel particulate filters, continuously regenerating Catalyzed diesel particulate filters, continuously regenerating trapstraps

●● “Cleaner“Cleaner--burning” fuelsburning” fuels▬▬ Ignition characteristics, molecular structure, … (next presentatIgnition characteristics, molecular structure, … (next presentation)ion)

What Does the Future Hold?What Does the Future Hold?

“It’s hard to make predictions, especially about the future.”– Yogi Berra

14

●● Changes in engine technology are being driven by desire for Changes in engine technology are being driven by desire for higher efficiency higher efficiency ▬▬ Improved emissions viewed as an enabler for highImproved emissions viewed as an enabler for high--efficiency CI efficiency CI

combustion modes (HCCI, DCDC)combustion modes (HCCI, DCDC)

●● LowLow--temperature combustion shows great potential for hightemperature combustion shows great potential for high--efficiency clean engines, but significant technical challenges efficiency clean engines, but significant technical challenges remainremain▬▬ Power density (lean and/or dilute mixtures)Power density (lean and/or dilute mixtures)▬▬ HCCI combustion control over broad speed/load map (fuel HCCI combustion control over broad speed/load map (fuel

properties, mixture preparation, sensors, variable valve timing,properties, mixture preparation, sensors, variable valve timing, …)…)

●● Experimental and computational R&D are playing critical roles; Experimental and computational R&D are playing critical roles; final solution will likely involve synergies among:final solution will likely involve synergies among:▬▬ Engine technologiesEngine technologies▬▬ Fuel propertiesFuel properties▬▬ Aftertreatment strategiesAftertreatment strategies

SummarySummary

111



1

Future FuelsFuture FuelsFuture Fuels

Tom RyanJune 2005

Three Combustion ModesThree Combustion ModesThree Combustion Modes

Flame Propagation (SI Gasoline)Stoichiometric Combustion Thin Reaction ZoneHigh Temperature and High NOx

Diffusion Burning (Conventional Diesel)Stoichiometric Reaction ZoneThin Reaction ZoneHigh Temperature and High NOxRich Zones at High T Leading to Soot Formation

Homogeneous Reaction (HCCI)Dilute MixturesLow Temperature Reactions and Low NOxHomogeneous Mixture at Low Temperature

113

2

BackgroundBackgroundBackground

Engine Combustion Technologies are Apparently Converging to the same General Characteristics

Delayed Ignition and Rapid Burn RateEngine Technologies are also Converging

Highly BoostedHigh BMEPHigh EGR 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720CRANK ANGLE

PRES

SUR

E (b

ar)

New Combustion ModesNew Combustion ModesNew Combustion Modes

HEDGE, HCCI, CAI, PCCI, LTC, PCI, and CSI are some of the Acronyms used to Describe the Recent Developments for Modified Fuel Reaction Approaches

HEDGE - High Efficiency Dilute Gasoline EngineHCCI - Homogeneous Charge Compression IgnitionCAI - Controlled Auto IgnitionPCCI - Premixed Charge Compression IgnitionLTC - Low Temperature CombustionPCI - Premixed Compression Ignition

CSI - Compression and Spark Ignition

114

3

HEDGE, HCCI, CAI, PCCI, LTC, PCI, and CSIHEDGE, HCCI, CAI, PCCI, LTC, HEDGE, HCCI, CAI, PCCI, LTC, PCI, and CSIPCI, and CSI

Common Factors include:Part or all of the Fuel is PremixedAll Use EGRAll have Lower NOx All have Higher HC and CO

Differences Include:Degree of PremixingPM EmissionsOverall Equivalence RatioInitiation of ReactionPurpose/Application

Low EmissionsExhaust Gas Composition and Temperature Control

Best Combustion Phasing - Theoretical vs Practical Best Combustion Phasing Best Combustion Phasing -- Theoretical vs Practical Theoretical vs Practical

Thermodynamically Ideal Cycles Produce Highest Efficiency with Instantaneous Heat Release at TDCPractical Limitation Include

Noise due to Rapid Rates of Heat ReleaseIncreases in Friction due to Higher Bearing Loads and Small dV/dθ EffectsPeak Firing Pressure LimitsPressure Oscillations (maybe Knock)

115

4

Typical HCCI Heat Release RateTypical HCCI Heat Release RateTypical HCCI Heat Release Rate

CA (Degrees)140 160 180 200

Hea

t Rel

ease

Rat

e (J

/deg

)

-200

20406080

100120140160 Main Reaction

Cool Flame

ApproachApproachApproach

Use Cycle Simulation to Determine the Effects of Changing the Heat Release Rate Characteristics on the Emissions and the Efficiency

Mainly Concerned with NOx and BTE

116

5

HEDGE Performance PredictionsTools

HEDGE Performance PredictionsHEDGE Performance PredictionsToolsTools

Alamo Engine (A_E) Phenomenological, Zero Dimensional ModelsGas Exchange

Steady State Emptying & Filling (Checks With Steady State 1D Flow Code)

TCEnergy and Flow Balance for Selected Efficiencies, Wastegating (Vs Engine Speed)

CombustionWatson and Wiebe

FrictionChenn-flynn

AftertreatmentFixed Converter Efficiencies

Assumption for All CalculationsAssumption for All CalculationsAssumption for All Calculations

Engine Configuration130X160 mm BoreXStroke16:1 CRTurbocharged

Engine Conditions1800 rpmA/F 24:140% EGR240 kPa MAP

Only Changes, Shape and Timing of the HRR Diagrams

117

6

Details on Shape and Timing EffectDetails on Shape and Timing EffectDetails on Shape and Timing Effect

Peak Efficiency Occurs in All Cases as 12o ATDCRapid to Slow Heat Release (Duration 10 to 30o) Results in 0.5% Change in BSFCCorresponding IMEP Drop of 0.5%

14.5

14.55

14.6

14.65

14.7

14.75

14.8

14.85

14.9

14.95

15

355 360 365 370 375 380 385

crank angle of main heat release peak [deg]

IME

P [b

ar]

200

202

204

206

208

210

212

214

216

218

220

BS

FC [

g/kW

-hr]

IMEP, narrow profileIMEP, middle profileIMEP, wide profileBSFC, narrow profileBSFC, middle profileBSFC, wide profile

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

340 345 350 355 360 365 370 375 380 385 390 395 400

crank angle [deg]

Future Diesel FuelsFuture Diesel FuelsFuture Diesel Fuels

118

7

Diffusion Burn Engine FuelDiffusion Burn Engine FuelDiffusion Burn Engine Fuel

Conventional Current Diesel Engine Fuel Appetite

Low Aromatics (high H/C Ratio)Lower Flame T and Lower NOxLower Propensity for Soot Formation

High Cetane NumberAdvanced Diesel Engine Fuel Appetite

Mixed Mode (Part Time HCCI and LTC)Low AromaticHigh Cetane Number (at least consistent)

Conventional DieselConventional DieselConventional Diesel

6 cylinder125 mm bore140 mm stroke225 mm connecting rod10.3 liter displacement4 valves/cylinderUnit injectors

119

8

Low Pressure Loop EGR SystemLow Pressure Loop EGR SystemLow Pressure Loop EGR System

Mode BackpressureNumber kPa

1 104.32 104.33 104.34 100.95 104.36 104.37 104.68 108.0

BACKPRESSUREFOR EGR TESTS

Weighted NOX vs. Cetane NumberWeighted NOWeighted NOXX vs. Cetane Numbervs. Cetane Number

The engine data shows that cetane number has a little effect on NOXemissions.

120

9

Weighted NOX vs. Total AromaticsWeighted NOWeighted NOXX vs. Total Aromaticsvs. Total Aromatics

Data agrees with the general trends reported in literature showing that NOXincreases with either density or aromatic content.Scatter is less for aromatics

Stoichiometric AdiabaticFlame Temperature

Stoichiometric AdiabaticStoichiometric AdiabaticFlame TemperatureFlame Temperature

NOX emissions show a strong relationship to hydrogen content.

121

10

Heat Release - Modes 7 & 8Reference Fuel (No EGR)Heat Release Heat Release -- Modes 7 & 8Modes 7 & 8Reference Fuel (No EGR)Reference Fuel (No EGR)

Rate of combustion is controlled by the rate of injection (especiallyat higher loads).

Advance Diesel EngineAdvance Diesel EngineAdvance Diesel EngineEuro V / US Tier II Combustion Strategies for Light-Duty Diesel Engine

Throttle Valve

EGR

Val

ve

EGR ValveInter Cooler

EGR CoolerAir Flow Mater

1) Avoid Deposit2) consume O23) Raise Intake gas

Temperature

CC--DPFDPF1) 1) PM oxidationPM oxidation2) Clean EGR Gas2) Clean EGR Gas

LNTLNT1) 1) NONOxx StorageStorage2) NO2) NOxx ReductionReduction

SwRI Internal Research

Project

122

11

Configuration of Engine Control SystemConfiguration of Engine Control SystemConfiguration of Engine Control System

Throttle ValveEGR

Val

ve

Inter Cooler

EGR Cooler

Air Flow MeterAir Flow Meter

•

•

•

•

Man

ifold

Pre

ssur

e M

anifo

ld P

ress

ure

Sens

orSe

nsor

Cylinder Pressure SensorCylinder Pressure Sensor(Low Cost Sensor)(Low Cost Sensor)

EGR Valve

∆P Sensor

Common Rail Injector Injection Correcting Injection Correcting (real time feedback & Learning Control) (real time feedback & Learning Control)

InIn--Cylinder Condition Cylinder Condition Estimation ModelEstimation Model

•• LTC/PCCI Rich/Near Rich ControlLTC/PCCI Rich/Near Rich Control•• Air Flow Meter CorrectingAir Flow Meter Correcting

λ λ SensorSensor

O2 Sensor

••

Engine out NOx Estimation ModelEngine out NOx Estimation Model

Multi Combustion System Strategy-Roles of New Concept Combustion-

PCCI (Lean)PCCI (Lean)

Late Injection

Normal OperationNormal Operation

•• Maintain Bed Temp.Maintain Bed Temp.•• NOx LessNOx Less

NOx Reduction(A few seconds every few minutes)

Torq

ue

Engine Speed

Torq

ue

Engine Speed

Torq

ue

•• Very Rich GasVery Rich Gas

Lean OperationLean Operation

•• Slight Rich Gas (>600Slight Rich Gas (>600ººc)c)

•• Lean Gas (>600Lean Gas (>600ººc)c)

Simultaneous PM/Sulfur Regeneration(Several minutes every 100-1000km)

PCCI (Rich)PCCI (Rich)

Late Post

LTC (Rich)LTC (Rich)

StandardDiesel Combustion

LTC (Lean)LTC (Lean)

Engine Speed

LNTLNT DPFDPF

LNT/DPFLNT/DPF

LNTLNT

Rich OperationRich Operation

123

12

Cetane Number Averages Cetane Number Averages Cetane Number Averages

2002Min=40.3Max= 56.4Min in CentralMax in Western

2003Min=40.3Max=55.6Min in Central and WesternMax in Western

HCCI Fuel RequirementsHCCI Fuel RequirementsHCCI Fuel Requirements

124

13

Fundamentals of HCCI Reaction 1Fundamentals of HCCI Reaction 1Fundamentals of HCCI Reaction 1

Ideally, a Homogeneous Fuel-Air Mixture is One in Which the Composition and the Thermodynamic Conditions are Uniform Throughout the Reaction Phase

Reaction Starts When the Thermodynamic Conditions are Sufficient to Initiate Chain Branching ReactionsReaction Rates and Reaction Duration are Kinetically Controlled

Fundamentals of HCCI Reaction 2Fundamentals of HCCI Reaction 2Fundamentals of HCCI Reaction 2

Practical Fuel-Air Mixtures Have Both Compositional and Thermodynamic In-Homogeneities

Reaction Begins in the Fuel Richest and the Highest Temperature LocationsReaction Rates and Reaction Duration are Affected by Mixing and Heat Transfer

125

14

SwRI Definition of HCCISwRI Definition of HCCISwRI Definition of HCCI

Defining Characteristics of HCCILow NOx, 15 ppm or LessNo Soot, as Indicated by Zero BSNMain Reactions Occurring after TDC

Definition of TermsDefinition of TermsDefinition of Terms

Diesel Fuel

CA (Degrees)140 160 180 200

Hea

t Rel

ease

Rat

e (J

/deg

)

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Pre-Reaction

Main Reaction

Phasing

Pre-Reaction Start

Main Reaction Start

126

15

Main Reaction TimingMain Reaction TimingMain Reaction Timing

Main Reaction Timing is Critical and Dependent on the Following:

Timing of the Cool Flame ReactionsMagnitude of Cool Flame

Fuel Composition Affects these Combustion Characteristics

Pre-Reaction DelayPrePre--Reaction DelayReaction DelayAll Fuels

Pre-Reaction Delay versus Compression T at TDCPRD=7.292-5.49E-03*TPRD=9.136-7.68E-03*TPRD=8.261-6.996E-03*TPRD=7.988-6.303E-03*TPRD=8.388-6.675E-03*TPRD=8.238-6.431E-03*TPRD=8.398-6.673E-03*T

Compression T (K)600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

Pre-

Rea

ctio

n D

elay

(ms)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

20% Gasoline40% Gasoline60% Gasoline80% Gasoline0% Gasoline100% Gasoline (16:1 CR)FT Naphtha

Gasoline, Diesel Fuel and BlendsPre-Reaction Delay versus Compression T at TDC

PRD=7.292-5.49E-03*TPRD=9.136-7.68E-03*T

PRD=7.988-6.303E-03*TPRD=8.388-6.675E-03*TPRD=8.238-6.431E-03*TPRD=8.398-6.673E-03*T

Compression T (K)900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150

Pre-

Rea

ctio

n D

elay

(ms)

0.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.02.22.42.6

20% Gasoline40% Gasoline60% Gasoline80% Gasoline0% Gasoline100% Gasoline (16:1 CR)

Gasoline

Diesel Fuel

20% Gasoline80% of Difference FTN

More Like DF But Shorter Delays

127

16

PhasingPhasingPhasing

Phasing Related to the Pre-Reaction Heat Release

Larger Pre-Reaction Means Shorter Phasing

All Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Blends and FT NaphthaPhasing versus Pre-Reaction Heat Release

Pre-Reaction Heat Release0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

Phas

ing

(ms)

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

FT Naphtha0% Gasoline20% Gasoline40% Gasoline60% Gasoline80% Gasoline100% Gasoline

FTN 33% LessThan Gasoline and 65% Less

Than Diesel

All Gasoline and Diesel Fuel BlendsPhasing versus Pre-Reaction Delay

Pre-Reaction Heat Release0.006 0.008 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.020 0.022

Phas

ing

(ms)

1 .5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

0% Gasoline20% Gasoline40% Gasoline60% Gasoline80% Gasoline100% Gasoline

Diesel Fuel

Gasoline

20% Gasoline75% of Difference

HCCI FuelsHCCI FuelsHCCI Fuels

Current Diesel Fuel has two Fundamental Problems

Boiling Point Distribution is too HighFuel Cannot be Vaporized Prior to the Start of Reaction

Pre-Reaction Delay is too ShortMain Reaction Begins before TDC

Ideal HCCI FuelBoiling Point Distribution Similar to GasolineIgnition Characteristics Between Gasoline and Diesel Fuel

Base + 6.5% Heptane

Base + 6.5% Toluene

128

17

Future GasolineFuture GasolineFuture Gasoline

Future GasolineFuture GasolineFuture Gasoline

Broader Range of Octane NumberVery Low ON for HCCI EnginesRegular Gasoline for Conventional SI EnginesHigh ON for HEDGE Engines

HCCI Engines Likely Capable of Operation on Either of the Two Lower ON GradesHEDGE Engines Likely Capable of Operation on Either Grades of the Two Higher ON Grades

129

18

HEDGE EnginesHEDGE EnginesHEDGE Engines

HEDGE Engine Combustion ConceptStoichiometric Gasoline Flame Propagation EngineVery High EGR Levels

Knock Mitigation for High EfficiencyLow Temperature Combustion for Low NOxThrottle Loss Reduction

High Boost for Downsize and Efficiency

HEDGE HD-Gasoline ResultsHEDGE HDHEDGE HD--Gasoline ResultsGasoline Results

25

30

35

40

45

50

500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300

MEP (kPa)

Ther

mal

Effi

cien

cy (%

)

Single-CylinderBTE vs BMEP

Multi-CylinderEquivalentBTE vs BMEP

Single CylinderITE vs IMEP

CAT 3501 4LRPM = 1200Phi = 1.0Fuel = Gasoline93 ONDiesel Micropilot

39%39%

130

19

High Efficiency Gasoline EngineA Light/Medium Duty Solution?High Efficiency Gasoline EngineHigh Efficiency Gasoline EngineA Light/Medium Duty Solution?A Light/Medium Duty Solution?

PZEV engine testedPZEV data taken at MBT at each speed / load pointHEDGE shows potential for better FE at low load and equivalent / better FE at high load

Current combustion system not optimized for PFI operationFriction load from oversized injection system highValve timing optimized for diesel only operation

Higher ON would Provide More Knock Margin

0

5

10

15

20

25

200 300 400 500 600BSFC [g/kW-hr]

BSN

Ox

[g/k

W-h

r]

12.5:1 CR Supercharged17.5:1 Turbocharged2004 MY PZEV SI Engine

`

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%% of Maximum Load

BSF

C [g

/kW

-hr]

12.5:1 CR Supercharged17.5:1 Turbocharged2004 MY PZEV SI Engine

High Efficiency Gasoline EngineA Light/Medium Duty Solution?High Efficiency Gasoline EngineHigh Efficiency Gasoline EngineA Light/Medium Duty SolutionA Light/Medium Duty Solution??

HEDGE has significantly lower engine-out BSNOxBSHC / BSCO equivalent to PZEV engine

Potential for reduction through optimization 0

5

10

15

20

25

200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

BSFC [g/kW-hr]

BSN

Ox

[g/k

W-h

r]

12.5:1 CR Supercharged 17.5:1 Turbocharged2004 MY PZEV SI Engine

`

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

BSFC [g/kW-hr]

BSHC

[g/k

W-h

r]

12.5:1 CR Supercharged 2004 MY PZEV SI Engine

05

101520253035404550

200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

BSFC [g/kW-hr]

BSC

O [g

/kW

-hr]

12.5:1 CR Supercharged 2004 MY PZEV SI Engine

131

20

Thank YouThank YouThank You

132

16.0 APPENDIX A2: FEEDBACK FROM BREAKOUT SESSIONS AND SUMMARY PRESENTATIONS




Advanced Engine Combustion with Diesel-Like Fuels – Recurring Themes:Facilitator: Charles MuellerRapporteur: René Pigeon

HCCI Issues• What’s the best fuel for HCCI?

– Don’t know but pretty sure it’s not diesel: autoignites too readily– Maybe naphtha or jet fuel: good volatility and cool-flame chemistry– Degree of isomerization could be important and should be studied– FCC gasoline could be saturated to reduce octane and increase yield

• In-spec fuel variability is currently large, will likely need to tighten for HCCI applications– Narrower distillation range requirement likely

• Octane and cetane numbers are inadequate for characterizing a fuel’s HCCI ignition quality• Cold-starting issues are important (more so than with diesel)• Need full-time HCCI to meet US EPA 2010 heavy-duty emissions levels• Power density is an important property of HCCI engines targeted at replacing HD diesels• Vast reduction in flash point of diesel fuel is a safety problem (not just an education issue)

that precludes gasoline-like fuels in heavy-duty applications

Participants were fuels focused answers were fuels focused (as opposed to focused on LTC engine technologies).

Mixed-Mode Issues• Want high cetane number for CI operation at light load (where HCCI has problems with

incomplete combustion), but high cetane is a problem for HCCI operation (ignites too early)– “High” cetane is ~ 50 – 55 (like in Europe and Japan)– Use 2 fuels, one for CI and one for HCCI? On-board distillation of a single fuel? On-

board additization?• Any new fuel must be backward-compatible with existing engines until existing engines are

phased out• Production of a standard base fuel that is additized at the terminal for desired ignition

characteristics was viewed as favorable to acceptable as long as < 1000 ppm of additive req’d

135

Other Issues• Emissions regulations are setting the deadlines for research efforts• Next round of emissions regulations likely in 2014-2016 timeframe (maybe 0.05 g

NOx/bhp-hr)• Effects of fuel properties on engine durability are important• Lots of techniques available to producers to give us the fuel want

– Solvent extraction to separate aromatics and paraffins– Robust ways to affect isomerization of paraffins– Straightforward to produce sharp boiling point cuts for experimental testing– Refinery perspective: “Tell us what to make.”

• Light-load conditions don’t matter much for meeting NOx regulations• Engine hardware changes to facilitate LTC that were not discussed• Injection strategies, technologies to recover power density by boosting, variable valve

actuation, compression ratio effects

Accepted Truths• The current fuels are what we’re stuck with in the near term, BUT this research should have a

long-term focus and not be overconstrained by current processing norms• There is no single fuel property that, if changed, would solve all of our problems• Engine technologies and fuels are evolving in parallel engine mfrs. and fuel suppliers must

work together to find the best answer: “collaboration and coevolution”– Optimal fuel depends on engine technology– Optimal engine technology depends on available fuels

• Fuel suppliers will resist fuel changes until credible legislation is in place to secure a market for the new product

• Saturation of aromatics into cycloparaffins is simple, cheap, robust feasible • “Everything that comes into a refinery gets sold.”• Many things that were initially thought to be impossible have come to pass (e.g., unleaded

gasoline, port fuel injection)

136

Areas for Research• Define “X”ane number to characterize a fuel’s HCCI ignition quality

– Should this be SwRI idea of Elevated Pressure Auto-Ignition Temperature (EPAIT) + total cool-flame heat release?

• We need the background science to understand the effects of fuel structural properties on combustion for modeling and experimental efforts. Once have this basis, need to add understanding of chemical kinetics.

– Come up with a few model surrogate fuels that contain representative classes of compounds, e.g. aromatics and cycloalkanes. These 3 different blends could represent different levels of hydrotreatment. Maybe 10 representative compounds in each blend.

– Understand the kinetics of each of the important classes of compounds (shock-tube studies)– Generate a public database of thermodynamic and chemical properties for real fuels to facilitate more

accurate models and to aid in engine design, including:• Specific heat, latent heat of vaporization• Ignition quality• Whether and why certain components are to be avoided (low-volatility aromatic compounds are

likely bad, also flash point is important)• Add knowledge of engine and fuel synergies to the above database• Develop a deeper understanding of which radicals and reactions govern cool-flame ignition processes• Conduct factorial-type experiments with model fuel compounds blended in “exaggerated” proportions to

simulate real fuels, then test a range of LTC engine technologies with the various fuel types to determine the most attractive approaches

• Study the variation of ignition delay with temperature for a range of oil-sands-derived compounds (process-related), notably: monocycloalkanes, monoaromatics, monocycloalkane-monoaromatic combination,…;

• These low-temperature ignition delays could be used to define a novel ignition quality scale for specifying fuels for HCCI or for diesel use

• Reduced temperature sensitivity of some compounds will be advantageous for HCCI applications and for cold-ambient cold-starting diesel engine (CR lowered for LD)

• Knowledge of temperature-dependent ignition delays for monoaromatics and polyaromatics could help evaluate whether regulators should these species as done by CARB or World Wide Charter, Category 5.

• Producing several oil sands derived reference fuels “is a necessity” for consistency in engine experiments over a reasonable time span (~5 years)

• Study soot-formation characteristics of cycloalkanes in HCCI applications• Low-sooting fuels enable mixing-controlled LTC strategies to avoid reaching smoke limit.• Sensing-based closed-loop control would expand the operating map in transients.• Study HCCI ignition-assist techniques like glow plugs, plasma torches, on-board reforming,

and laser ignition (resonant absorption preferable to plasma production)• Evaluate most cost-effective way to use hydrogen in fuel production and use

• Can use solvent extraction to separate aromatics from paraffinics and n- from iso-paraffins(solvent de-waxing), iso-dewaxing = isomerizing n-paraffins

• Aromatics to napthenes is easy• Platforming = gasoline technology• Important parameters for jet fuel are BTU/lb and smoke point• Are methyl-branched iso-paraffins good HCCI fuels?• Maintenance intervals with new technologies may be much shorter and this could be a big

problem.

137



Breakout Session Summary:Advanced Engine Combustion with

Gasoline-Like Oil-Sands-Derived Fuels

Facilitator: Mark P. B. MusculusSandia National Laboratories

Rapporteur: Thomas McCracken National Research Council Canada

Oil Sands Chemistry and Engine Emissions Roadmap WorkshopJune 6-7, 2005


OverviewQ: “What are the knowledge gaps related to in-cylinder combustion and pollutant formation processes for OSDF gasoline?”

• OSDF vs. conventional gasoline • Alternative to octane number• Knowledge of speciation effects• Single-fuel desires• Miscellaneous

139

OSDF vs. Conventional Gasoline • Non-universal concensus: highly-processed oil-sands-derived

gasoline is nearly indistinguishable from highly-processed conventional, gasoline especially if G/D is increased for OSDFs– However, OSDF gasoline has been observed to produce significantly

higher PM emissions from DI gasoline engines. Why?– So, components may be essentially the same, but ratios may be

different, esp.: less processed / straight-run OSDF gasoline may have naturally higher aromatic/cylcloparaffin content

– Can such fuels (without significant additional processing ) be useful in advanced engines?

• Many of the questions about performance and in-cylinder combustion and emissions formation processes of OSDF gasoline are essentially the same as for conventional gasoline– Even so, can OSDF gasoline be superior to conventional gasoline, e.g.,

high octane from aromatic content, potential on-board reforming capabilities?

– How does OSDF gasoline compare to conventional gasoline from heavy crude (e.g., Venezuelan) and/or shale oil?

Alternative to Octane Number• General concensus is that the octane number, i.e. RON, MON, or

derived quantities like (R+M)/2, is no longer sufficient to describe fuel performance in all advanced gasoline-fuelled engines. – Too many different potential engine technologies for the conventional

octane number to be sufficient.

• New quantification(s) of fuel performance are needed. Alternative metrics may include:– Volatility, to include potential mixing effects– Speciation, to include kinetics & interactions– Alternative, more fundamental (non-engine test) measures of

autoignition quality • Include both effects of both autoignition temperature and magnitude of cool

flame heat release• Analog to Ignition Quality Tester (IQT) for diesel cetane developed at SwRI

that replaces engine cetane test• Sensitivity to ∆T should also be considered.

140

Knowledge of Speciation Effects (1)

• Refiners/Upgraders need to know which species are desired for fuel performance

• Fundamental understanding of the chemical kinetic pathways by which various species control autoignition, especially for LTC processes, is needed.– However, there is a need to simplify the dataset. Using modern

analysis techniques, an overwhelming set of speciation data can be made available, but it needs to be simplified to the set of (as yet unknown) controlling parameters.

– Do low-temperature combustion (LTC) processes and operating conditions favor high H/C ratios or other fuel parameters?

– How important are EGR interactions for LTC operation, esp. kinetic interactions with fuel species?

– How do components contribute to RON, MON, and what characteristics are desirable in the fuel?

Knowledge of Speciation Effects (2)

• A better description of the “optimum” fuel speciation is required, which could follow from better understanding of fundamental kinetics– Which fuel components are important?– Which chemical kinetic steps are dominant?

• An empirical approach may be advised– By trial and error, find a fuel that performs as desired.

• Need to keep political considerations / regulated limits in mind(volatility, benzene, ethanol, etc.)

– Then, through experiments and modeling, determine the mechanisms by which the fuel performs as desired.

• May lead to improved scientific understanding of the best way to tailor fuels for advanced engine combustion.

– Then, the required components for an OSDF gasoline reference fuel might be defined for use by multiple entities to ensure uniformity.

141

Single Fuel Desires• Multiple fuel streams / gasoline grades (esp. lower octane numbers for

HCCI engines) tailored to specific engine technologies is undesirable– Infrastructure issues– Refining issues

• Identification of the necessary speciation / property set for a single fuel to run on current and advanced engines is needed.

– What can be done during transition from current fuel to widespread adoption of new fuel?

• Analogous to transition from leaded to unleaded fuel.– If HCCI/LTC is the more demanding application, can fuel be developed for

HCCI/LTC and then modified with additives to suit conventional SI engines, or, perhaps can SI fuels be modified with additives for HCCI?

• Better understanding of the engine technology variables that could reduce sensitivity to fuel properties is needed.

– Can compression ratio, EGR, port- versus direct-injection, knock-feedback or other strategies be utilized to reduce fuel sensitivity?

– Can single fuel be tailored to tolerate mode switching?– Backward-compatibility with current engines is also an issue

Miscellaneous• Management of rate of pressure rise

– Are there any kinetic controls on the rate of reaction at high temperatures (T>1400K) for either conventional or OSDF gasoline?

• Computational Time– Under what circumstances can kinetics be separated, to some degree, from CFD to speed

modeling results?

• Deposit formation– How does OSDF gasoline compare to conventional gasoline, especially for direct-injection

engine technologies? Will the same deposit-reducing additives work with OSDF fuels?

• Research vs. Production– How do observations in the research environment compare to real production engines in

practical applications?

• What exactly is a “gasoline-like” fuel for advanced LTC/HCCI engines?– Intermediate between diesel and gasoline (e.g., locomotive diesel fuel, CN=32?)– Can low-octane fuels that would otherwise be further processed be useful for LTC?

• Non-regulated emissions– In addition to PM, NOx, UHC, CO, etc., need to consider other potential emissions problems

with OSDF fuels, especially ground level ozone chemistry.

• Chicken and Egg– Should fuels be tailored to meet the needs of engines, or should engines be designed to

utilize the unique properties of OSDF fuels?

142

Summary• Need to better identify differences between

OSDF and conventional gasoline, and dependencies on processing.

• Need a mindset of change in terms of specification of fuels using new metrics to replace octane number.

• Better knowledge of the effects of various gasoline species on kinetics and combustion processes is needed.

• A tailored, multi-purpose single fuel that works with old SI and numerous alternative engine technologies would be really neat.

143



Fuels Processing

Rapporteur: Noël BilletteFacilitator: Richard McFarlane

Oil Sands Derived Feedstocks-1 • How does composition of oil sands derived SCO

differ from conventional crudes?– Are new refining processes necessary to for these

feedstocks to produce future fuels?• More H2 needed for SCO

– cycloparaffins, hydrocracking; current limit is 40 cetane• Bitumen-derived distillates are children of

aromatic feedstocks with aliphatic side chains– apple may not fall far from the tree– no straight chain paraffins– Methyl (-CH3) is ultimate fate of side chain

145

Oil Sands Derived Feedstocks-2 • Technologies exist to:

– saturate aromatic rings– open rings to produce branched paraffins (question of

process efficiency)– how to open rings with less energy?

• New refinery processes giving high quality diesel– more molecular definition, better process control

• Future fuels may be discounted until regulations enacted– Need demand to act: Refiners/upgraders

Oil Sands Derived Feedstocks-3• Many grades of gasoline (not by regulation); could

have several grades of diesel also– New grades of diesel: higher distribution costs

• Make future engines work on today fuels– Forward compatibility of today’s fuels– Refinery investment decisions based on economics– Government legislation is also a decision driver, e.g.,

low sulphur - Europe and Calif. pushed by govt.– Is blending the key?

• How to introduce new fuels & engines?– feasible only if fuels slightly modified & backward

compatible

146

Cetane Dichotomy• Cetane issue might be misleading

– not altogether clear if ring opening needed for future fuels

• Cetane is the issue - higher cetane than 40 & high H/C ratio– 50+ cetane in Europe and Japan– tail pipe target (NOx & PM) known, fuel is the issue

Processing: Bridging Steps - 1• Split in US refinery conversion capacity is 85%

FCC and 15% hydrocracking– What steps are required, if any, to fill the quality gap

between distillate feedstocks preferred by FCC-based refinery and bitumen derived distillate?

• Refinery crude diet shifting towards heavier crudes (Mex., Venez., S. Arabia, Can.)

• For Alberta to be competitive, look at process & economics– HOW is the question - depends on price– Recognized that most of SCO consumed in Canada

today

147

Processing: Bridging Steps -2• Least energy to upgrade diesel, off the shelf

process• Big issue is opening rings - holy grail

– Hydrocracking gives premium SCO; higher liquid yield

• Need lots of H2 addition to SCO– FCC reduces H/C ratio (gas, olefin & coke production)

• Sell finished products into US market– Leads to multiple products

Trends in Catalysts - 1• Are there new trends or developments in

catalysts?• Ring opening is the holy grail

– Required to change cetane beyond that achievable by hydrogenation

– Produces branched paraffin (thermodynamically favorable) but straight chain preferred

– Need agreement of required cetane number. Intermediate between high cetane diesel and gasoline?

• Are there incompatibilities in the requirements

148

Trends in Catalysts - 2• Catalyst suppliers:

– A major change in last 15 yrs has been amalgamation• lots of activity in low surface fuels

– Steady improvements have led to longer run lengths and lower operating temperatures

• Better catalysts:– N-tolerant and/or N removal– Better selectivity for hydrocracking & H2 addition

• If need more straight chain paraffins product, go from NG directly via Fisher-Tropsch (or coal viasyn gas) - $$$

Trends in Catalysts - 3• Potential synergy between cycloparaffins from oil

sands base and n-paraffins from oil shales

149

Modifications for HCCI - 1• What general modifications in molecular make-up

and boiling range are required for HCCI?– How different are these from those required for

improving diesel?– Is this fuel too revolutionary? Evolutionary interim fuel

required?

• Challenge is parameters to characterize fuels for engine– HCCI needs different fuel, e.g., avoid premature

ignition

Modifications for HCCI - 2• Cannot have fuel for full range use

– Need different properties for diff. engine & op. mode– Producers cannot change process to accommodate– For full HCCI in heavy duty diesel, low octane, high

cetane required beyond 2010

• For mixed mode, what happens when I switch?– High cetane for some techs, moderate 40-60 for HCCI– Other characteristics improved also (e.g., initiation T)– Could fuel be tailored for mixed mode? A challenge

150

Modifications for HCCI - 3• Will need 10 yr. to figure out fuel specs. for HCCI

– market does not support other new fuel– but…HCCI will come to pass, no other tech giving us

low NOx, low PM– after treatment, no answer for long term requirements– Need to remove S for after-treatment

• We are going there already

Experiments & Models - 1• What questions are best answered by modeling

and/or experiments?• Good refinery process models to predict products

could be utilized with existing engine models (cetane, aromatics, etc.) to predict engine performance.– Similar to using S.G. to predict boiling point

distribution and refinery yields

151

Experiments & Models - 2• Kinetics of reactions rates during combustion need

to be modeled and verified in well controlled experiments

• Processors and engine companies must work together to communicate determining changes in fuel and engine requirements.

• Different numbers or set of numbers needed to characterize HCCI fuel, e.g.– initiation temperature, energy in cool flame

Experiments & Models - 3• Need empirical engine data

– Existing models can be used to predict refinery product– If fuel specifications exist then can turn refinery knob

to get right fuel

152

SCO Products: Monitoring & Measuring

• Should we be monitoring or measuring SCO`s • Upgraders can make many product grades to suit

market– various materials may have different yields– results are fairly constant; what you start with tells what

you can get - highly aromatic or highly paraffinic

• What to monitor may be different for different producers

Jet Fuel• Could oil sands derived jet fuel have an

advantage?– higher temperature tolerance for turbine cooling– energy density

153



Fuel Characterization

Parviz RahimiAndre Lemieux

Patricia Arboleda

Goal of the workshop

Identify knowledge gap related to the utilization of future transportation fuels derived from oil sands sources in advanced combustion engine technologies

155

Oil sands

Bio

Fisher-Tropsch

Characterization

Fuel enginetesting

Develop correlationsbetween molecular structureand engine response

Relationship between fuel properties -engine performance

Summary Seed Question -1

Canadian Bitumen Distillate vsConventional Distillate

156

• There is a need for a clear definition of bitumen and conventional distillate.– Many plants have mixed feeds.

• Severity of process tends to minimize differences

• Bitumen distillates maybe favourable for HCCI engines because of it’s poor cetaneproperty.

Seed Question -1 Canadian Bitumen Distillate vsConventional Distillate


What fuel matrices needed?

Are these in oil sands

157

Seed Question 2- What fuel matrices needed?

Are these in oil sands

• A need for a standard for HCCI engine fuel.

• Refiners want the specs to be broad and engineers need the best tight specs; there might need to be a compromise.

• Make available to engine developers the range of fuels available so the limits of HCCI can be determined.


Chemical and Physical TestsCharacterization Techniques

158

Seed Question 3- Chemical and Physical TestsCharacterization Techniques

• Analytical capabilities for full characterization still not available.– Ex: diesel

• Once chemical characteristic is complete, convert requirements to a refinery spec– Ex: a new cetane or octane number, the new “X”

• Make a standard to be tested and unify all results.– Ex: Institute a round robin testing to get reproducible

results


Computational Limits

Molecular Simplification

159

Seed Question 4- Computational Limits

Molecular Simplification

•Is the computational limit hardware or data input overload?

•Do kinetic modeling on a model fuel at temperatures 950-1600 K and study the impact of fuel composition in global kinetic rates under those conditions.

160

Impact of OSDF on Emissions Control Devices

Tim JohnsonBruce Bunting

Jim KellyOil Sands Meeting, 5/6+7/2005

Introduction

• OSDF have a different HC mix, cyclo paraffins and aromatics are higher

• Aftertreatment uses unburned or partial oxidized fuel• Advanced engines (full load HCCI) will require new fuels and

different aftertreatment

161

Aftertreatment Devices

• Diesel oxidation catalysts– Reduce engine out HC and particulate

• Fuel reformers– Used for pre-treatment for combustion or aftertreatment

• Diesel particulate filters– Reduce particulate

• NOX reduction catalysts / systems– Lean NOX traps– SCR system

• Urea / ammonia reductant• HC reductant

• Automotive three way catalysts

Other Systems / Areas

• Engine out PM– Any OSDF effect

• Increased HC and CO emissions with HCCI / LTC– More effective / lower temperature oxy cats needed

• EGR systems, intake valves, charge air cooler– Any OSDF related deposit issues?

162

Impact on Existing Devices

• Do the OSDF have a tendency to plug/foul catalysts at lower temperature? Same question for cooled EGR systems? Higher aromatics and olefin production?

• Cold start warm-up more difficult with higher aromatic content OSDF.

• High temperature catalyst operation is expected to be least effected by OSDF.

• More soot in the exhaust with OSDF?• Environment Canada has not seen any difference in engine or

catalyst out emissions using OSDF for criteria emissions.

Impact on LNT

• Aromatics are bad for LNT regeneration – do not regenerate the traps. Most are single ring aromatics. Finding could swing NOxsolution from LNT to SCR.

• How does OSDF effect “in-cylinder” reforming of fuel in terms of using this downstream for LNT regeneration – possible research project!

• Injected cyclo-paraffins will partially oxidize to aromatics producing hydrogen. How will this affect LNT, DOCs & DPF?

• How do cycloparaffins affect LNT & DeNOx behaviour? Partial oxidation products?

• Do OSDF coke eg. in rich injection conditions? Effect on LNT and rich spikes?

• Cycloparaffins will generate more hydrogen in fuel reformers. Impact?

163

Impact on Other Future Devices

• High temperature catalyst operation is expected to be least effected by OSDF for DPF and LNT management.

• Environment Canada has not seen any difference in engine or catalyst out emissions using OSDF for criteria emissions.

• Injected cyclo-paraffins will partially oxidize to aromatics producing hydrogen. How will this affect LNT, DOCs & DPF?

• Cycloparaffins will generate more hydrogen in fuel reformers. Impact?

• Cycloparaffins also form olefins during combustion – can these be used to benefit aftertreatment?

Impacts with New Combustion Regimes

• On Phi vs T curve (Mueller) perhaps OSDF can generate more CO in OH formation regime

• Part load HCCI will be driven by aftertreatment cost reduction, mixed mode might save on net emissions system costs because LTC works at light loads/low temperature and emission control is only needed at high loads where high temperatures are available.

• Full load HCCI will be driven by lower fuel cost, if low cetane DF and/or low octane gasoline are cheaper (.20-.25$/gal for gasoline).

• Higher engine cost for full load HCCI is offset by additional aftertreatment cost savings.

164

Other Considerations

• Need to make sure research engine work is verified with multicylinder engines.

• Need to develop better “on board” devices to measure critical fuel properties that the computer controlled engine can take advantage of – would be especially good for sensitive HCCI engines.

• OSDF will be blended – will there still be an impact?• Blends of OSDF need to consider cold flow problems.• Need to look at biofuel additives into OSDFs.• Will OSDF affect the size of the aftertreatment device?

Fuels Related Questions, 1• Are their engine sectors (marine, loco.) that might use less

treated bitumen?• More and more oil sands issues (more upgrading) are

becoming the same across all crude derived fuels so oil sand fuels are becoming closer to conventional

• Do we need new or different metrics for characterisingadvanced fuels?

• Military driven to go to single fuel. How will OSDF affect this?What is impact on engines and emissions control?

• What happens to OSDF in combustion? HC species in partial combustion?

• Some 1980 diesel fuels had higher aromatics and higher energy density. Might be useful to review old literature.

165

• Is flame temperature affected by OSDF?• Do OSDF produce higher soot and therefore affect engine wear

and soot load on catalyst.• OSDF diesel typically have high doses of cetane improves and

higher energy density per gallon• Cetane differential between cetane expectations and pool

cetane is growing and is an increasing problem• HCCI engines should be 10-15% more efficient, oil sands fuels

may help with lower cetane and higher volatility.• Timeframe for introducing a new fuel is probably > 10 years

Fuels Related Questions, 2

166

Fuels of the Future

Shawn Whitacre, NRELCraig Fairbridge, NCUT

Objective

To speculate on a significantly longer term progression towards an ideal fuelAssumes concurrent advancements in hardware and fuel technologiesTarget: 2030 and beyond

167

Major technology drivers

Tightening emission standardsemission standards have driven technology development for last 30 yearsWe may have exhausted available means to reduce emissions

Have we done enough?Energy efficiencyEnergy efficiency will have a greater emphasis in the futureTransition is always gradual

Role of IC EngineIC engines will play a significant role for foreseeable futureWill capitalize on advancements in sensor technologies and electronic controls

Engine recognizes, adapts to and exploits fuel properties

Auxiliary components to further improve efficiency (hybridization, etc.)Significant skepticism regarding fuel cells

168

Fuel Technology AdvancementNeed knowledge of chemistry to make changesExpect specs on chemistry, not just bulk propertiesNeed to rethink the process for collaboration between hardware suppliers and energy companiesCurrent standard setting organizations are inefficient and not technically drivenSome participants see too much emphasis on fuel change – need more emphasis on hardware

Renewable Fuels

Yes, but only as low volume blending componentsCrop resources still insignificant relative to demandNeed to consider energy balanceMust be suitable for useMust come from a broad portfolio of renewable feedstocks

Deliberate “production”Waste products

169

How do we get there?“Technology has a way of surprising us!”

Plans need to be made on an international basisEncourage formal collaboration between stakeholdersDecisions need to be data-based and framed by good scienceResearch portfolios need to be mission oriented, not curiosity driven

170

Implications of oil sands derived fuels on existing engines

Tom Gallant / Jerry Wang

Fuel Chemistry on Systems• Fuel effects fuel pump system, combustion chamber components

including oil and Emission systems.– Problems are identified by extensive engine and field testing

• Fuel pump and injector durability, e.g., Lubricity – Lack of applying appropriate analytical tools mislead researchers, (Diaromatics and not Sulphur cmpds). – Lubricity appears to have been a major issue in recent history isolated to

Alberta and analytical tools used to solve the problem could not find a difference in a ‘good’ and ‘bad’ fuel.

• Crude source, blending and the additives make chemistry very complex issue for all engine systems, e.g., lubricity, seal compatibility, filter plugging, oil and fuel additive compatibility and Emissions.

171

Barriers to predicting backward compatibility of new fuels

• Backward compatibility requires knowing what we are looking for and the fuel system/fuel interaction is too complex for simple answers.

• Inadequate analytical tools/expertise applied to problems.

• Problem fuels are gone by the time the problem is identified.

• Changes in refinery processing and processing upsets occur regularly which can lead to unusual chemistries but still within current specifications.

• Problems are highly proprietary and typically will not be sharedopenly, e.g., legal / warranty implications.


• Engine and fuel manufacturers are reactive and not proactive in solving these types of problems. – Fuels companies say: “Make better equipment”– Engine companies say: “Make better fuel”

• Engine and fuel manufacturers have limited ability to pursue future compatibility issues. Industry focus 6-12 month vision

• Lack of knowledge on fundamental chemistry /component interaction – No company wants fund fundamental knowledge.

172


• Current modeling, engine and bench tests may not be applicable for new fuel chemistry new materials.

• Fuel is a commodity and therefore, fuel quality as it relates tocompatibility needs to be specified.

• Fuel chemistry is becoming more complex, not less.

• Fleets are 10 and 20 years old and predicting changes in future fuel chemistry on these engine systems are difficult.

What role should the national labs, industry and standard-setting organizations play to

backward compatibility

• Ideally, promote cooperation between oil and engine companies todevelop the kind of testing /analytical tools required to improve prediction.

• Pre-competitive research, long term issues, to be funded by a central pool that everyone contributes.

• Need a common ‘get together’ to collect information on introduction of new fuels among all engine /fuel manufacturers.

173



Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop

LENEF Consulting Limited- June 2005- Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps 1

Summary of Key Knowledge Gaps

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

ENGINES:MANY LTCOPTIONS

AND THE WINNER IS?

FUEL CHARACTERIZATION

OEMS INCREASING INVOLVEMENT

REFINERS:”INTERESTED OBSERVERS”

GOVERNMENTS: AGITATE

OEM

S: FIRST N

EW

ENG

INES

GO

VTS LEGISLA

TE

REFINERS: DENIAL / PANICBUT ADJUST

AND LIFE GOES ON…

175

• Need to better identify differences between OSDF and conventional fuels

• Explore niche opportunities for OSDF

• Need to develop new fuel specification of fuels

• Public data base of thermodynamic properties

• Better knowledge of the effects of various fuel species on kinetics and combustion processes is needed

• CFD on combustion processes• Emphasis on emissions and efficiency

Advanced Engine Combustion with Oil Sands-Derived FuelsFuels Characterization

• Extend R&D to full cycle loads • A few tailored, multi-purpose fuels that works

with old and new engines desirable• Resolve “low flash” issue• Investigate Additive chemistry – positive or not? • Move the R&D to multiple cyclinder engines•

• Co-evolution and Co-evaluation with OEMs

Advanced Engine Combustion with Oil Sands-Derived FuelsFuels Characterization

continued

176

Fuels Processing

• HOW TO OPEN RINGS WITH LESS ENERGY(but cyclo-paraffins may be good for future fuels LTC)

• COST EFFECTIVE AROMATICS REMOVAL AS PARTOF THE EQUATION…PHYSICAL PROCESSES ?

• TARGET 50+ CI…HOW TO GET THERE…FOR EXISTING ENGINES

• WHAT FUEL IS “IDEAL” FOR LTC ENGINES

• DEFINE THE FUEL, AND REFINERS WILL ADJUST !

• ADDED REFINERY CHALLENGE .. HANDLING ANY LOOSE ENDS

Emission Control Systems

• DO OSDF PLUG/FOUL CATALYTS AT LOWER COMUTION TEMPERATURES

• VERIFY ENGINE R&D WITH MULTI-CYLINDER ENGINES

• BETTER “ON BOARD” DEVICES MEASURE CRITICAL FUEL PROPERTIES –ESPECIALLY FOR LTC ENGINES

• AFTER COMBUSTION DEVICES

• FUEL REFOMERS “ON BOARD”?

• ADVANCED EGR SYSTMS

177

Fuels of the Future

Conventional engine/fuels technology-or hybrids-still significant slice of the pieOil prices will bring alternatives “into the picture”The emissions “dragon” is slayed ...energy efficiency is king !

• IC ENGINES DOMINATE FOR SOME TIME TO COME

• SOLAR CELLS AND FUEL CELLS ….WHERE ARE THEY ?

• IS NANO TECHNOLOGY PART OF THE EQUATION ?

• HYDROGEN… WILL IT FLY IN TERMS OF FULL CYCLE ENERGYEFFICIENCY

• RENEWABLES…NEED OBJECTIVE ASSESSEMENT OF THEIR ROLE AS SUPPLEMENTAL BLENDING COMPONENTS

Implications of Oil Sands Derived Fuels on Existing Engines

• RESOLVE THE LUBRICITY ISSUE … SCIENCE .v. STOPGAP

• COMPLETE REVIEW REQUIRED OF RELEVANCE OF TRADITIONAL SPECS

• UNCONVENTIONAL/CONVENTIONAL BLENDING NOT WELL DEFINED

• FUELS SOPPLIERS AND OEMS NEED TO WORK TOGETHER…• PRE-COMPETITIVE R&D

178

17.0 APPENDIX A3: ASSESSMENT OF PRIORITIES FOR TECHNOLOGY AND SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENTS

Sections 6 through 12 described the breakout sessions discussions and the most important knowledge gaps or questions in each of the areas of review. After the workshop these individual knowledge gaps were summarized in the table on the following pages to allow participants to “stand back” and make an assessment of the highest priority knowledge gaps from the overall workshop. Respondents were asked to try and place the knowledge gaps into one of three timeframes for action: A need to start addressing this gap IMMEDIATELY B need to start addressing this no later than 2007 C can/needs to await progress on the more immediate priorities The summary table used by respondents, which went through one change to improve the wording of the key challenges, is reproduced in the next pages, with the consensus of the responses. For the purposes of this summary report, the responses have been summarized to merge the categories as follows: High priority (H) Responses were more or less equally divided between A and B, most likely in recognition that, in the context of planned medium-to-long-term R&D, “within two years” is still “immediate”. Most of the knowledge gaps fell within this category. Responses of ‘C’ in these cases were very rare. Lower Priority (LWR) In this much smaller grouping of knowledge gaps, responses were largely ‘C’, but with a significant number of respondents rating these as ‘B’. Responses of ‘A’ were very rare. In a few cases (H-LWR), there was no consensus for either of the two categories. In addition, the relative priorities were for the individual topic areas, and are not at this stage rated across topics. No scientific accuracy is claimed for this analysis, and not all respondents replied in all areas. The output may provide added insight into the thinking of a reasonable cross section (16 persons) from the workshop. The analysis is summarized in Section 3 to provide an overview of priorities.


1. Advanced Engine Combustion with Diesel-Like Oil Sands Derived Fuels

Description of the Knowledge or Other Gap Priority The effects of various fuel species on kinetics of combustion and integrated CFD models of combustion processes

H

Develop new fuel specifications tailored to LTC H Better identification of differences between OSDF fuels and conventional fuels, Including any deposit formation

H

Public data base of fuel thermodynamic properties H Investigate if LTC will fit in best with “mixed mode” combustion at various loads

H

Study soot formation tendencies of cycloparaffins H Study ignition-assist techniques in HCCI-type engines LWR Investigate Additive chemistry for advanced combustion LWR Determination of the energy efficiency / emissions balance LWR Narrow down “advanced engine choices” via expanded R&D H Explore niche opportunities for oil sands-derived fuels H-LWR Extend R&D on Advanced Combustion technology to “full cycle” loads H Extend R&D on Advanced Combustion technology to multiple cylinder engines H Resolve the “low flash “ issue with future fuels in the Diesel truck market LWR Involve OEMs in the future R&D and development H 2. Advanced Engine Combustion with Gasoline-Like Oil Sands Derived Fuels

Description of the Knowledge or Other Gap Priority The effects of various fuel species on kinetics of combustion and integrated CFD models of combustion processes

H

Develop an alternative performance specification (similar to RON, MON) but more fundamentally based and tailored to characteristics of LTC engines

H

Better identification of differences in chemical composition between OSDF and conventional gasoline, including fraction of ring compounds (aromatics, cycloparaffins) and the potential for deposit formation

H

Public data base of fuel thermodynamic properties H The potential for “mixed mode” combustion at different loads H-LWR Investigate Additive chemistry for advanced combustion H Explore niche opportunities for oil sands-derived fuels LWR Extend R&D on Advanced Combustion technology to “full cycle” loads LWR Extend R&D on Advanced Combustion technology to multiple cylinder engines LWR Pro-active investigation of emissions beyond those currently regulated LWR A single fuel type that is suitable for spark ignition or LTC/HCCI type engines, or other advanced engines

H

Involve OEMs in the future R&D and development H


3. Fuels Processing In this area, concepts of new process technology for existing engines are more obvious. It is understood that fuels for future engines may require an entirely different philosophy and approach to refinery processes.

Description of the Knowledge or Other Gap Priority Ring opening technology for today’s diesel engine technology H The definition of the “ideal” LTC engine fuel and its impact on Oil Sands and other heavy crudes

H

Physical processes for aromatics removal (perhaps linked to catalytic processes) which may be linked to …. “Refinery of the Future” options to cope with / convert “non-fuel” streams

LWR

4. Fuels Characterization

Description of the Knowledge or Other Gap Priority Better identification of differences between OSDF fuels and conventional fuels H Develop new fuel specifications relevant to the new engine technology and confirm applicability via “round robin” testing (in this case, the appropriate refinery tests need to be included)

H

Better characterization and analytical techniques for all components, including cyclo-paraffins (including clarification of appropriate analytical techniques)

H

Develop correlations between molecular structure and engine response H 5. Emission Control Systems

Description of the Knowledge or Other Gap Priority Impact of Gasoline OSDF on existing gasoline engines: 3-way catalysts, EGR, systems, intake valve deposits and catalyst fouling

H

Impact of Diesel OSDF on existing 3-way catalysts, oxy catalysts, EGR systems, soot filters, coolers, gaskets and seals, deposits

H

The impact of OSDF-Diesel on Lean NOx trap, urea SCR, or HC SCR catalysts and system performance

H

How do OSDF fuels reform differently in-cylinder or in on-board reformers. How will any differences affect engine or catalyst performance

H

The challenges or opportunities for OSFD and emission controls from mixed mode, LTC and HCCI engines

H

Confirmation of OSDF emissions-related results with multiple-cylinder engines and extended tests

LWR

On Board Devices to measure fuel properties and combustion performance H




18.0 APPENDIX A4: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS




Oil

Sand

s Che

mis

try a

nd E

ngin

e E

mis

sion

s Roa

dmap

Wor

ksho

p Ju

ne 6

-7, 2

005

E

dmon

ton,

Alb

erta

, Can

ada

LIST

OF

PAR

TIC

IPAN

TS

Nam

e A

ffili

atio

n T

elep

hone

E

-mai

l

Patri

cia

Arb

oled

a N

atio

nal C

entre

for U

pgra

ding

Tec

hnol

ogy

1-78

0-98

7-87

24

parb

oled

@nr

can.

gc.c

a

And

y B

ereg

szas

zy

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es C

anad

a 1-

613-

943-

8840

ab

ereg

sz@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

Noë

l Bill

ette

N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Can

ada

1-61

3-99

2-37

38

Noe

l.Bill

ette

@nr

can-

rnca

n.gc

.ca

Tim

Bla

ckm

ore

Om

nico

n C

onsu

ltant

s Inc

. 1-

780-

915-

7912

te

blac

kmor

e@om

nico

n.ca

Dub

ravk

a B

ulut

N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Can

ada

1-61

3-99

5-35

51

dbul

ut@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

Bru

ce B

untin

g O

ak R

idge

Nat

iona

l Lab

orat

ory

1-86

5-94

6-15

12

bunt

ingb

g@or

nl.g

ov

Gra

ham

Cam

pbel

l N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Can

ada

1-61

3-99

5-88

60

Gra

ham

.Cam

pbel

l@nr

can.

gc.c

a

Jinw

en C

hen

Nat

ural

Cen

tre fo

r Upg

radi

ng T

echn

olog

y 1-

780-

987-

8763

jic

hen@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

Jean

Coo

ley

Sync

rude

Can

ada

Ltd.

1-

780-

970-

6934

co

oley

.jean

@sy

ncru

de.c

om

Fred

Cor

nfor

th

Con

ocoP

hilli

ps C

ompa

ny

1-91

8-66

1-94

76

fred

.cor

nfor

th@

cono

coph

illip

s.com

Nea

l Cur

rier

Cum

min

s, In

c.

1-81

2-37

7-46

25

neal

.w.c

urrie

r@cu

mm

ins.c

om

Bill

Daw

son

Nat

iona

l Cen

tre fo

r Upg

radi

ng T

echn

olog

y 1-

780-

987-

8656

bd

awso

n@nr

can.

gc.c

a

Eliz

abet

h Es

corih

uela

En

viro

nmen

t Can

ada

1-81

9-99

4-29

01

Eliz

abet

h.Es

corih

uela

@ec

.gc.

ca

Cra

ig F

airb

ridge

N

atio

nal C

entre

for U

pgra

ding

Tec

hnol

ogy

1-78

0-98

7-86

18

crai

g@nr

can.

gc.c

a

Gai

l Fla

herty

R

enai

ssan

ce In

genu

ity In

c.

1-40

3-24

2-98

62

gfla

herty

@sh

aw.c

a

Len

Flin

t LE

NEF

Con

sulti

ng L

imite

d 1-

403-

238-

0484

le

nef@

telu

s.net

Jam

es F

ranz

Pa

cific

Nor

thw

est N

atio

nal L

abor

ator

y 1-

509-

375-

2967

ja

mes

.fran

z@pn

l.gov

Thom

as G

alla

nt

Paci

fic N

orth

wes

t Nat

iona

l Lab

orat

ory

1-50

9-37

2-68

37

thom

as.g

alla

nt@

pnl.g

ov

John

Gor

don

Cer

amat

ec In

c.

1-80

1-97

8-21

38

john

g@ce

ram

atec

.com

Lisa

Gra

ham

En

viro

nmen

t Can

ada

1-61

3-99

0-12

70

lisa.

grah

am@

ec.g

c.ca

Dr.

Mur

ray

R. G

ray

Uni

vers

ity o

f Alb

erta

1-

780-

492-

7965

/492

-281

6 m

urra

y.gr

ay@

ualb

erta

.ca

Hug

h G

uthr

ie

USD

OE

NET

L 1-

304-

285-

4632

hg

uthr

@ne

tl.do

e.go

v

Tom

Hal

ford

Pe

tro-C

anad

a 1-

403-

296-

4174

ha

lford

@pe

tro-c

anad

a.ca

185

Oil

Sand

s Che

mis

try a

nd E

ngin

e E

mis

sion

s Roa

dmap

Wor

ksho

p Ju

ne 6

-7, 2

005

E

dmon

ton,

Alb

erta

, Can

ada

LIST

OF

PAR

TIC

IPAN

TS

Nam

e A

ffili

atio

n T

elep

hone

E

-mai

l

Tim

othy

John

son

Cor

ning

Inc.

1-

607-

974-

7184

jo

hnso

ntv@

corn

ing.

com

Jam

es K

elly

N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Can

ada

1-61

3 99

6-03

96

jkel

ly@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

Bria

n K

enne

y Pe

tro-C

anad

a 1-

905-

804-

4607

bk

enne

y@pe

tro-c

anad

a.ca

Kel

ly K

ishi

uchi

N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Can

ada

1-61

3-99

5-34

77

kkis

hiuc

@nr

can.

gc.c

a

Mic

hael

Kol

eda

Kol

eda

Con

sulti

ng In

c.

1-70

3-27

6-06

00

mko

leda

@kc

ihq.

com

Van

ce K

opp

Sunc

or E

nerg

y U

SA

1-30

3-79

3-80

62

vkop

p@su

ncor

.com

Dav

id L

ax

Am

eric

an P

etro

leum

Inst

itute

1-

202-

682-

8479

la

x@ap

i.org

S. W

in L

ee

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es C

anad

a 1-

613-

996-

3873

sw

lee@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

And

ré L

emie

ux

Om

nico

n C

onsu

ltant

s Inc

. 1-

780-

975-

3026

ap

lem

ieux

@om

nico

n.ca

And

y M

ain

Impe

rial O

il R

esou

rces

1-

403-

284-

7410

an

drew

.j.m

ain@

esso

.ca

Den

nis M

cAnd

rew

G

E R

ail

1-81

4-87

5-51

76

denn

is.m

cand

rew

@tra

ns.g

e.co

m

Thom

as M

cCra

cken

N

atio

nal R

esea

rch

Cou

ncil

Can

ada

1-61

3-99

3-95

69

thom

.mcc

rack

en@

nrc-

cnrc

.gc.

ca

Ric

hard

McF

arla

ne

Alb

erta

Res

earc

h C

ounc

il 1-

780-

450-

5257

m

cfar

lane

@ar

c.ab

.ca

Ken

Mitc

hell

Shel

l Can

ada

Prod

ucts

1-

403-

691-

2877

K

en.M

itche

ll@sh

ell.c

a

Cha

rles M

uelle

r Sa

ndia

Nat

iona

l Lab

orat

orie

s 1-

925-

294-

2223

cj

mue

ll@sa

ndia

.gov

Mar

k P.

B. M

uscu

lus

Sand

ia N

atio

nal L

abor

ator

ies

1-92

5-29

4-34

35

mpm

uscu

@sa

ndia

.gov

Stua

rt N

eill

Nat

iona

l Res

earc

h C

ounc

il 1-

613-

990-

2408

St

uart.

Nei

ll@nr

c-cn

rc.g

c.ca

Nak

ajim

a N

obum

asa

Cos

mo

Oil

Com

pany

Ltd

. 1-

780-

987-

8794

nn

akaj

ima@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

Nic

olet

ta P

anar

iti

Enite

cnol

ogie

+3

9-02

-520

5620

5 ni

cole

tta.p

anar

iti@

enite

cnol

ogie

.eni

.it

Jam

es P

atte

n B

atte

lle

1-61

4-42

4-37

92

patte

nj@

batte

lle.o

rg

Ren

é Pi

geon

N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Can

ada

1-61

3-94

3-88

40

pige

on@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

186

Oil

Sand

s Che

mis

try a

nd E

ngin

e E

mis

sion

s Roa

dmap

Wor

ksho

p Ju

ne 6

-7, 2

005

E

dmon

ton,

Alb

erta

, Can

ada

LIST

OF

PAR

TIC

IPAN

TS

Nam

e A

ffili

atio

n T

elep

hone

E

-mai

l

Will

iam

J. P

itz

Law

renc

e Li

verm

ore

Nat

iona

l Lab

orat

ory

1-92

5-42

2-77

30

pitz

1@lln

l.gov

Parv

iz R

ahim

i N

atio

nal C

entre

for U

pgra

ding

Tec

hnol

ogy

1-78

0-98

7-87

08

rahi

mi@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

Zbig

niew

Rin

g N

atio

nal C

entre

for U

pgra

ding

Tec

hnol

ogy

1-78

0-98

7-86

79

zrin

g@nr

can.

gc.c

a

Thom

as R

yan

Sout

hwes

t Res

earc

h In

stitu

te

1-21

0-52

2-31

92

tryan

@sw

ri.or

g

Nat

alie

She

a N

atur

al R

esou

rces

Can

ada

1-61

3-94

4-51

30

nshe

a@nr

can.

gc.c

a

Lau

Shek

Sy

ncru

de C

anad

a Lt

d.

1-78

0-79

0-56

50

lau.

shek

@sy

ncru

de.c

om

Gre

g Sm

allw

ood

Nat

iona

l Res

earc

h C

ounc

il C

anad

a 1-

613-

993-

1391

G

reg.

Smal

lwoo

d@nr

c-cn

rc.g

c.ca

And

rzej

Sob

iesi

ak

Uni

vers

ity o

f Win

dsor

1-

519-

253-

3000

ext

. 388

6 as

obie

s@uw

inds

or.c

a

Kev

in S

tork

U

.S. D

epar

tmen

t of E

nerg

y 1-

202-

586-

8306

ke

vin.

stor

k@ee

.usd

oe.g

ov

F. D

exte

r Sut

terf

ield

N

atio

nal E

nerg

y Te

chno

logy

Lab

orat

ory

1-91

8-69

9-20

02

dext

er.su

tterf

ield

@ne

tl.do

e.go

v

Rod

Sw

eer

Citg

o Pe

trole

um C

orpo

ratio

n 1-

630-

257-

4124

rs

wee

r@ci

tgo.

com

Hie

u Tr

an

EnC

ana

Mid

stre

am &

Mar

ketin

g 1-

403-

645-

2989

hi

eu.tr

an@

EnC

ana.

com

John

Van

Hey

st

Sunc

or E

nerg

y M

arke

ting

Inc.

1-

403-

920-

8922

jv

anhe

yst@

sunc

or.c

om

Jim

Wal

lace

U

nive

rsity

of T

oron

to

1-41

6-97

8-48

99

wal

lace

@m

ie.u

toro

nto.

ca

Jerr

y W

ang

Cum

min

s 1-

812-

377-

2267

je

rry.

c.w

ang@

cum

min

s.com

Gar

y W

ebst

er

Adv

ance

d En

gine

Tec

hnol

ogy

Ltd.

(AET

) 1-

613-

721-

1234

ga

ry@

aet.c

a

Shaw

n W

hita

cre

Nat

iona

l Ren

ewab

le E

nerg

y La

bora

tory

1-

303-

275-

4267

sh

awn_

whi

tacr

e@nr

el.g

ov

Thom

as H

. Wis

e Pu

rvin

& G

ertz

1-

403-

266-

7086

w

ise@

purv

inge

rtz.c

om

Jose

ph W

ong

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es C

anad

a 1-

613-

992-

6207

jo

won

g@nr

can.

gc.c

a

Hon

g Y

ang

Alb

erta

Res

earc

h C

ounc

il 1-

780-

987-

8725

hy

ang@

nrca

n.gc

.ca

187



19.0 APPENDIX A5: WORKSHOP AGENDA Sunday, June 5

5:30-7:00 p.m. Registration (lobby) Monday, June 6 7:00 a.m. Registration and breakfast Opening C. Fairbridge NCUT 7:45 a.m. Welcome Bill Dawson NCUT 7:55 a.m. Workshop Goals K. Stork Office of FreedomCAR and Vehicle Technologies 8:05 a.m. International Collaboration G. Campbell NRCan Plenary Sessions L. Flint LENEF Consulting 8:15 a.m. Oil Sands Overview T. Wise Purvin & Gertz 8:45 a.m. Upgrading and Refining of Bitumen Derived Crude Oil T. Halford Petro-Canada 9:15 a.m. Chemistry and Analysis of Bitumen Derived Crudes and Fuels M. Gray University of Alberta 9:45 a.m. Impact of Oil-Sands Derived Fuels on Existing Engines S. Neill National Research Council 10:15 a.m. Coffee 10:30 a.m. Emerging Trends in Advanced Combustion Strategies C. Mueller Sandia National Laboratory 11:00 a.m. Speculation on the Impact of Fuel Properties on T. Ryan Advanced Combustion Southwest Research Institute 11:30 a.m. Panel discussion and questions L. Flint LENEF Consulting 12:30 p.m. Lunch 1:30 to 2:15 p.m. Breakout session #1 2:30 to 3:15 p.m. Breakout session #2 3:15 p.m. Coffee 3:45 to 4:30 p.m. Breakout session #3 6:30 p.m. Reception and dinner


Tuesday, June 7 7:00 a.m. Breakfast 7:45 to 8:30 a.m. Breakout session #4 8:45 to 9:30 a.m. Breakout session #5 9:30 a.m. Coffee Plenary Session G. Smallwood National Research Council 10:20 a.m. Plenary session with feedback (20 mts each for 7 sessions) Breakout Facilitators 12:30 p.m. Lunch 1:30 p.m. Key Knowledge Gaps and Priorities L. Flint LENEF Consulting 2:45 p.m. Closing Remarks D. Sutterfield National Energy Technology Laboratory Breakout Sessions These sessions will be 45 minutes each and held simultaneously. All participants will be able to participate in at least 5 sessions. Advanced Engine Combustion with Diesel-Like Facilitator: C. Mueller (Sandia) Oil-Sands-Derived Fuels Rapporteur: R. Pigeon (NRCan) Advanced Engine Combustion with Gasoline-Like Facilitator: M. Musculus (Sandia) Oil-Sands-Derived Fuels Rapporteur: T. McCracken (NRC) Fuels Processing Facilitator: R. McFarlane (ARC) Rapporteur: N. Billette (NRCan) Fuels Characterization Facilitators: P. Rahimi (NCUT) and A. Lemieux (Omnicon) Rapporteur: P. Arboleda (NCUT) Impacts of Oil Sands Fuels on Emerging Facilitators: B. Bunting (Oak Ridge) and T. Johnson (Corning) Emission Controls Rapporteur: J. Kelly (NRCan) Fuels of the Future Facilitator: S. Whitacre (Nat. Renew. Energy Lab) Rapporteur: C. Fairbridge (NCUT) Implications of Oil-Sands-Derived Fuels on Facilitators: T. Gallant (Pacific Northwest) and J. Wang (Cummins) Existing Engines Rapporteur: N. Shea (NRCan)







June 6-7, 2005


Oil Sands Chemistry & Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop – June 6-7, 2005

Date post:	20-Dec-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

Oil Sands Chemistry and Engine Emissions Roadmap Workshop

Documents