The Impacts of Running our Fleet Vehicles on Propane
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
In my last article, I focused on the seemingly overlooked benefits of using propane as fuel for our vehicles. The merits of propane have been recognized by city governments, propane alliances, and the Department of Energy through its Clean Cities program. And with the current increase in domestic oil supply, comes an increase in domestic propane supply. Yet, relative to oil, there are few uses for propane in this country, even though we’ve got a lot of it and we’ve recognized the benefits of running our most prolific energy user on propane: automobiles.
And if we were going to prove the concept in practice, the natural place to start would be with the heaviest fuel users – the vehicles that get the lowest number of miles per gallon of fuel, have the biggest fuel tanks, refuel most often, and travel in packs – fleet vehicles. Converting fleet vehicles to run on propane has the biggest impact, since they’re doing the heavy lifting. Think about fleet vehicles in cities: they’re performing road maintenance and parks maintenance, fleets include city buses and school buses, as well as police cars and emergency vehicles that can’t afford to operate on low-range electric plug-in options.
If SD converted 5% of its fleet vehicles to run on propane…
The county of San Diego manages a fleet of over 3,800 vehicles performing a variety of services in the city and county. The San Diego regional area is a member of the Clean Cities coalition run by the Department of Energy, which works with vehicle fleets, fuel providers, and community leaders to reduce petroleum use in transportation. It’s feasible to think that San Diego could convert 5% of their fleet vehicles in an effort to directly reduce their dependence on oil and to capture the other benefits of propane as automobile gas. As we learned last month, these benefits include reduced emissions for better air quality, savings on fuel costs, and reduced maintenance costs.
The EPA regulates the process for converting vehicles from gas to propane; more specifically, the EPA issues conversion certificates to authorized dealers who have paid to have their process for conversion seen and permitted by the EPA. The authorization signifies that vehicles converted by the dealer will be in accordance with EPA emissions standards. A certification must be gained by the dealer for each engine family that they wish to work with, and the certificates don’t come cheap. For the county of San Diego, it would make sense to pay a dealer to convert their light duty fleet vehicles, which would come at an upfront cost of around $6,000 per vehicle. The savings on fuel and maintenance costs will offset the upfront investment in converting the 190 vehicles, representing 5% of San Diego’s fleet.
The County Would Save Big
Gas prices have taken a noticeable dip in the past months, however, propane prices have remained lower still. At this time last year, and on average over the past few years, propane prices have been $1.25 – $1.50 cheaper per gallon than gas prices. This savings on fuel is largely where fleet managers recoup the high upfront costs incurred for converting their fleets’ gas engines to run on propane. The latest data on fuel prices, for the week of February 23, puts the national average price of gas at $2.42, and the national average price of propane at $2.36.
So, even with lower than average gas prices and assuming they stay this low all year, if San Diego were to convert 5% of their 3,800 fleet vehicles to run on propane, and assuming the average fuel economy of a US light duty fleet vehicle is 17.1 mpg, and the average light duty city fleet vehicle travels 14,536 miles per year, San Diego would save $9,690 on fuel costs alone this year.
In a ‘normal’ year, with fuel prices at an average of $1.25 more than propane prices, San Diego would be looking at a fuel savings to the tune of $202,000 per year.
Apart from the decrease in fuel costs, maintenance costs are also documented as being cheaper for propane vehicles than for gasoline engines. By some estimates, maintenance costs are reduced by 50% when running an auto engine on propane.
San Diego would be doing its residents a service in converting vehicles to propane through the benefits the public would reap in better air quality. The Ford F-series trucks have been the number one selling light duty vehicle in the US for the past 27 consecutive years, and the GHG emissions numbers below have been calculated based on a Ford F-150 traveling 10,000 miles per year at the 14.7 average mpg. We can see from the table that by converting 5% of their fleet, San Diego would be directly reducing the amount of carbon equivalents (think emissions & particulates) in the air by 1,340 kgs per vehicle per year, which adds up to 254,600 kgs per year, and cleaner air in San Diego.
Not to mention that San Diego’s 190 conversions would directly reduce our nation’s oil consumption by over 161,500 gallons of gas per year. The impacts and implications of running just a small percentage of our vehicles on propane are huge, so the last piece of the puzzle remains – what about the infrastructure? Stay tuned for the final article in this series that will examine the barriers to running and sustaining a propane vehicle economy.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
People seem frequently to assume that the terms “sustainability” and “resilience” are synonyms, an impression reinforced by the frequent use of the term “climate resilience”, which seems to enmesh both concepts firmly. In fact, while they frequently overlap, and indeed with good policy and planning reinforce one another, they are not the same. This article picks them apart to understand where one ends and the other begins, and where the “sweet spot” lies in achieving mutual reinforcement to the benefit of disaster risk reduction (DRR).
As extreme weather conditions become the new normal—from floods in Baton Rouge and Venice to wildfires in California, we need to clean and save stormwater for future use while protecting communities from flooding and exposure to contaminated water. Changing how we manage stormwater has the potential to preserve access to water for future generations; prevent unnecessary illnesses, injuries, and damage to communities; and increase investments in green, climate-resilient infrastructure, with a focus on communities where these kinds of investments are most needed.
A few years ago, I worked with some ARISE-US members to carry out a survey of small businesses in post-Katrina New Orleans of disaster risk reduction (DRR) awareness. One theme stood out to me more than any other. The businesses that had lived through Katrina and survived well understood the need to be prepared and to have continuity plans. Those that were new since Katrina all tended to have the view that, to paraphrase, “well, government (city, state, federal…) will take care of things”.
While the experience after Katrina, of all disasters, should be enough to show anyone in the US that there are limits on what government can do, it does raise the question, of what could and should public and private sectors expect of one another?