Overview of the Article.
The article by Bari, Zietsman, Quadrifoglio, & Farzaneh (2011) explains a framework which was developed to aid managers of construction equipment, especially those in charge of decision making in the deployment of emission reduction technologies. Noteworthy, this is in order for individuals in charge of decision making to take advantage of the benefits associated with emission reduction, as well as cost savings associated with fuel consumed by construction equipment. The framework that depends on a cost-effectiveness analysis is demonstrated using the HE – hydrogen enrichment, FA – fuel additive, as well as the SCR- selective catalytic reduction emission reduction technologies that have different performance and operation attributes. Bari et al. (2011) note that the structure of the framework is very straight forward and flexible and can be utilized to any emission reduction technology. Therefore, they recommend it for application and implementation on both no-road and on-road sources. Further, the authors also identify and recommend several options or strategies for emission reduction including retrofitting, repowering, replacing, as well as rebuilding Hydrogen Enrichment (HE), Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR), And Fuel Additive (FA) Technologies.
HE is an emission reduction technology in which a mixture of hydrogen and traditional hydrocarbon fuel is utilized in an internal combustion engine. It involves the generation of hydrogen via electrolysis, reformation of traditional fuel using a catalyst, as well the storing of the hydrogen either in another fuel or on automobiles. Hydrogen Emission results in the creation of a better flame front that assist in the reduction of emissions from the engine. On the other hand, SCR refers to an advanced emission reduction technology system that is often used in diesel engines. This system injects, via a special catalyst, a liquid-reducing agent into a diesel engine’s exhaust pipe. It is the reductant that results in a chemical reaction which conducts NOx in nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and water, as well as other natural components that are expelled via the car’s tailpipe. Finally, FA is an emissions reduction technology that can either reduce emission by the engine, as well as improve fuel consumption.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Optimal Deployment of Emissions Reduction Technologies for Construction Equipment".
The Advantages and Disadvantages Of HE, SCR, And FA, Including a Discussion of Costs
These three emission reduction technologies, Bari et al (2011) assert, have different performance and operation attributes; they also have different advantages and disadvantages. For instance, in terms of cost, SCR is considered as the most expensive yet is efficient when it comes to the reduction of emissions; it however has some fuel penalties. On the other hand, FA is the least expensive in terms of costs, yet it is the least inefficient when it comes reduction of emissions; furthermore, it offers no fuel economy. HE is mildly expensive and efficient in emission reduction and is considered to be better when it comes to fuel reduction – economy.
Does the Computer Model Do a Satisfactory Job of Determining the Best Technology? Explain.
The computer model does a fairly good job in determining which of the three technology is better. This is because it looks beyond what the technology does, but also compares the associated costs, the combined accrued benefits, as well as the rate at which each of the technologies results in NOx reductions. In fact, it also puts into consideration the unique attributes of each technology.
What Would Be Your Recommendations as Far as Which Technology (HE, SCR, and/or FA) Should Be Used, or Should None Be Used?
As far as which technology should or should not be used, I would recommend first determining the type of combustion engine and fuel used. Secondly, I will recommend determining the cost savings and emission reduction rates projected. Once this is done, the findings of model described by Bari et al (2011) can be relied on to choose which technology to use or not to use.
- Bari, M. E., Zietsman, J., Quadrifoglio, L., & Farzaneh, M. (2011). Optimal deployment of emissions reduction technologies for construction equipment. Journal of Air & Waste Management, 61, 611–630.
