Air Quality

Report as inappropriate Your report has been received

Shared by: jennyyingdi

Tags

Stats

views:: 2
posted:: 3/31/2012
language:
pages:: 92

Public Domain

Document Sample

5/26/2011

Air Quality

EPA News Release
January 6, 2010

• EPA proposes to strengthen national air
quality standards for ozone
• New proposed standard of 60 – 70 parts
per billion
• Current standard is 75 parts p billion
p per
set in 2008
• Responds to criticisms that public health
not being protected with an adequate
margin of safety

1
5/26/2011

Estimated Timeline for Revised Standards

Milestone Date
Final Rule August 31, 2010
State Designation
Early Spring 2011
Recommendations to EPA
Final Designations Effective August 2011

MPO Subject to Conformity
MPOs S bj t t C f it Approx. A
A t
August 2012

SIPs Due Approx. December 2013
2014-2031
Attainment Dates
(depending on severity of problem)

2
5/26/2011

National Air Quality Standards

• Standards established by Clean Air Act in 1990
• Fourth highest reading each year averaged over
3 years; that average compared to ppb standard
• If average exceeds standard, area will be
non attainment
declared non-attainment
• Exceedances at ANY of four sites affects the
designation for the entire three county area

Current Attainment Status:
Seminole State College, Seminole Co.

Year 4th Highest 8 Hr Avg Date
2011 68 Mar 23
2010 66 Jul 9
2009 62 May 8

2009-2011 Three-Year Running Average = 65
(Highest Reading: May 19 = 81)

3
5/26/2011

Current Attainment Status:
Morse & Denning, Winter Park, Orange Co.

Year 4th Highest 8 Hr Avg Date
2011 68 May 13
2010 70 Apr 22
2009 65 May 5

2009-2011 Three-Year Running Average = 67
(Highest Reading: May 19 = 78)

Current Attainment Status:
Winegard Elementary, Pinecastle, Orange Co.

Year 4th Highest 8 Hr Avg Date
2011 71 Mar 22
2010 71 Oct 10
2009 66 Jun 19

2009-2011 Three-Year Average = 69
(Highest Readings: May 8 = 78 and May 7 = 76)

4
5/26/2011

Current Attainment Status:
Four Corners Fire Station, Osceola Co.

Year 4th Highest 8 Hr Avg Date
2011 68 May 10
2010 67 Apr 29
2009 63 Apr 16

2009-2011 Three-Year Average = 66
(Highest Reading: Mar 18 = 73)

5
2008 Emissions Inventory for Orange,
Seminole, and Osceola Counties
A Final Report (Corrected)

By:
Jessica Ross, EI, Graduate Research Assistant
C. David Cooper, PhD, PE, QEP, Professor

University of Central Florida
Department of Civil, Environmental,
and Construction Engineering
February 28, 2011
Table of Contents
List of Figures and Tables .............................................................................................................................. 2
Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 4
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 7
Literature Review .......................................................................................................................................... 9
Description of Inventory Source Types ....................................................................................................... 12
On-road mobile sources...................................................................................................................... 12
Non-road mobile sources.................................................................................................................... 12
Point Sources .......................................................................................................................................... 12
Area Sources ........................................................................................................................................... 13
The Orlando Urban Area Inventory Results ................................................................................................ 14
Mobile Sources ....................................................................................................................................... 14
On-road ............................................................................................................................................... 14
Non-road ............................................................................................................................................. 17
Point Sources .......................................................................................................................................... 20
Area Sources ........................................................................................................................................... 23
2008 Inventory compared with 2002 Results ............................................................................................. 26
Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 29
Mobile Sources ....................................................................................................................................... 29
On-road ............................................................................................................................................... 29
Non-road ............................................................................................................................................. 31
Point Sources .......................................................................................................................................... 33
Area Sources ........................................................................................................................................... 34
Total Emissions per County by Source Category .................................................................................... 35
Orange County .................................................................................................................................... 35
Seminole County ................................................................................................................................. 36
Osceola County ................................................................................................................................... 37
References .................................................................................................................................................. 38

1
List of Figures and Tables
Figure EX-1 – Total VOC emissions for OSO by source category .................................................................. 5
Figure EX-2 – Total NOx emissions for OSO by source category ................................................................... 5
Figure EX-3 – Total CO2 emissions for OSO by source category ................................................................... 6

Figure 1 – Correlation of RSD measurements to MOBILE6 default values for the Denver metropolitan
area (Pokharel et al, 2002) .......................................................................................................................... 11
Figure 2 – 2008 On-road VOC contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area ......................................... 15
Figure 3 – 2008 On-road NOx contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area .......................................... 15
Figure 4 – 2008 On-road CO2 contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area .......................................... 16
Figure 5 – 2008 Non-road VOC contributions by source for the OSO area* .............................................. 18
Figure 6 – 2008 Non-road NOx contributions by source for the OSO area* ............................................... 18
Figure 7 – 2008 Non-road CO2 contributions by source for the OSO area ................................................. 19
Figure 8 – 2008 Point source VOC contributions by source for the OSO area* ......................................... 22
Figure 9 – 2008 Point source NOx contributions by source for the OSO area* .......................................... 22
Figure 10 – 2008 Area source VOC contributions by source for the OSO area .......................................... 25
Figure 11 – 2008 Area source NOx contributions by source for the OSO area ........................................... 25
Figure 12 – 2008 Total VOC emissions for the OSO area ............................................................................ 27
Figure 13 – 2008 Total NOx emissions for the OSO area ............................................................................ 28
Figure 14 – 2008 Total CO2 emissions for the OSO area............................................................................. 28
Figure 15 – 2008 On-road VOC Contributions for OSO............................................................................... 29
Figure 16 – 2008 On-road NOx Contributions for OSO ............................................................................... 30
Figure 17 – 2008 On-road CO2 Contributions for OSO................................................................................ 30
Figure 18 – 2008 Non-road VOC Contributions for OSO............................................................................. 31
Figure 19 – 2008 Non-road NOx Contributions for OSO ............................................................................. 31
Figure 20 – 2008 Non-road CO2 Contributions for OSO.............................................................................. 32
Figure 21 – 2008 Point Source VOC Contributions for OSO........................................................................ 33
Figure 22 – 2008 Point Source NOx Contributions for OSO ........................................................................ 33
Figure 23 – 2008 Area Source VOC Contributions for OSO ........................................................................ 34
Figure 24 – 2008 Area Source NOx Contributions for OSO ......................................................................... 34
Figure 25 – 2008 Orange county VOC emissions by source........................................................................ 35
Figure 26 – 2008 Orange county NOx emissions by source ........................................................................ 35
Figure 27 – 2008 Seminole county VOC emissions by source .................................................................... 36
Figure 28 – 2008 Seminole county NOx emissions by source ..................................................................... 36
Figure 29 – 2008 Osceola county VOC emissions by source....................................................................... 37
Figure 30 – 2008 Osceola county NOx emissions by source ....................................................................... 37

Table EX-1 – Total OSO emissions by source category ................................................................................. 4

2
Table 1 – VOC and NOx emissions based on the NONROAD program for California 2002 (Strum et al,
2007) ........................................................................................................................................................... 10
Table 2 – 2008 On-road mobile source emission totals for OSO by vehicle type....................................... 14
Table 3 – 2008 NONROAD Emission totals for OSO .................................................................................... 17
Table 4 – 2008 Point source emission totals for OSO ................................................................................. 21
Table 5 – 2008 Annual NOx and CO2 emissions of OSO power plants ........................................................ 21
Table 6 – 2008 EDMS airport (aircraft) emission results ............................................................................ 21
Table 7 – List of categories included in area sources.................................................................................. 23
Table 8 – 2008 Area Source Emission Totals for OSO ................................................................................. 24
Table 9 – 2008 CO2 emissions from residential heating by fuel type ......................................................... 24
Table 10 – 2002 and 2008 OSO emission totals for VOC and NOx ............................................................. 26
Table 11 – 2008 OSO Emission totals.......................................................................................................... 27

3
Executive Summary
An emissions inventory for the year 2008 has been completed for the Orlando Urban Area
(OUA), composed of Orange, Seminole, and Osceola (OSO) Counties. The inventory focused on
VOC and NOx emissions, both of which are precursors to ozone, but also included CO2
emissions. The inventory was developed using methods, data, and models endorsed by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. In agreement with the previous inventory (2002), the current
results show the importance of on-road and non-road mobile sources for VOCs and NOx, along
with the significant contributions of area sources to total regional VOC emissions as well as the
significant contributions of point sources to total NOx emissions. In spite of overall population
growth since the previous inventory, emissions of VOCs and NOx declined during the past 6
years, especially from mobile sources. This decrease was due mostly to the improvements on
both on-road and non-road vehicles that resulted from federally-mandated steps by
manufacturers to reduce pollution from new vehicles and engines.

The overall picture of emissions in OSO is given in Table EX-1, and the percentages of VOCs and
NOx from each major source group are shown in Figure EX-1 and Figure EX-2. As can be seen
from Table EX-1, total VOC emissions in the OSO region are about 71,000 tons/year, and NOx
emissions are about 59,000 tons/year. Of these totals, on-road vehicles (cars, SUVs, trucks,
buses, etc.) emit about 33% of the VOCs and 64% of the NOx. Non-road sources (construction
equipment, lawn and garden equipment, boats, etc.) emit about 21% of the region’s VOCs, and
about 17% of its NOx. Area sources (chemicals and paints, gasoline stations, printing and
coating operations, open burning, etc.) emit a large portion of the VOCs – about 43%, while
point sources (mostly power plants) emit about 19% of the NOx.

Table EX-1 – Total OSO emissions by source category

Source VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr CO2, tons/yr
On-road 23,582 37,726 12,608,634
Non-road 15,190 10,172 1,348,158
Point 1,901 10,987 8,627,199
Area 30,648 158 147,158
TOTALS 71,321 59,043 22,731,149

4
2008 Total OSO VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 71,321 tons)

On-road
33%
Area
43%

Point Non-road
3% 21%

Figure EX-1 – Total VOC emissions for OSO by source category

2008 Total OSO NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 59,043 tons)
Area
Point <1%
19%

Non-road
17%
On-road
64%

Figure EX-2 – Total NOx emissions for OSO by source category

5
2008 OSO CO2 Emissions by Source
(total = 22,731,149 tons)
Area
1%

Point
38%
On-road
55%

Non-road
6%

Figure EX-3 – Total CO2 emissions for OSO by source category

In addition to VOCs and NOx emissions, we also estimated CO2 emissions as part of this project.
That additional information (although not part of the original contracted work) was included
because of the current interest in global climate change emissions throughout the region, the
state and the nation. Total emissions of CO2 in the region were estimated to be about 23 million
tons per year, of which about 62% came from the mobile sources (mostly on-road) and about
38% from point sources.

6
Introduction
This report contains an emissions inventory for the Orange, Seminole, and Osceola (OSO) tri-
county area, also called the Orlando Urban Area (OUA). Volatile organic compounds (VOC),
nitrogen oxide (NOx), and carbon dioxide (CO2) pollutant emissions were tallied for the 2008
calendar year. An emission inventory is an important tool in managing air quality for any region
because it gives managers and decision makers a good tool for focusing their efforts to reduce
emissions of particular types (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004).

VOCs and NOx are known as “ozone precursors” and in the presence of sunlight can react in the
atmosphere to form ground-level ozone (O3). VOCs are emitted as gases from solvents or fuels,
have high vapor pressures, and low water solubility. They can exist in many forms, ranging
from simple hydrocarbons such as butane or benzene, to oxygenates like formaldehyde or
methyl ethyl ketone, to chlorinated solvents such as trichloroethylene. NOx is emitted from
sources where high temperature combustion occurs, including diesel engines in motor vehicles,
large steam-electric power generation boilers, and industrial furnaces (U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1998). NOx contributes to acid rain formation and react with VOCs to create
ground-level ozone. Ground-level ozone is a criteria pollutant that can cause serious health
problems. In addition to VOCs and NOx emissions, we also estimated CO2 emissions as part of
this project. That additional information (although not part of the original contracted work) was
included because of the current interest in global climate change emissions throughout the
region, the state and the nation.

In this inventory, emissions are categorized into four main source types: on-road mobile, non-
road mobile, point, and area. On-road mobile sources include vehicles such as cars, SUVs,
trucks, buses, motorcycles, etc. Non-road mobile sources include lawn equipment, pleasure
craft (e.g., boats and jet skis), construction and mining equipment, and others. The area source
category is comprised of numerous small emission sources that do not individually emit enough
to be considered point sources, but, as a group, are large contributors. Area sources consist of
restaurants, dry cleaning facilities, printers, painting operations, wildfires, architectural coating,
pesticides, auto body refinishing, gasoline stations, and others. Point sources are large facilities
or industrial sites that require air permits for their emissions and must submit an annual report.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set minimum emission requirements
for point sources at 25 tons of VOCs and 10 tons of NOx annually (Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, January 2010). Point sources may include power plants, airports,
boat manufacturers, hospitals, food production facilities, concrete plants, and large printing
firms, among others.

Computer models developed by the EPA and Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) were used to
estimate mobile (both on-road and non-road), and airport emissions, respectively. EPA

7
guidelines and journal articles were reviewed and followed to prepare the emissions inventory
and provide accurate results. Florida DEP permits were reviewed to obtain estimates of point
source emissions in the OUA. For area source emissions, we obtained data from the 2008
National Emission Inventory (“2008 National emissions inventory data & documentation,”
2010).

The last inventory for Metroplan Orlando was prepared in 2002 (Arbrandt, 2003). In the six
years between inventories, there have been significant changes in population, on-road and
non-road vehicles (and their emission characteristics), construction and development activity in
the region, and the opening and closing of manufacturing facilities. Current data were
gathered, and newer EPA models were used (compared with 2002) to produce the 2008
Emission Inventory. In general, there was good agreement with the previous inventory; the
details of the differences and similarities of this work with the previous emission inventory can
be seen in the results presented herein.

8
Literature Review
The US EPA performs a national emissions inventory every three years. It is a comprehensive
list that includes VOCs and NOx, as well as other compounds such as ammonia, methane, sulfur
oxides, and more. It is important to quantify these emissions in order to manage emissions to
better protect the nation’s air quality, and to assess the need for new regulations to preserve
and/or improve air quality.

Emissions can be estimated in two ways. One way is by using computer models and inputting
the required data so that the model can use standard algorithms to calculate emissions for the
specific scenarios. The second way is by making use of emission factors and multiplying each
factor by its appropriate unit of measure. For example, if the factor is given as pounds per
capita, it will be multiplied by a county-wide population to give total emissions for that
particular county.

The methods for the estimation of VOC, NOx, and CO2 emissions have been discussed in many
articles in professional journals. Some of these articles used the same estimation methods that
we used, and thus validate the methods used to produce this emissions inventory. The
following review provides detailed support for the methods used to quantify the emissions
reported for OSO in 2008.

A. Athens airport emissions using EDMS (Theophanides et al, 2009)
Theophanides and Anastassopoulou (2009) examined airport emissions from the Athens
International Airport (AIA). They used the program that the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) requires for modeling emissions from airports – the Emissions and
Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) developed by Federal Aviation Authority (FAA).
The program incorporates the EPA’s NONROAD and MOBILE6 models for contributions
from ground support equipment (GSE), buses, and cars. Those authors assumed a
reduced number of taxipaths and gates that represented the majority of traffic flow.
They found that 75 tonnes VOCs (a tonne is a metric ton or 1000 kg) and approximately
360 tonnes NOx per year per 100,000 aircraft movements came from the airport activity.
The NOx results produced from EDMS were within 10% of the values published by AIA
(~390 tonnes NOx per year per 100,000 aircraft movements). These results correlated to
those from other studies. There was less information on airport VOC emissions against
which to compare the AIA results, so Dulles International Airport was used as a
reference by Theophanides and Anastassopoulou.

B. Non-road Equipment Emissions in California (Strum et al, 2007)
The inventory performed in 2002 for California non-road equipment compared temporal
aspects in generating emissions data using two programs – the National Mobile

9
Inventory Model (NMIM) and NONROAD model. The EPA used the NMIM to generate
an inventory for each state besides California. Instead, California submitted its own
results. The NMIM accounts for variation in temperature, activity, and fuels. It also
takes into account the engine mode when generating emissions data. For the California
inventory, the largest source of VOCs was pleasure craft with 2-stroke engines. The
second largest contributor was lawn and garden equipment (both 2- and 4-stroke
engines). NOx emissions were highest from construction and mining equipment. The
results from the California inventory can be seen in Table 1. Our results in the 2008 OSO
inventory demonstrate very similar patterns as those found by Strum et al (2007).

Table 1 – VOC and NOx emissions based on the NONROAD program for California 2002 (Strum
et al, 2007)

C. Denver on-road emissions inventory (Pokharel et al, 2002)
A dual method on-road emissions inventory was conducted for the Denver metropolitan
area using fuel-based estimation and modeling using MOBILE6. The fuel-based method
used fuel use data from tax records to develop emission factors. MOBILE6 produces
emission factors based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). VMT are estimated using a
model based on the registered vehicle fleet. Figure 1 shows the comparison of VMT
fraction to vehicle fleet age based on remote sensing data (RSD) that were used in the
fuel-based approach and MOBILE6 defaults. These values were highly correlated.

MOBILE6 produced values that were 30-70% higher for CO, 40% lower for THC, and 40-
80% higher for NOx than the fuel-based approach. One of the reasons MOBILE6
produced a lower estimate for total hydrocarbons (THC) could be that it only modeled

10
running exhaust emissions in order to be able to compare the results to the fuel-based
results. In the Denver study, the model showed that 32% of THC emissions were from
start emissions and 44% are from evaporative emissions. CO start emissions
contributed 50% to the total and NOx start emissions contributed 27%. Regarding
mobile source emissions, VOCs are similar in magnitude to THCs, so the general trends
from THC estimates can be applied to VOCs. The higher CO and NOx estimates could
indicate the worst case scenario. Under a certain set of assumptions, that is the highest
that emissions are predicted to be, so that could be better for policy formation.

Figure 1 – Correlation of RSD measurements to MOBILE6 default values for the Denver
metropolitan area (Pokharel et al, 2002)

11
Description of Inventory Source Types
On-road mobile sources
As the name suggests, on-road mobile sources are comprised of those vehicles which are
operated on roadways. These vehicles include cars and light trucks, SUVs, heavy trucks, buses,
and motorcycles, and contribute a very large portion of the area’s VOC and NOx emissions. For
the past 10 years, MOBILE6 was EPA’s official on-road emissions modeling program, and has
been replaced very recently by MOVES. Use of MOBILE6 is still officially accepted until the end
of 2010; MOBILE6 produces emission factors (grams per vehicle mile traveled) for volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon dioxide (CO2),
particulate matter (PM), toxics, and others (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 2010).
The user inputs conditions to simulate different environments and scenarios. Some of these
conditions are calendar year, temperature, travel speeds, fuel volatility, and mileage accrual
rates (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003). MOBILE6 is widely used by the air
pollution control community to evaluate on-road mobile source emissions and develop control
strategies (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003). To calculate total emissions, the
emission factors produced from the program must be multiplied by vehicle miles traveled
(VMT). In this study, VMT data were obtained from the Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT) website and includes rural, small and large urbanized roads, and limited access
highways (Florida Department of Transportation, 2009).

Non-road mobile sources
Non-road mobile sources contribute a large portion of the area’s VOC and NOx emissions. Non-
road sources include lawn equipment, construction equipment, pleasure craft, and more.
NONROAD is the EPA model for non-road emission estimation. The program can produce
national estimates at the broadest use and county level estimates at the most specific use (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 2005). The program was set up to specify Orange, Seminole,
and Osceola counties and the results were tabulated in Microsoft Access and then imported to
Excel. Inputs to the program include calendar year, temperatures, fuel properties, and others.
NONROAD uses embedded algorithms to generate emissions estimates. The algorithms
combine user inputs as well as default values contained in the program to provide these
estimates.

Point Sources
Point sources are stationary sources that are large enough that they must file a permit with the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) documenting their emission levels. The
type and size of facility determines which type of permit is required. These permits specify
emission testing and monitoring methods for each facility, and that each must report to DEP
annually (Florida Department of Environmental Protection, March 2010). Point sources vary by

12
location, but they typically include fossil-fuel fired power plants, manufacturing facilities,
hospitals, large printing companies, and airports. The FDEP requires facilities that have the
potential to emit more than 10 tons of VOCs or 25 tons of NOx per year and are located in an
ozone nonattainment area or ozone air quality maintenance area to have permits on file with
the agency (Florida Department of Environmental Protection, January 2010). To calculate point
source contributions, emission reports were obtained from FDEP and EPA. Furthermore, the
EDMS model was used for the region’s airports. Inputs to EDMS include aircraft and engine
types and quantities (of take-offs and landings), runway, gate, and taxiway locations, taxipath
configurations for arrival and departures between each gate and runway, and parking facility
information.

Area Sources
Area sources are made up of many small sources, none of which individually releases enough
emissions to be considered a point source, but collectively, can emit considerable amounts.
They consist of dry cleaners, gasoline stations, restaurants, surface coating and painting
operations, paving operations, traffic road striping, auto body shops, degreasing facilities, and
even wildfires. The data for area source estimation in this report were obtained from the EPA’s
2008 National Emission Inventory (2008 National emissions inventory data & documentation,
2010).

13
The Orlando Urban Area Inventory Results

Mobile Sources

On-road
Of the eight (8) vehicle types used in the fleet in MOBILE6, light duty gas vehicles (LDGV – cars)
and light duty gas trucks and SUVs (LDGT) accounted for about 90% of VOC emissions and
about 45% of NOx emissions. The distinctions for light duty truck types within MOBILE6 are
based on weight, and range from micro-pick-up trucks and small SUVs to large pick-ups and
large SUVs. These light duty vehicle types make up about 90% of the vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) in the region, so it was expected that they would be responsible for the largest portion of
VOCs. Vehicles using gasoline (instead of diesel) are more numerous than diesel vehicles.
However, diesel fuel burns at a higher temperature and therefore diesel vehicles emit
considerably more NOx but less VOCs per VMT than gasoline vehicles. Because of this, heavy
duty diesel vehicles (HDDV) contributed a very large portion of NOx (47.2%) despite accounting
for less than 10% of the VMT.

To calculate emissions, the emission factor produced by MOBILE6 was multiplied by VMT for
each category. These results were then converted from grams to tons per year. The formula

�������������������� �������������������� 1 �������� 2.2 �������� 1 ������������
for this calculation is:

�������������������������������� ������������������������ � � × ������������ � �× × ×
���������������� ���������������� 1000 ���� 1 �������� 2000 ��������
= ���������������� �������� ������������������������������������/����������������

Diesel fuel has a higher carbon content than gasoline, and thus diesel vehicles contributed
more than 20% of the CO2. Table 2 shows the emissions of each vehicle type in both tons per
year and its percentage of the total. Figure 2, Figure 3, and Figure 4 show the same results
graphically for VOCs, NOx, and CO2 respectively.

Table 2 – 2008 On-road mobile source emission totals for OSO by vehicle type

VOCs NOx CO2
Vehicle Type Annual VMT
tons/year percent tons/year percent tons/year percent
LDGV 7,934,111,592 8,186 34.7% 6,096 16.2% 3,221,975 25.6%
LDGT12 7,639,946,529 8,228 34.9% 7,310 19.4% 4,015,419 31.8%
LDGT34 2,605,760,026 4,774 20.2% 3,708 9.8% 1,779,426 14.1%
HDGV 744,800,904 1,144 4.9% 2,613 6.9% 755,322 6.0%
LDDV 8,345,108 3 0.0% 7 0.0% 2,911 0.02%
LDDT 39,639,264 25 0.1% 43 0.1% 25,902 0.21%
HDDV 1,777,508,040 903 3.8% 17,791 47.2% 2,785,240 22.1%
MC 114,745,237 319 1.4% 158 0.4% 22,438 0.2%
TOTALS 20,864,856,699 23,582 100% 37,726 100% 12,608,634 100%

14
2008 On-road VOC Emissions by Vehicle Type
(total = 23,582 tons)
HDDV
LDDT MC
LDDV < 1% 4%
1%
< 1%
HDGV
5%

LDGV
LDGT34 35%
20%

LDGT12
35%

Figure 2 – 2008 On-road VOC contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area

2008 On-road NOx Emissions by Vehicle Type
(total = 37,726 tons)
MC
1%

LDGV
16%

HDDV
47% LDGT12
19%

LDDV LDGT34
< 1% LDDT HDGV 10%
< 1% 7%

Figure 3 – 2008 On-road NOx contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area

15
2008 On-road CO2 Emissions by Vehicle Type
(total = 12,608,634 tons)
MC
< 1%

LDDT HDDV
< 1% LDGV
22% 26%
LDDV
< 1% HDGV
6%
LDGT34
14% LDGT12
32%

Figure 4 – 2008 On-road CO2 contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area

16
Non-road
According to the NONROAD model, pleasure craft (motor boats and jet skis) are the largest
source of VOC emissions comprising 42% of the total, followed closely by lawn and garden
equipment (mowers, edgers, trimmers, chain saws, blowers, etc) with 35% of the total.
Construction and mining equipment is the largest source of NOx emissions. This accounts for
67% of the total. This type of equipment is also responsible for the largest portion of CO2
emissions, making up 56% of the total. Total VOC, NOx, and CO2 emissions from the NONROAD
program are tabulated in Table 3. Figures 5, 6, and 7 show the break-down of VOC, NOx, and
CO2 emissions in the OSO area by source.

In the years from 2005-2008, prior to the extreme slow-down in economic activity that
occurred in the latter half of 2008, there had been enormous land development activity in the
OSO area. This equated to a huge number of a wide variety of construction equipment being
used (graders, pavers, dozers, excavators, off-highway trucks, scrapers, backhoes, etc). All this
equipment is diesel engine driven (higher NOx emissions), and typically moves under high load
for short distances or sits idling, waiting to be used numerous times throughout the day. The
stop-and-go movements are an inefficient use of fuel and according to the modeling results,
construction vehicles produce a majority of the NOx emissions in this region.

Table 3 – 2008 NONROAD Emission totals for OSO

Classification VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr CO2, tons/yr
Agricultural Equipment 9 73 6,907
Airport Equipment 17 183 20,407
Commercial Equipment 1,195 771 117,770
Construction and Mining Equipment 1,013 6,796 755,940
Industrial Equipment 193 934 98,915
Lawn and Garden Equipment (Com) 3,575 762 191,294
Lawn and Garden Equipment (Res) 1,714 113 42,037
Logging Equipment 2 4 526
Pleasure Craft 6,339 500 98,312
Railroad Equipment 0 1 59
Recreational Equipment 1,133 35 15,993
TOTALS 15,190 10,172 1,348,158

17
2008 Non-road VOC Emissions
(total = 15,190 tons)
Commercial
Recreational Equipment
Equipment 8%
7% Construction and
Mining Equipment
7%
Industrial Equipment
1%
Pleasure Craft
Lawn and Garden
42%
Equipment (Com)
24%
Lawn and
Garden
Equipment (Res)
11%

Figure 5 – 2008 Non-road VOC contributions by source for the OSO area*
* Does not include agricultural equipment, airport equipment, logging equipment, and railroad equipment. The
total from these sources combined was less than 0.25%.

2008 Non-road NOx Emissions
Pleasure Craft
5% (total = 10,172 tons)
Lawn and Garden
Equipment (Res)
1%
Lawn and Garden
Equipment (Com)
7%
Industrial Equipment
9%
Construction
Commercial and Mining
Equipment Equipment
8% 67%
Agricultural
Airport Equipment
Equipment
2%
1%

Figure 6 – 2008 Non-road NOx contributions by source for the OSO area*

18
* Does not include logging equipment, railroad equipment, and recreational equipment. The total from these
sources combined was less than 0.50%.

2008 Non-road CO2 Emissions
(total = 1,348,158 tons) Commercial
Equipment
9%

Industrial Equipment
7%

Lawn and Garden
Equipment (Com)
Construction and 14%
Mining Equipment
Lawn and Garden
56%
Equipment (Res)
3%
Pleasure Craft
7% Recreational
Agricultural Equipment
Airport Equipment Equipment 1%
2% 1%

Figure 7 – 2008 Non-road CO2 contributions by source for the OSO area
* Does not include logging equipment and railroad equipment. The total from these sources combined was less
than 0.05%.

19
Point Sources
Point sources were identified from the US EPA Facility Emissions List and the central Florida
office of the FDEP (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Markets Division, 2010 and
Michael Young, personal communication, December 4, 2009). Point source facilities included
large power plants (such as the OUC Stanton Plant), large facilities (such as Disney World,
Lockheed Martin, large graphic arts shops, and large asphalt plants), and major airports (such as
Orlando International). Each individual facility must submit annual emission records to the FDEP
to show they are operating within their permitted limits. Table 4 shows the categories in which
facilities may be classified. The “Airports” and “Other” categories had the highest level of VOC
emissions. The “Airport” category includes aircraft emissions, but does not include ground
service equipment (GSE) emissions. GSE was included in the Non-road source section. Some of
the companies included in the “Other” category were Cellofoam North America Inc., Sonoco
Products Company, Walt Disney World Co., and Lockheed Martin Missiles & Fire Control. The
airports in OSO are Orlando International Airport (OIA), Orlando Sanford International Airport,
Orlando Executive Airport, and Kissimmee Gateway. Orlando International handled
approximately 360,000 flights during the 2008 calendar year. The OIA emissions were
estimated based on a detailed model of flight activity (data gathered directly from OIA) and
using the EDMS model. The other three airports have drastically less air traffic, and their
emissions were taken as given in the 2008 EPA inventory (2008 National emissions inventory
data & documentation, 2010).

Power plants emitted significant amounts of NOx in OSO, accounting for three fourths of all the
point source emissions, and about 14% of the total regional emissions of NOx from all sources.
Most of that came from the two (2) coal fired units at the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC)
Stanton Energy Center. OUC, Kissimmee Utility Authority (KUA), and the Southern Company
have ownership in one or more of the power plants in OSO. The NOx and CO2 emissions from
each power plant can be seen in Table 5. The aircraft emissions from the region’s four airports
are shown in Table 6. It was assumed that CO2 emissions from point sources other than airports
and power plants are insignificant in comparison and so only these two groups were included in
this inventory.

20
Table 4 – 2008 Point source emission totals for OSO

Total
Category
VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr CO2, tons/yr
Airports (aircraft)* 473 1,469 492,645
Asphalt Plant 31 66 -
Chemical Plant 2 0 -
Electric Production 0 36 -
Fiberglass Products Mfg. 103 0 -
Food Production 297 31 -
Graphic Arts/Printing 146 1 -
Hospitals/Health Care 5 77 -
Misc Wood Products Mfg. 2 0 -
MSW Landfill 37 24 -
Other 364 708 -
Other Incineration 1 32 -
Petroleum Storage/Transfer 80 9 -
Power Plants 111 8,525 8,134,554
Secondary Metal Production 0 1 -
Surface Coating Operations 249 8 -
TOTALS 1,901 10,987 8,627,199
*Airports in this table represent aircraft emissions (landings and take-offs and taxiing) but do not include ground
service equipment (GSE). Those emissions are included in the non-road inventory.

Table 5 – 2008 Annual NOx and CO2 emissions of OSO power plants

Facility Name NOx, tons/yr CO2, tons/yr
Curtis H. Stanton Energy Center 8,137 5,953,729
Orlando CoGen 144 328,439
RRI Energy Osceola 35 142,176
Reedy Creek 1 1,910
Stanton A 126 1,099,367
Cane Island 82 608,933
TOTALS 8,525 8,134,554

Table 6 – 2008 EDMS airport (aircraft) emission results

Airport VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr CO2, tons/yr
Orlando International 322 1,353 453,743
Orlando Executive 40 3 1,006
Orlando-Sanford International 66 110 36,890
Kissimmee Gateway 45 3 1,006
TOTALS 473 1,469 492,645

21
2008 Point Source VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 1,901 tons)
Miscellaneous
Surface Coating 3%
Operation
Airports
14%
21%
Power Plant
Petroleum 5% Fiberglass Products
Storage/Transfer Mfg.
5% 6%
Others
20% Food Production
Graphic 16%
MSW Landfill Arts/Printing
2% 8%

Figure 8 – 2008 Point source VOC contributions by source for the OSO area*
* The “Miscellaneous” source category includes chemical plants, hospitals/healthcare facilities, miscellaneous
wood products manufacturing, other incineration, and asphalt plants

2008 Point Source NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 10,987 tons)

Other
Airports
6%
13%
Miscellaneous
3%

Power Plant
78%

Figure 9 – 2008 Point source NOx contributions by source for the OSO area*
* The "Miscellaneous" source category includes graphic arts/printing, petroleum storage/transfer, secondary
metal production, surface coating operation, MSW landfill, asphalt plant, electric production, food production,
hospitals/healthcare facilities, and other incineration

22
Area Sources
Area source emissions data came from the US EPA 2008 National Emissions Inventory (“2008
National emissions inventory data & documentation,” 2010). The EPA has county-level data for
the sub-categories listed in Table 7. The totals for the area source emissions in the OSO region
can be seen in Table 8. It was assumed that source categories which did not show appreciable
NOx emissions would have negligible contributions to CO2 emissions. Therefore, burning, land
clearing, and residential heating categories were the only ones for which CO2 emissions were
significant, but for two of those sub-categories, the CO2 emissions are typically assumed to be
part of the natural cycle. Table 9 shows CO2 emissions by fuel type for residential heating in the
region. The largest contributor of VOCs amongst the area sources was the chemicals and paint
category, which comprised 47% of the area source total. The consumer solvents sub-category
accounted for approximately half of that source with VOC emissions of 7,365 tons per year.
The majority of area-source NOx emissions came from the burning of gas and oil for residential
heating. Open burning of yard waste and land clearing debris can contribute both VOCs and
NOx, but both Orange and Seminole counties had open burning bans in 2008, so emissions of
both pollutants were low in 2008. Emission totals for area sources (by category) can be seen
graphically in Figure 10 and Figure 11.

Table 7 – List of categories included in area sources

23
Table 8 – 2008 Area Source Emission Totals for OSO

Sub-category VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr CO2, tons/yr
Asphalt 67 0 -
Burning 51 33 Assumed to be part of the natural carbon cycle
Chemicals and Paints 14,519 0 -
Coatings 5,229 0 -
Cooking 63 0 -
Gasoline and Fuels 10,719 125 147,158*
Land Clearing 1 1 Assumed to be part of the natural carbon cycle
TOTALS 30,648 158 147,158
* The CO2 data for “Gasoline and Fuels” comes from residential heating and not the entire list of sub-categories

Table 9 – 2008 CO2 emissions from residential heating by fuel type

Fuel Type CO2, tons/yr
Anthracite Coal 1.3
Bituminous Coal (assumed 70% carbon content) 5.2
Distillate Fuel 4,789
Kerosene 2,963
LPG 55,799
Natural Gas 83,601
TOTAL 147,158

24
2008 Area Source VOC Emissions by Sub-category
(total = 30,648 tons)
Gasoline and Fuels
35%
Land Clearing
< 1%
Cooking
< 1%

Burning
< 1%

Asphalt
Chemicals and Paints
Coatings < 1%
48%
17%

Figure 10 – 2008 Area source VOC contributions by source for the OSO area

2008 Area Source NOx Emissions by Sub-category
(total = 158 tons)

Burning
21%

Gasoline and Fuels
79%

Figure 11 – 2008 Area source NOx contributions by source for the OSO area

25
2008 Inventory compared with 2002 Results
Table 10 shows a summary of the results from the 2002 inventory and the most recent, 2008,
inventory. The largest decrease in emissions was from on-road mobile sources (37%). This
decrease can be attributed to improvements in vehicle pollution control technology and the
turnover of the vehicle fleet over six (6) years. Older, higher-emitting vehicles were removed
and replaced with newer, lower-emitting ones. Non-road VOCs increased slightly from 2002
(due to increased boating and lawn & garden activity), while non-road NOx showed a decrease
of 36% (likely due to improvements in the larger, diesel-engine non-road vehicles). Point
sources remained relatively consistent with a slight drop in NOx emissions. Area source VOCs
decreased slightly, but owing to the large decreases posted by on-road vehicles, became a
larger percentage of the region’s total emissions. NOx emissions from area sources remain very
low as a percentage of the total. The sub-categories that were listed in the 2002 inventory
differ from those in the 2008 inventory, so the details cannot be compared directly. Overall,
total emissions in the region decreased from 2002 to 2008: VOCs by 15% and NOx by 25%.

Table 10 – 2002 and 2008 OSO emission totals for VOC and NOx

2002 2008
Source
VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr
On-road 37,511 49,872 23,582 37,726
Non-road 13,389 15,889 15,190 10,172
Point 1,711 12,596 1,901 10,987
Area 31,198 103 30,648 158
TOTALS 83,809 78,460 71,321 59,043

Summary
Emissions in the OSO area are on the decline. Improvements to emissions control systems in
the on-road vehicle fleet and improvements in the design of new non-road engines are the two
main reasons for this reduction. The largest contributors to VOCs are area sources, on-road
vehicles, and non-road engines; the largest NOx emitters are on-road vehicles, construction
equipment and point sources (mainly power plants). This can be seen in Figure 12 and Figure
13. The totals for each pollutant by source category are shown in Table 11. On-road mobile
sources produce the most carbon dioxide emissions, but point sources also make up a large
portion of the total. Despite population growth in the three counties, emissions decreased over
the six (6) years between inventories. This indicates that policies in place and advances in
technology are still achieving lower emissions.

26
Table 11 – 2008 OSO Emission totals

Source VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr CO2, tons/yr
On-road 23,582 37,726 12,608,634
Non-road 15,190 10,172 1,348,158
Point 1,901 10,987 8,627,199
Area 30,648 158 147,158
TOTALS 71,321 59,043 22,731,149

2008 Total OSO VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 71,321 tons)

On-road
33%
Area
43%

Point Non-road
3% 21%
Figure 12 – 2008 Total VOC emissions for the OSO area

27
2008 Total OSO NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 59,043 tons)
Area
Point <1%
19%

Non-road
17%
On-road
64%

Figure 13 – 2008 Total NOx emissions for the OSO area

2008 OSO CO2 Emissions by Source
(total = 22,731,149 tons)
Area
1%

Point
38%
On-road
55%

Non-road
6%

Figure 14 – 2008 Total CO2 emissions for the OSO area

28
Appendix
This section contains information about source category emissions by county. Then, total
emissions for each county are broken down by source category. The graphs serve as a visual
aid to show from where the largest emissions are coming.

Mobile Sources
On-road

2008 On-road VOC Emissions by County
(total = 23,582 tons)

Osceola
16%

Seminole
19%
Orange
65%

Figure 15 – 2008 On-road VOC Contributions for OSO

29
2008 On-road NOx Emissions by County
(total = 37,726 tons)

Osceola
16%

Seminole
19%
Orange
65%

Figure 16 – 2008 On-road NOx Contributions for OSO

2008 On-road CO2 Emissions by County
(total = 12,608,634 tons)

Osceola
16%

Seminole
19%
Orange
65%

Figure 17 – 2008 On-road CO2 Contributions for OSO

30
Non-road

2008 Non-road VOC Emissions by County
(total = 15,190 tons)

Osceola
33%
Orange
49%

Seminole
18%

Figure 18 – 2008 Non-road VOC Contributions for OSO

2008 Non-road NOx Emissions by County
(total = 10,172 tons)

Osceola
20%

Seminole Orange
21% 59%

Figure 19 – 2008 Non-road NOx Contributions for OSO

31
2008 Non-road CO2 Emissions by County
(total = 1,348,158 tons)

Osceola
20%

Seminole Orange
21% 59%

Figure 20 – 2008 Non-road CO2 Contributions for OSO

32
Point Sources

2008 Point Source VOC Emissions by County
(total = 1,901 tons)
Osceola
Seminole 5%
7%

Orange
88%

Figure 21 – 2008 Point Source VOC Contributions for OSO

2008 Point Source NOx Emissions by County
(total = 10,987 tons)
Osceola
Seminole 1%
7%

Orange
92%

Figure 22 – 2008 Point Source NOx Contributions for OSO

33
Area Sources

2008 Area Source VOC Emissions by Sub-category
(total = 30,648 tons)
Gasoline and Fuels
35%
Land Clearing
< 1%
Cooking
< 1%

Burning
< 1%

Asphalt
Chemicals and Paints
Coatings < 1%
48%
17%

Figure 23 – 2008 Area Source VOC Contributions for OSO

2008 Area Source NOx Emissions by Sub-category
(total = 158 tons)

Burning
21%

Gasoline and Fuels
79%

Figure 24 – 2008 Area Source NOx Contributions for OSO

34
Total Emissions per County by Source Category

Orange County

2008 Orange County VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 44,068 tons)

On-road
Area 35%
45%

Non-road
17%

Point
3%
Figure 25 – 2008 Orange county VOC emissions by source

2008 Orange County NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 41,195 tons)
Area
< 1%

Point
26%

On-road
Non-road 59%
15%

Figure 26 – 2008 Orange county NOx emissions by source

35
Seminole County

2008 Seminole County VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 14,527 tons)

On-road
30%
Area
50%

Non-road
19%
Point
1%

Figure 27 – 2008 Seminole county VOC emissions by source

2008 Seminole County NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 9,318 tons)
Area
Point 1%
1%

Non-road
23%

On-road
75%

Figure 28 – 2008 Seminole county NOx emissions by source

36
Osceola County

2008 Osceola County VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 12,671 tons)

Area On-road
29% 31%

Point
1%

Non-road
39%
Figure 29 – 2008 Osceola county VOC emissions by source

2008 Osceola County NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 8,804 tons)
Point Area
6% 1%

Non-road
23%

On-road
70%

Figure 30 – 2008 Osceola county NOx emissions by source

37
References

2008 National emissions inventory data & documentation. (2010, May 17). Retrieved from

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html

Arbrandt, M. (2003) 2002 Emission inventory for central Florida. M.S. Thesis, University of

Central Florida, Orlando, FL.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection. (2010, March 29). Emission Sources –

Permitting. Retrieved from http://www.dep.state.fl.us/air/emission/permitting.htm.

Florida Department of Environmental Protection. (2010, January 04). Emission Sources –

Emission Inventory. Retrieved from http://www.dep.state.fl.us/air/emission/inventory.

htm.

Florida Department of Transportation. (2009). Public Road Mileage and Miles Traveled, 2008.

Retrieved from http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/statistics/mileage-rpts/public08.

pdf.

Pokharel, S.S., Bishop, G.A., & Stedman, D.H. (2002). An on-road motor vehicle emissions

inventory for Denver: an efficient alternative to modeling. Atmospheric Environment, 36,

5177-5184.

Strum, M., Mintz, D., & Driver, L. (2007). Estimating the monthly variation in California’s

nonroad equipment emissions for the 2002 emissions and air quality modeling platform.

Retrieved from www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/conference/ei16/session4/strum.pdf.

Theophanides, M., & Anastassopoulou, J. (2009). Air pollution simulation and geographical

information systems (GIS) applied to Athens International Airport. Journal of

Environmental Science and Health, Part A, 44(8), 758-766.

38
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2004, August). Introduction to emission inventories.

Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/apti/course419a/index.html.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2010, May 10). MOBILE6 vehicle emission modeling

software. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/otaq/m6.htm.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Markets Division. (2010). Data and maps.

Retrieved from http://camddataandmaps.epa.gov/gdm/index.cfm?fuseaction=

emissions.wizard.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. (2003). User's guide to

MOBILE6.1 and MOBILE6.2 (EPA420-R-03-010). Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/

otaq/m6.htm.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. (2005). User's guide for the

final NONROAD2005 model (EPA420-R-05-013). Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/

otaq/models/nonrdmdl/nonrdmdl2005/ 420r05013.pdf.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. (1998).

NOx: How nitrogen oxides affect the way we live and breathe (EPA-456/F-98-005).

Retrieved from http://www.cleanairaction.org/pubs/pdfs/old_pubs/noxfldr.pdf.

39
MetroPlan Orlando
315 East Robinson Street, Suite 355
Orlando, Florida 32801
(407) 481-5672
www.metroplanorlando.com
Fifth Annual Report and Contingency Plan
for
Air Emissions Reduction
in Central Florida

By:
C. David Cooper, PhD, PE, QEP
Jessica Ross, EIT, EPI

University of Central Florida
Department of Civil, Environmental,
and Construction Engineering
February 2011
Table of Contents
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................ 3
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................. 4
Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 5
Acknowledgments......................................................................................................................................... 8
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 9
Background ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Current Air Quality Status – Ozone ......................................................................................................... 10
Effects of Meteorology ........................................................................................................................... 13
Emissions Inventory .................................................................................................................................... 15
On-road Mobile Sources ......................................................................................................................... 15
Potential Action Steps ......................................................................................................................... 17
On-road Mobile Summary .................................................................................................................. 24
Non-road Mobile Sources ....................................................................................................................... 27
Potential Action Steps ......................................................................................................................... 29
Non-road Mobile Summary ................................................................................................................ 32
Point and Area Sources ........................................................................................................................... 34
Point Sources ...................................................................................................................................... 35
Area Sources ....................................................................................................................................... 38
Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 40
References .................................................................................................................................................. 43

2
List of Figures
Figure EX-1 - Total VOC emissions for OSO by source category ................................................................... 6
Figure EX-2 - Total NOx emissions for OSO by source category ................................................................... 6

Figure 1 - Past and projected trends in VMT and vehicular emissions in OSO ............................................. 9
Figure 2 - Locations of Ambient Ozone Monitors in Central Florida .......................................................... 11
Figure 3 - Year 2008 Maximum Monthly 8-hr Ozone Readings in Central Florida ..................................... 14
Figure 4 - Five-year History of Maximum Monthly 8-hr Ozone Readings at one OUA location ................. 14
Figure 5 - 2008 On-road VOC contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area .......................................... 16
Figure 6 - 2008 On-road NOx contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area .......................................... 16
Figure 7 - HDDV NOx emissions in OSO as a function of speed .................................................................. 23
Figure 8 - Diagram of ORVR system ("My beloved Sable--help me save her", 2009) ................................. 23
Figure 9 - 2008 Non-road VOC contributions by source for the OSO area* ............................................... 28
Figure 10 - 2008 Non-road NOx contributions by source for the OSO area*.............................................. 28
Figure 11 - Total VOC emissions for OSO by source category .................................................................... 34
Figure 12 - Total NOx emissions for OSO by source category ..................................................................... 34
Figure 13 - 2008 Point source VOC contributions by source for the OSO area* ........................................ 37
Figure 14 - 2008 Point source NOx contributions by source for the OSO area* ......................................... 37
Figure 15 - 2008 Area source VOC contributions by source for the OSO area ........................................... 39
Figure 16 - 2008 Area source NOx contributions by source for the OSO area ............................................ 40

3
List of Tables
Table EX-1 - 2002 and 2008 OSO emission totals for VOC and NOx ............................................................. 5

Table 1 - Historical 4th-Highest 8-hr Ozone Readings in Central Florida.................................................... 10
Table 2 - Fourth highest 8-hr O3 Readings in OSO, 2006-2010, by monitor ............................................... 12
Table 3 - Highest 8-hr O3 Readings in 2010 at each Monitor in OUA......................................................... 12
Table 4 - Monthly peak 8-hr Ozone Concentrations in Central Florida (all monitors) ............................... 13
Table 5 - 2008 On-road vehicle emissions for OSO by vehicle type ........................................................... 15
Table 6 - NOx emission factors for HDDV at common highway speeds ..................................................... 22
Table 7 - Reduction steps for on-road mobile sources ............................................................................... 26
Table 8 - 2008 NONROAD Emission totals for OSO .................................................................................... 27
Table 9 - Reduction steps for non-road mobile sources ............................................................................. 33
Table 10 - 2008 Point source emission totals for OSO................................................................................ 36
Table 11 - 2008 Annual NOx emissions of OSO power plants ..................................................................... 36
Table 12 - 2008 airport (aircraft) emission results ..................................................................................... 36
Table 13 - List of categories included in area sources ................................................................................ 38
Table 14 - 2008 Area Source Emission Totals for OSO................................................................................ 39
Table 15 - Major VOC contributors by source type .................................................................................... 41
Table 16 - Major NOx contributors by source type ..................................................................................... 41

4
Executive Summary
This report outlines steps for Orange, Seminole, and Osceola counties (OSO area) to reduce VOC
and NOx emissions in order to reduce ozone concentrations. OSO is at risk of becoming ozone non-
attainment and if this occurs, EPA will mandate a contingency plan for central Florida to reduce
emissions of ozone precursors. An emissions inventory was submitted to MetroPlan in summer 2010
that presented the contributions from on-road and non-road mobile, area, and point sources, based on
2008 emissions estimates. Table EX-1 shows how emissions of VOCs and NOx have changed from the
previous inventory to the current one.

Overall, despite population growth, emissions of both VOCs and NOx have decreased from 2002
to 2008. On-road emissions decreased substantially, contrary to what might be expected from having
more vehicles on the roadways. The decrease was because of improved vehicle pollution control
efficiencies on newer vehicles and normal turnover of the fleet. Non-road VOCs increased mainly
because of large growth in emissions from pleasure craft (boats, jet skis, etc). Point source VOCs
increased very slightly, but NOx decreased by about 15%. Area source VOCs decreased only slightly,
while area source NOx increased slightly. Because of the big drop in on-road emissions, area sources
now account for the largest percentage of VOC emissions in the region. Figure EX-1 and Figure EX-2
show the contributions of each source type to overall OSO emissions.

Table EX-1 - 2002 and 2008 OSO emission totals for VOC and NOx

5
2008 Total OSO VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 71,321 tons)

On-road
33%
Area
43%

Point Non-road
3% 21%

Figure EX-1 - Total VOC emissions for OSO by source category

2008 Total OSO NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 59,043 tons)
Area
Point <1%
19%

Non-road
17%
On-road
64%

Figure EX-2 - Total NOx emissions for OSO by source category

6
It is believed that OSO is a NOx-limited area regarding ozone production (Olson, 2010). This
means that NOx emissions reduction should be more heavily targeted, but VOC reduction remains
important as well. The main sources of NOx emissions are on-road vehicles (especially large trucks, aka
HDDVs), point sources (mainly one large power plant), and non-road sources (mainly construction
equipment). Steps that can significantly reduce NOx emissions include reducing VMT (vehicle miles
traveled) by all vehicles (personal cars as well as trucks), reducing idling by construction equipment,
slowing down HDDVs on I-4, and/or excluding HDDV access from the left-most lane on I-4. The largest
contributors of VOCs are area sources (48%), followed by on-road mobile sources (30%), and then non-
road sources (20%). On-road measures that can significantly reduce VOC emissions include reducing
VMT (e.g., carpooling and increased transit use) and stage 2 vapor recovery (S2VR); non-road measures
include reducing use of gasoline powered lawn care equipment and reducing pleasure craft use. Area
source emissions reduction steps were not investigated in this report. As all of the steps were evaluated,
some were determined to reduce emissions by substantial amounts and others by only small amounts.
Additionally, some steps were determined to cost money (such as installing catalytic converters on
lawnmowers) and others would actually save money (such as reducing vehicle idling).

To make substantial cuts in emissions in the future, steps which save money should be
accomplished first, followed by steps that will incur costs, but which have a better cost-effectiveness
(the cost per ton of pollutants averted). This strategy will produce good emission reductions, without
requiring the expenditure of substantial funding. The U.S. EPA is continually mandating that industry
reduce emissions from small engines as well as from motor vehicles. EPA efforts have resulted in major
decreases in emission over the past thirty years, a trend that is projected to continue into the near
future. As long as the region remains in attainment, we should wait to see the effects of these further
emission reductions in the next few years. On a more pro-active note, the best way to deal with future
emissions is to conduct comprehensive planning for minimizing emissions. Building homes and
apartments near office space encourages people to live near where they work. Designing roads to allow
for public transportation to be implemented promotes the use of such systems. Avoiding urban sprawl
slows the growth of VMT thereby reducing commuter emissions. These are some planning options that
can be done in advance which may help keep OSO in ozone attainment and may render some of the
more drastic steps discussed in this report unnecessary.

7
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank MetroPlan Orlando for their financial support of this project over the
past five years. They have made it possible for several students to conduct detailed research and
contribute to this report while getting their degrees. The efforts of these students (Mike Radford, Oscar
Duarte, Jessica Ross, Wyatt Champion, Mark Ritner, Ali Bayat, and Megan Crum) are hereby
acknowledged.

8
Introduction

Background
Metroplan Orlando is the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for Orange, Osceola and
Seminole Counties (OSO, which is also called the Orlando Urban Area – OUA). As the regional MPO,
Metroplan Orlando provides the forum for local elected officials and transportation experts to work
together to improve mobility for Central Florida residents, businesses, and visitors. It has the mission to
provide leadership in planning and promoting a comprehensive intermodal surface transportation
system that will provide for regional mobility, encourage a positive investment climate, and foster
sustainable development sensitive to community and natural resources. An important part of fostering
sustainable development is promoting clean air in the region through understanding and encouraging
best practices for reducing mobile source emissions.

The OUA has been one of the fastest growing regions in the country for many years. It is known
that cars have been getting cleaner – the per vehicle emission factors (EFs) have declined for the past
thirty years. But, because of the steady high rate of growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the region,
vehicular emissions continue to be significant (see Figure 1). Overall, regional emissions of VOCs and NOx
(the two pollutants that cause ground-level ozone problems) generally have been declining for the past
thirty years due to improvements in individual vehicles and all sorts of internal combustion engines. But
if VMT continues to grow, total emissions of VOCs and NOx may begin to increase in the future, and
central Florida could become classified as air quality non-attainment. Furthermore, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been contemplating stricter ozone standards for some time.
EPA has announced that the new standard will likely be between 60 and 70 ppb (the current standard is
75 ppb), and it is expected that the new standard will result in OSO being declared non-attainment.

Trends in VMT and Emissions

90,000 50.00
80,000 45.00

70,000 40.00
Emissions (tons/yr)

VMT (10^9 mi/yr)

35.00
60,000
30.00
50,000
25.00
40,000
20.00
30,000
15.00
20,000 10.00
10,000 5.00
0 0.00
1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

Year

VOC NOX VMT

Figure 1 - Past and projected trends in VMT and vehicular emissions in OSO

9
Non-attainment is a designation by the EPA that the area has measured concentrations of one
or more air pollutants that are in violation of federal and state standards. Getting approval for future
road-building projects would be more difficult if OSO becomes a non-attainment area. Being declared
non-attainment means that the three-county area would be subject to state and federal actions,
sanctions, or mandates that would require the region to develop plans and action steps to reduce
emissions to get back into attainment status. The action steps we might have to take include required
installation of stage 2 vapor recovery systems on all gasoline stations in the three-county area,
mandatory vehicle inspection and maintenance programs, enforceable carpool lanes, not allowing
certain road building projects, and many other steps to cut emissions from a variety of other sources.
Hopefully, some of these other steps would be much less onerous than the first few mentioned above.
Central Florida governmental leaders need a contingency plan that lists various action steps along with
their costs and emission reduction benefits so that they can take the right steps at the appropriate
times.

Current Air Quality Status – Ozone
The major air pollution problem in Central Florida at this time is ozone (O3) – a pollutant of
national concern that results from atmospheric reactions of VOCs and NOx catalyzed by sunshine. Both
VOCs and NOx are emitted in large quantities from motor vehicles. In March 2008, EPA lowered the
federal ozone standard to 0.075 ppm (75 ppb), over an 8-hour averaging time, considered over a three-
year period. This standard is interpreted such that the three-year average of the fourth-highest
concentration cannot exceed 75 ppb. In January 2010, EPA announced that it is considering further
lowering the standard to between 0.06 ppm and 0.07 ppm. In recent years, the four ozone monitoring
sites in Central Florida have experienced ozone concentrations that exceed these levels (see Table 1).
Fortunately, since 2008 when the standard was lowered to .075 ppm, none of the monitors has
experienced a three-year average above that level, so OSO remains in attainment. The locations of these
monitors are shown in Figure 2.

Table 1 - Historical 4th-Highest 8-hr Ozone Readings in Central Florida

4th-Highest 8-Hour Average
Year Monitor Location
Ozone Conc., ppb
2010 Winegard Elementary School 71
2009 Winegard Elementary School 66
2008 Osceola Fire Station – Four Corners 71
2007 Winegard Elementary School 78
2006 Lake Isle Estates 80
2005 Winegard Elementary School 86
2004 Lake Isle Estates 76
2003 Seminole State College 76
2002 Seminole State College 78

10
A violation of national ambient air quality standards only occurs if, for any one monitor, its 3-
year average of the fourth-highest annual concentrations exceeds 75 ppb. Thus, OSO is not now a non-
attainment area. However, if ozone concentrations grow by even just a little in the future, or if the
standard is reduced to say, 0.065 ppm, then OSO likely will become non-attainment. The U.S. EPA is
scheduled to make non-attainment determinations based on the data from 2006-2008 (the fourth-
highest readings for 2006-2010 are listed in Table 2). However, the process will continue into the future
with each year’s new data (and any new standards) being considered each year. At this point in time,
with the current standard, OSO is within the limits, and still is attainment.

The data for 2009 showed lower-than-average ozone readings, perhaps due to lower emissions
from traffic and construction activity in 2009, or perhaps due to the wetter spring season that central
Florida experienced that year. Note that the month of May 2009, was very unusual in that 8-hour ozone
readings were very low that year (perhaps due to the large amounts of rain received during May 2009).
The month of April 2010 was similarly wetter than normal, and the 4th-highest ozone readings have been
lower than typical. Table 3 shows the highest ozone concentrations in 2010.

Figure 2 - Locations of Ambient Ozone Monitors in Central Florida

11
Table 2 - Fourth highest 8-hr O3 Readings in OSO, 2006-2010, by monitor

Monitor Location Year 8-Hour Average O3, ppb
Seminole State College, Seminole County 2010 67
2009 62
. 2008 67
2007 69
2006 80
2008-2010 average 65
Lake Isle (Morse/Denning), WP, Orange County 2010 70
2009 65
2008 70
2007 76
2006 80
2008-2010 average 68
Winegard Elem, Pinecastle, Orange County 2010 71
2009 66
2008 70
2007 78
2006 79
2008-2010 average 69
Four Corners Fire Station, Osceola County 2010 67
2009 63
2008 71
2007 73
2006 73
2008-2010 average 67

Table 3 - Highest 8-hr O3 Readings in 2010 at each Monitor in OUA

Highest 8-Hour Average 4th-Highest 8-Hour Average
Monitor Location
O3, ppb (date) O3, ppb (date)
Four Corners Fire Station 80 (4/1) 67 (4/29)
Winegard Elementary School 80 (7/9) 71 (10/10)
Lake Isle Estates 79 (7/9) 70 (4/22)
Seminole State College 72 (2/2) 67 (4/1)

12
Effects of Meteorology
The year-by-year declining trends in vehicle emissions shown previously in Figure 1 are
welcome, but our ozone concentrations have not declined as significantly (see Table 1 presented
previously). Ozone is a product of emissions plus meteorology plus complex atmospheric reactions
involving both VOCs and NOx, so it is not possible to make a one-for-one prediction of lower ozone for
each increment of emissions reduction. Also, the reductions in mobile source emissions do not tell the
whole story; non-road sources and point sources emit large amounts of both NOx and VOCs, and area
sources emit large amounts of VOCs. Meteorology plays a very important role as well. Of course, we
cannot control the weather, so we focus our efforts on controlling emissions. But it is important to be
aware of the effects of weather on ozone concentrations. To explore that statement, let us next look at
how ozone concentrations in central Florida have historically varied throughout the year.

Table 4 and Figure 3 and Figure 4 portray an important fact about ozone in OSO. As can be seen,
ozone in the OUA peaks in the April-May time frame (and this holds true over many years). This early
peak period is due in part to an increase in the non-roads emissions (more lawn and garden work) in
those months, and in part to the hotter, drier weather. This suggests that some contingency steps could
be taken specifically in those months.

Table 4 - Monthly peak 8-hr Ozone Concentrations in Central Florida (all monitors)

Peak 8-hour Ozone Concentration, ppb
Month Four Corners Winegard Lake Isle SCC
‘08 ‘09 ‘10 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10
January 48 51 45 45 50 46 47 49 50 45 48 47
February 52 56 53 52 66 53 55 52 55 53 59 72
March 67 59 64 70 59 70 69 60 71 67 54 72
April 74 68 80 74 75 75 73 72 74 73 65 67
May 77 54 60 85 61 62 81 65 63 76 62 60
June 53 62 73 57 66 60 63 63 56 63 59 56
July 43 60 67 54 57 80 60 56 79 60 54 66
August 52 51 60 59 59 66 65 61 56 62 61 53
September 57 47 50 59 49 57 62 51 54 61 46 53
October 59 64 67 55 62 71 59 64 66 55 59 67
November 44 48 49 48 53 54 49 52 52 48 52 49
December 42 38 50 41 40 50 41 41 51 42 42 51

13
100

90 Previous 8-hr Ozone

80
New 8-hr Ozone
70

60
Concentration (ppb)

30
Site 1 Winegard Site 2 Lake Isle
20
Site 3 Seminole CC Site 4 Four Corners
10

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Figure 3 - Year 2008 Maximum Monthly 8-hr Ozone Readings in Central Florida

Winegard, Maximum 8-hr O3 Reading
90
80
70
60 2006
50 2007
40 2008
30 2009
20
2010
10
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Figure 4 - Five-year History of Maximum Monthly 8-hr Ozone Readings at one OUA location

14
Emissions Inventory

On-road Mobile Sources
In 2008, on-road mobile source emissions accounted for 30% (23,582 tons) of the VOC and 62%
(37,726 tons) of the NOx emissions in OSO. These numbers are lower than the 2002 levels by about
14,000 tons of VOCs and 12,000 tons of NOx. The major reason for this substantial decrease is the big
improvements in per-vehicle emissions. On-road vehicles include cars, vans, SUVs, pick-ups, delivery
trucks, heavy trucks, buses, and motorcycles. Newer model vehicles are more fuel efficient and much
less polluting than older models. However population is increasing in central Florida, thus increasing the
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) each year. However, from 2002 to 2008, the improvements in the per-
vehicle emissions outweighed the growth in VMT, resulting in a decline in total emissions from this
sector. Even more surprising is that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) increased faster than population and
the results still showed decreased emissions. Table 5 and Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the distribution of
on-road VOC and NOx emissions (respectively) by vehicle type. There are a number of ways in which to
reduce VOCs and NOx even further that are discussed in the following sections.

Table 5 - 2008 On-road vehicle emissions for OSO by vehicle type

VOCs NOx
Vehicle Type
tons/year percent tons/year percent
LDGV 8,186 34.7% 6,096 16.2%
LDGT12 8,228 34.9% 7,310 19.4%
LDGT34 4,774 20.2% 3,708 9.8%
HDGV 1,144 4.9% 2,613 6.9%
LDDV 3 0.0% 7 0.0%
LDDT 25 0.1% 43 0.1%
HDDV 903 3.8% 17,791 47.2%
MC 319 1.4% 158 0.4%
TOTALS 23,582 100% 37,726 100%
Key: LDGV = light duty gasoline vehicles (0-6000 lbs), LDGT12 = light duty gasoline trucks (< 6000 lbs), LDGT34 = light duty
gasoline trucks (6001-8500 lbs), HDGV = heavy duty gasoline vehicles (> 8500 lbs), LDDV = light duty diesel vehicles (0-6000 lbs),
LDDT = light duty diesel trucks (< 8500 lbs), HDDV = heavy duty diesel vehicles (> 8500 lbs), MC = motorcycles

15
2008 On-road VOC Emissions by Vehicle Type
(total = 23,582 tons)
LDDT HDDV
MC
LDDV 0% 4%
1%
0%
HDGV
5%

LDGV
LDGT34 35%
20%

LDGT12
35%

Figure 5 - 2008 On-road VOC contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area

2008 On-road NOx Emissions by Vehicle Type
(total = 37,726 tons)
MC
1%

LDGV
16%

HDDV
47% LDGT12
19%

LDDV LDGT34
0% LDDT HDGV 10%
0% 7%

Figure 6 - 2008 On-road NOx contributions by vehicle type for the OSO area

16
Potential Action Steps

Decrease School Bus Idling Time
This action step has the potential to reduce VOC emissions by 1.1 tons/year and NOx emissions
by 11 tons/year. Central Florida has a hot, humid climate which tends to make sitting in a vehicle
without the air conditioner running uncomfortable. One reason buses are left running is to keep them
cool to maximize passenger (and driver) comfort. Drivers also leave buses idling before they start their
route in the mornings and as they wait in line during after-school pick-ups. This step is difficult to
regulate because it relies on the word of the driver that they will turn off the bus while not in use. There
is no actual penalty for not turning it off. The three counties already have a policy against idling. The
savings calculated (based on fuel savings) amounted to $13,700 per ton of VOCs and NOx reduced and
$166,000 annually. These savings are split between the three counties with Orange County seeing the
largest return since its fleet is larger than the other two.

Switch School Bus Fleet from ULSD to B20
The school bus fleet currently uses ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) and emits approximately 28
tons/year of VOCs and 380 tons/year of NOx. These emissions can be cut by 3.4 tons/year of VOCs by
substituting a biodiesel blend (B20). B20 may or may not cause an increase in NOx, but the data are
inconclusive. To be conservative, an increase was estimated at approximately 2.3 tons. Biodiesel costs
approximately $0.15/gal more than petroleum diesel (U.S. Department of Energy, 2009). The cost of
switching to B20 is approximately $2,280,000 per ton of emissions reduced but may vary depending on
the price difference of B20 over ULSD. This expense would be distributed among the three counties.

Implement More Aggressive Carpooling Programs
Orlando’s major carpooling service is currently provided by LYNX. It is a computer-based
voluntary program, and LYNX’s involvement is solely to match the participants. They do not keep track
of interested parties after they have been put in contact with one another, so the reductions estimated
in this report are based on estimated ridership. There were 3,868 participants who contacted LYNX in
the 2007/2008 fiscal year (Metroplan, 2009). Estimating that 20% of interested parties actually followed
through and began carpooling, 440 automobiles were removed from the roads because of carpooling
(based on 2 people per car). This resulted in a reduction of 2.79 tons of VOCs and 1.95 tons of NOx
annually. The cost of the program is attributed to having one full time employee, a website, and web
maintenance. This was estimated to be $81,000 annually and equates to $16,800/ton averted.
However, from the participants’ point of view, they saved on gasoline consumption as well as wear and
tear on their vehicles. Thus, it is estimated that this action step saved them about $550,000/year (for a
net savings of $470,000/year in OSO). A more aggressive program might well result in a substantial
increase in carpoolers.

FDOT began a program to promote ride sharing in central Florida called “ReThink Your
Commute.” It utilizes Google Maps to verify that the origin and destination are correct, as well as
provides the safest biking and walking routes. This program was started on July 12, 2010 and its success
has not yet been measured. There are currently over 600 people registered with the program.
Registered users were to be contacted in December, 2010, to determine the success of the program. A

17
potential incentive is being considered which would be similar to that offered by the “Clear Air
Campaign” in Georgia (currently $3 per day, up to $100 over a 90 day period) (Clear Air Campaign,
2010).

UCF began a “Zimride” carpooling program in summer 2010. Zimride is a national service with
universities and businesses as its subscribers (Zimride, 2010). There were 543 active rides posted on
December 1, 2010 for the UCF program. There is not a method for ridership participation to allow us to
determine Zimride’s success, and thus to estimate the emissions reduction achieved. The goal is to
connect UCF students, faculty, and staff with rides to and from campus as well as throughout the area.

LYNX VanPlan Program
The LYNX VanPlan program is another service which LYNX provides to aid in the carpooling
effort of the region. LYNX provides the commuter group with a van, insurance, and vehicle
maintenance. Each van can accommodate between seven and fifteen passengers. The IRS offers up to
$230/month in tax-free salary to assist in the cost of the vanpool. In the 2007/2008 fiscal year, the LYNX
VanPlan program provided 180,065 rides using 71 vans (Champion, 2010). This effort averted 3.6 tons
of VOCs and 2.5 tons of NOx in 2008. The program costs LYNX an estimated $300,000/year, which
equates to $49,100/ton averted (Champion, 2010).

Parking Cash Out in Downtown Orlando
Parking cash out programs offer employees an incentive to carpool by giving a cash subsidy to
participants. This subsidy is generally representative of the cost of the parking space that is no longer
needed and is paid by the employer. Estimates suggest that single passenger car use can be reduced by
approximately 20% for any given company that implements this program (Champion, 2010). If this
program were to be implemented in Orlando, emissions could be decreased by 3.7 tons of VOCs and 2.5
tons of NOx per year. The projected cost of this program is $22,600/year and $3,620/ton averted. The
annual cost is the net difference between the cost to the employers of paying for the parking spaces less
the cost for them to pay the employees not to use the parking spaces.

“Free” Transit for UCF Students
This action step would allow UCF students to use public transportation (Lynx buses) throughout
the metro area along with the UCF shuttles free of charge. This “free” charge is actually only free to the
student. The university would pay a negotiated annual lump sum to the transit agency based on
projected ridership estimates; that money most likely would come from increased student fees. This
program has been successful in other university cities. Once implemented, none of the schools have
discontinued the “Unlimited Access” program (Champion, 2010). Students are only required to show a
valid student ID to board the bus. According to a survey of 35 universities who offer this type of
program, ridership increased between 71 and 200 percent during the first year (Champion, 2010).
Because of increased use, the public transit system service also improved. This would then benefit the
LYNX service area because there would be a guaranteed amount of funding that could potentially be
used to expand the service to lesser populated areas making it even more accessible. At an estimated
$30 per student per year and approximately 56,000 students at UCF, LYNX could expect about
$1,680,000 of additional funding per year. The survey of 35 universities showed that the average

18
number of rides provided by the programs annually to students at universities of comparable size was
2,221,000 (Brown, 2001).

Assuming a round trip distance to UCF of approximately 5 miles, this program could decrease
VOC emissions by 18.5 tons and NOx by 11.7 tons per year. This equates to $55,700 per ton averted. An
estimated 4,830 cars would be removed from the road each day (approximately 8.5% student
participation) and the savings passed on to the students who utilize this feature is $797,000 annually.

Increase Transit Use (Lynx) in the OUA
Increasing transit use by all persons in the OUA on existing buses will reduce VMT and fuel
consumption. This will result in decreases in CO2, VOCs, and NOx. Emissions reductions are evaluated
for this situation in two ways:

1. Increasing passengers on existing buses
2. Adding new buses

LYNX currently operates 268 buses on 65 fixed routes (LYNX Fast Facts, 2010). Adding an
average of three people to each of these buses would decrease OUA emissions of VOCs by 4.4 tons and
NOx by 3.1 tons per year. This would generate additional revenues for LYNX and would also likely save
money for the 804 new passengers. This estimate was based on the assumption that the new
passengers would replace their car use by the bus for their work commute (but still use their cars for
leisure driving).

Based on the MOBILE6 model’s emission factors for urban buses and light duty gasoline vehicles, it
was determined that the NOx emissions from one large diesel bus are equal to that of 18 cars.
Additional buses are recommended if ridership is expected to be 18 or greater to yield both emissions
and traffic reduction. Fewer passengers would result in an increase in NOx emissions, while any number
greater than 18 results in emissions reductions. For VOCs, the “breakeven” passenger load is about 3.

Another option is to add smaller buses to the fleet. Smaller buses use less fuel, emit less
pollution, and may be more attractive to operate on routes where ridership is light. As ridership
increases on the routes using the smaller buses, larger buses may be substituted and the smaller buses
can be used to expand LYNX service to other low ridership areas.

Replace Existing Buses with CNG or Diesel/Electric Hybrid Buses
A report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) found that CNG buses can reduce
NOx emissions by as much as 53% ("Evaluating the Emission Reduction Benefits of WMATA Natural Gas
Buses", 2003). The diesel emission factor from the study is higher than that of the one used for data
calculations in this report, so that percentage reduction would not be realized. However, using the
numbers from the MOBILE6 model, NOx emissions would decrease by 38%. By replacing 20% of the
LYNX fleet (approximately 54 buses) with CNG buses, NOx emissions could be reduced by 30.3 tons per
year (or 7.6% of bus NOx emissions).

19
A study of the New York area’s buses on emissions from diesel/electric hybrid buses found that NOx
emissions decreased between 36% and 44% (Chandler, Walkowicz, and Eudy, 2002). There was not a
clear pattern for VOC emissions as two of the routes saw decreases of 28% and 43%, while the third
route saw an increase of 88%. Substituting 20% of the LYNX fleet with diesel/electric hybrid buses could
decrease NOx by 32 tons per year (or 8% of bus NOx emissions).

CNG and diesel/electric hybrid buses result in approximately the same reduction in NOx. The
advantage of diesel/electric hybrid buses is that they have the potential to reduce VOCs depending on
the speed at which they travel.

According to a report by the U.S. Department of Transportation, the capital cost of a CNG bus is
$371,000 (“Transit Bus Life Cycle Cost and Year 2007 Emissions Estimation”, 2007). The capital cost of a
diesel/electric hybrid bus is $533,000 1. These costs include emissions equipment, depot modification, a
refueling station, and the vehicle cost. The operating cost of a CNG bus is $350,200 and a diesel/electric
hybrid it is $375,200. Annualizing the capital cost of each bus over 10 years, the annual operating cost
for a CNG bus is $387,300, while that of a diesel/electric hybrid bus is $428,500. These costs are no
doubt higher than conventional diesel buses, but a detailed cost comparison should be made if the OUA
should go into non-attainment.

Shuttle Service for UCF Students
UCF offers a free shuttle service to students, visitors, faculty, and staff from off-campus student
apartments and park-and-ride lots in Research Park. During the 2008-2009 academic year, the shuttle
service provided an average of 8,255 one-way rides per day (Champion, 2010). This kept approximately
3,100 vehicles off campus each day. The car traffic (which uses gasoline) was replaced with bus traffic
(which uses diesel). To promote the service, UCF provided extra buses, resulting in fewer than 18 riders
per bus in many cases, and causing an increase in NOx emissions of 3.4 tons per year. VOC emissions
decreased by 5.2 tons per year. The shuttle service cost UCF’s Student Government Association $4.9
million during the 2009-2010 academic year (Keena, 2010). The cost per ton of pollutant averted is
$2.72 million. However, there is also a savings that is distributed among the riders (gasoline costs,
vehicle wear and tear, and parking permit savings). This was estimated to be $1,430,000 per year. The
net cost is approximately $3.5 million, or $1.94 million per ton..

Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Programs
Inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs require people to drive their vehicles to an
inspection station periodically for evaluation of their emissions control system. The programs range
from basic tailpipe emissions tests to a more detailed “Enhanced I/M” program developed by the EPA,
which includes visual inspection and evaluation of evaporative emissions. Visual inspection determines
if the system has been tampered with. Evaporative emissions can occur even when the vehicle is not in
operation.

1
This includes the cost of a refueling station for the new buses (about $2,000 per bus). The cost may change
depending on the cost of the station divided by the number of buses ordered.

20
Vehicles must pass these tests before their registration can be renewed. Costs for these tests
are either paid at the time of inspection, or included in vehicle registration fees. The maximum cost for
an inspection in the U.S. is $50 in Anchorage, Alaska (St. Denis and Lindner, 2005). The lowest cost
(aside from free inspection) was $8 in Memphis, Tennessee. There is also a maximum cost to the owner
for the mandatory repairs on the vehicles. This varies by program, but the literature showed that it was
generally less than $1000. Assuming an average cost of the programs that test for VOCs and NOx to be
$25, the cost of an I/M program to central Floridians would be approximately $38.7 million per year.
This estimate does not include the cost of lost time.

I/M programs were effective in the 1980s and 1990s, when there was a substantial fraction of
older vehicles in the fleet. EPA models still show a reduction in VOCs and NOx with a properly operated,
high compliance program. However, other studies show that actual reductions are much less than those
indicated by the models. This is especially true for a modern fleet, which typically has a very low
percentage of vehicles out of compliance.

According to an EPA document (“Clean Cars for Clean Air: Inspection and Maintenance
Programs”, 1994), I/M programs can reduce VOC and NOx emissions substantially (5 to 15% for VOCs
and 0-10% for NOx). That EPA study was based on data from the late 1980s and early 1990s – a time
when the vehicle fleet had a high percentage of older, higher emitting vehicles than exists today. Using
conservative reduction estimates to reflect the 2010 fleet, it was estimated that OSO on-road VOC
emissions could be reduced by 708 tons/year and NOx by 377 tons/year (3% and 1% reductions,
respectively). This step would cost $34,839 per ton of VOCs and NOx averted. The use of such
conservative reduction estimates was made due to the older timeframe of the data from the EPA article.
The cars that make up the majority of today’s fleet are running on engines that are regulated by
computers, and have more modern exhaust emissions reduction technology.

An article evaluating vehicle I/M programs in Arizona and California found that the EPA
overestimated the effectiveness of such programs (Harrington, 2000). The difficulty with I/M programs
lies in the large fleet population being managed. It tries to regulate the behavior of millions of small
sources rather than one large source. In addition to being less effective than anticipated, the programs
also cost more. The article also attributes emissions reduction to improved vehicle technology more
than to repairs on failed vehicles. It is the opinion of the author that I/M programs are not worth the
expense, however, since the models show a reduction, one was included in our list of action steps.

Reduce HDDV Speeds on I-4
Heavy duty diesel vehicles (HDDVs) are responsible for the majority of NOx emissions from on-
road mobile sources in central Florida. They produce 47% of NOx from on-road mobile sources and 4%
of VOCs. Interstate NOx emissions amount to 4,630 tons/year of which it was estimated that
approximately 80% come from HDDVs (despite the fact that they make up only 8.5% of total VMT).
Based on computer modeling runs using MOBILE6, the approximate highway speed at which they
produce the least grams per mile of NOx is 45 miles per hour. At this speed, the emissions factor is 8.966
grams per mile. At an average speed of 65 miles per hour, the emissions factor is 15.165 grams per mile.
By lowering this speed to 60 miles per hour, NOx emissions can be reduced from 1,195 tons per year to

21
993 tons per year – an improvement of 202 tons. Peak hours (morning and evening rush hours) for
weekdays were not included in the emissions calculations because at those times traffic on the
interstate is already travelling well below 65 miles per hour. This action step would have little effect on
VOC emissions. Table 6 shows the NOx emissions factors for speeds between 45 and 65 mph.

Table 6 - NOx emission factors for HDDV at common highway speeds

Speed (mph) Emission Factor (g/mi)
45 8.966
50 9.733
55 10.907
60 12.639
65 15.165

The costs associated with HDDV speed reduction involve additional signage and enforcement.
These costs are highly variable depending on the required signage per mile, size of signs, and number
and types of patrols. Therefore, the cost for this action step was not quantified.

Restrict HDDVs to the Right Lanes on I-4
Big trucks (HDDVs) often drive slower than other vehicle types, causing slow downs on the road.
This can frustrate drivers and may result in less efficient driving practices and increased emissions. By
restricting HDDVs from using the left lane or lanes, other cars can move along faster and decrease the
occurrence of traffic congestion due to slower moving semi-trucks. This also has the desirable effect of
further slowing down the HDDVs. Through simplified traffic modeling, it was estimated that truck speeds
on I-4 (in the non-rush hour times) would decrease from the current estimate of 69 mph to 65 mph by
restricting semi-truck access to the left-most lane only. Also, 147 tons of NOx per year would be averted
by this restriction. This step is also one of few that has the potential for reducing large quantities of NOx.
Figure 7 shows how speed affects NOx emissions from HDDVs in OSO. As with the HDDV speed reduction
step on I-4, the costs for this step were too uncertain to be quantified.

Change Signal Timing on Major Arterials
A methodology was developed to estimate the potential emissions reductions from changing
signal timing on all major arterial roads in OSO. If the signal timing can be computerized to reduce the
delay times for the vehicles on the major arterials, it will result in a reduction of idling time at the
signals. Assuming that such a signal optimization program can accomplish a 10% reduction in idling
emissions throughout the region (this assumption is by no means assured), VOCs would decrease by up
to 111.6 tons and NOx by 9.9 tons per year. Calculating the monetary costs of changing the signal timing
was outside the scope of this study.

22
HDDV - NOx Emissions as a Function of
1200
Speed
1000
NOx
Emissions
(ton/yr) 800

600
40 45 50 55 60 65
Miles per Hour

Figure 7 - HDDV NOx emissions in OSO as a function of speed

Stage II Vapor Recovery
Stage II vapor recovery (S2VR) systems are used at gas stations to recover VOCs that usually
escape vehicle gas tanks during refueling. A cup-like device is attached to the nozzle and fits over the
tank opening. When gas is pumped into the tank, the vapors are pushed out through a hose, and back
into the underground storage tank. These systems are useful at recovering a large portion of the VOCs,
but in recent years, this system has become less effective thanks to onboard refueling vapor recovery
(ORVR) technology in newer vehicles (see Figure 8). The cars now recover the gasoline vapors
themselves and pass the vapors along to an activated carbon packed canister (which adsorbs the vapor).
The vapors later are used as fuel when they are drawn into the engine intake manifold during operation.
However, the carbon canisters have a life of approximately 10 years (Koch, 1997). Unless the canister is
replaced, VOCs will fail to be recovered by the car, and will be released to the atmosphere.

Figure 8 - Diagram of ORVR system ("My beloved Sable--help me save her", 2009)

23
Because of ORVR, there is a rate of diminishing returns occurring with S2VR. The systems were
effective in the 1990s, and may still help today, but lose effectiveness each year as the older vehicles in
the fleet continue to be replaced by newer vehicles. As the vehicle fleet is updated, more cars from
2000 and later will be on the road (catching their own vapors), and fewer vapors will be available to
recover with S2VR. The equipment still costs the same to install but achieves decreasing emission
reduction rates, making it cost more per ton reduced.

To estimate the cost for upgrading a conventional fueling station to S2VR capabilities, a “model”
station was created on which to base the calculations. This station was estimated (based on the average
number of pumps per station in Orange, Seminole, and Osceola counties) to have eight pumps.
MOBILE6 predicted that with a 3-year phase-in period beginning in 2012, 2,608 tons of VOCs could be
averted through 2015. Reductions for the first two years are approximately 260 and 460 tons of VOCs,
then when fully implemented, reductions average around 630 tons per year. For equipment alone (no
labor or demolition to upgrade a station), the estimated cost is $11,100. Labor and construction costs
were estimated at $100,000 per station. For all stations in all three counties, this cost is approximately
$73,659,000, or $283,000 per ton of VOC averted in the first year ($54,560 2 per ton of VOC averted after
phased in).

Create High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes
Central Florida previously attempted to use HOV lanes (in the 1980s) without much success.
Diamonds were painted and signs were posted, but the lanes wound up being used as just another lane
on the highway. The biggest problem was enforcement because it was difficult and dangerous for police
to pull into traffic and pull cars over across several lanes of traffic and onto the small shoulder of I-4.
HOV lanes need to be designed and constructed rather than simply designated on existing roads.
However, when done properly, HOV lanes work. In Dallas, Texas, and Los Angeles County, California,
HOV lanes have been successful. A study in 1999 of the Dallas HOV lanes showed a 79% increase in
carpools on eastbound I-635 and a 296% increase on I-35E North (Skowronek, P.E., Ranft, and Slack,
1999). This study also found that the lanes saved motorists an average of at least five minutes over the
other non-HOV lanes on incident-free days. A similar study conducted in Los Angeles County, California,
found that emissions (per person per mile) from carpool lanes are approximately half of those from
other lanes (HOV Performance Program, 2002). Costs were not estimated for this step because HOV
lanes are already in the plan for the I-4 expansion and funds for this have already been budgeted.

On-road Mobile Summary
Table 7 shows the on-road mobile emissions reduction steps discussed previously. If all of these
proposed steps were to be put into action, OSO could reduce on-road mobile emissions by 1,493 tons of
VOCs and 1,199 tons of NOx annually. The steps which showed the biggest potential reductions for VOCs
were changing the signal timing to reduce idling emissions, offering “free” transit to UCF students, and
I/M programs. An effective I/M program can reduce emissions by about 700 tons of VOCs, but would
cost residents about $38,000,000/year in inspection fees. Stage 2 vapor recovery would decrease VOC
emissions by 260 tons in its first year of the phase-in period, ultimately saving 630 tons annually when

2
$54,560 = total cost divided by the cumulative emissions reduced up to the time of full implementation.

24
fully phased in. The “free” UCF transit would save 18 tons of VOCs, but would cost $1,680,000, which
would be paid for by UCF and not the counties. Stage 2 vapor recovery would save about 630 tons/year
of VOCs, but would cost approximately $73.7 million. That cost would be spread to gas station owners
and ultimately to consumers. The expense for stage 2 vapor recovery systems is for the estimated
equipment, labor, and construction costs to update from conventional refueling to vapor recovery, but
does not include operation and maintenance.

The steps which achieved the largest NOx reductions were I/M programs, reducing HDDV speeds
on I-4 and restricting their access from the left lane (allowing them in the middle and right lanes). These
latter two steps would reduce average speeds from 69 mph to 60 mph. They accounted for the majority
of NOx reductions in OSO. However, if the I/M reductions are to be believed, I/M would save 380 tons of
NOx at a cost of $38,000,000/year. The speed reduction steps were attractive, but the costs associated
with them were not quantified due to the uncertainty of signage required and additional patrols to
enforce them. These two NOx reduction steps would be a cost to the counties. And the trucking
companies might claim some costs due to lost time. However, the increase time required for passage
through the OSO area along I-4 at the 60 mph instead of 69 mph is only about 6 minutes. Furthermore,
the fuel savings at the lower speeds might well result in a cost savings to the truckers. Thus, these latter
two steps are highly recommended.

25
Table 7 - Reduction steps for on-road mobile sources

Pollutant reductions,
Cost, $/(ton of
tons/yr Cost, $/yr VOC + NOx
Reduction Step VOC NOx reduced)
Decrease school bus idling time
1.1 11 -$166,000 -$13,720
15 minutes/day
Switch from ULSD to B20
3.4 -2.3 $2,280,000 $2,073,000
biodiesel) school bus fleet
Implement carpooling
2.8 2 $80,640 $16,800
programs
Lynx VanPlan program 3.6 2.5 $300,000 $49,100
Parking cash out in downtown
3.7 2.5 $22,600 $3,620
Orlando
"Free" transit for UCF students 18.5 11.7 $1,680,000 $55,630
Increase transit use (adding No additional No additional
4.4 3.1
passengers to existing buses) cost cost
Replace existing buses with
not
CNG or diesel/electric hybrid 31 $21,600,000 $696,770
quantified
buses
Shuttle service for UCF
students or at large 5.2 -3.4 $709,090 $410,000
employment centers
Inspection/Maintenance
708 377 $37,800,000 $34,840
Program
Reduce HDDV speeds on I-4
and other limited access negligible 607 not quantified not quantified
highways in OSO
Restrict HDDVs on I-4 and other
limited access highways to the negligible 147 not quantified not quantified
right two lanes only
Changing the signal timing on
112 10 not quantified not quantified
major arterials
Stage 2 vapor recovery 630 0 $73,659,000+ $54,560
not not
Create HOV and HOT lanes not quantified not quantified
quantified quantified
TOTAL EMISSION REDUCTION
1,493 1,199
POTENTIAL
+
Cost to upgrade all stations; these are one-time costs, not annual operating costs.

26
Non-road Mobile Sources
According to the EPA’s NONROAD model, pleasure craft (motor boats and jet skis) are the
largest source of non-road VOC emissions in OSO comprising 42% of the total, followed closely by lawn
and garden equipment (mowers, edgers, trimmers, chain saws, blowers, etc) with 35% of the total.
Construction and mining equipment is the largest source of NOx emissions, accounting for 67% of the
total. Total OSO emissions of VOCs and NOx (as derived from the NONROAD model) are tabulated in
Table 8 and displayed graphically in Figure 9 and Figure 10.

Table 8 - 2008 NONROAD Emission totals for OSO

Classification VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr
Agricultural Equipment 9 73
Airport Equipment 17 183
Commercial Equipment 1,195 771
Construction and Mining Equipment 1,013 6,796
Industrial Equipment 193 934
Lawn and Garden Equipment (Com) 3,575 762
Lawn and Garden Equipment (Res) 1,714 113
Logging Equipment 2 4
Pleasure Craft 6,339 500
Railroad Equipment 0 1
Recreational Equipment 1,133 35
TOTALS 15,190 10,172

In the years from 2005-2008, prior to the extreme slow-down in economic activity that occurred
in the latter half of 2008, there had been very significant land development activity in the OSO area.
This created a high usage of a large number of a wide variety of construction equipment (graders,
pavers, dozers, excavators, off-highway trucks, scrapers, backhoes, etc). All this equipment is diesel
engine driven (higher NOx emissions), and typically moves under high load for short distances or sits
idling (waiting to be used) numerous times throughout the day. The stop-and-go movements are an
inefficient use of fuel, and according to the modeling results, construction vehicles produce about two-
thirds of all the non-road NOx emissions in this region. However, due to improvements by
manufacturers of both small and large engines, even with the economic boom that occurred between
the previous inventory (2002) and this one (2008), VOC emissions increased by only 1,801 tons (13.5%).
The decreases in VOC emissions from lawn and garden equipment and construction and mining
equipment from 2002 to 2008 mitigated the increases from pleasure craft and recreational equipment.
Furthermore, NOx emissions actually decreased by 5,717 tons (36%), owing to improvements in lawn
and garden and construction equipment per-engine emissions.

27
2008 Non-road VOC Emissions
(total = 15,190 tons) Commercial
Equipment
Recreational 8%
Equipment
7% Construction and
Mining Equipment
7%
Industrial
Equipment
Pleasure Craft 1%
42%
Lawn and Garden
Lawn and Equipment (Com)
Garden 24%
Equipment (Res)
11%
Figure 9 - 2008 Non-road VOC contributions by source for the OSO area*

* Does not include agricultural equipment, airport equipment, logging equipment, and railroad equipment. The total from
these sources combined was less than 0.25%.

2008 Non-road NOx Emissions
Lawn and Garden
Equipment (Res)
(total = 10,172 tons)
1% Pleasure Craft
Lawn and Garden 5%
Equipment (Com)
7%
Industrial
Equipment
9%
Commercial Construction and
Equipment Mining Equipment
8% 67%
Agricultural
Airport Equipment Equipment
2% 1%

Figure 10 - 2008 Non-road NOx contributions by source for the OSO area*

* Does not include logging equipment, railroad equipment, and recreational equipment. The total from these sources
combined was less than 0.50%.

28
Potential Action Steps

Use Biodiesel in Diesel Powered Lawn and Garden Equipment
Results from a survey conducted for determining emissions from lawn and garden equipment
showed that over half of commercial lawn care companies use gasoline-powered equipment (for at least
90% of their equipment). Ethanol is a potential replacement for gasoline, but changing to ethanol in
gasoline-powered equipment may require changes to their fuel and engine systems. Because VOC
emissions are approximately the same from ethanol as they are from gasoline, biodiesel is the only
other option suggested for use in lawn and garden equipment.

Switching from diesel to biodiesel in all applicable lawn and garden equipment could save 5 tons
of VOC emissions per year. These savings would be realized by consumption of an estimated 2.8 million
gallons annually of B20. There is some debate over whether NOx emissions from B20 are greater than or
less than petroleum diesel NOx emissions. Assuming NOx emissions would increase by no more than 1%
after switching to B20, NOx emissions would increase by less than 0.5 tons per year. The net reduction
of VOCs and NOx would be 4.5 tons per year. The monetary cost for this reduction is $445,000/year and
$98,900/ton. Based on the literature, it was assumed that B20 costs approximately $0.15 more per
gallon than regular diesel (U.S. Department of Energy, 2009).

Use PuriNOx in 20% of Diesel Construction Equipment
“PuriNOx” is a water emulsified fuel (i.e. watered down diesel) that consists of approximately
15% water. NOx emissions can be reduced by about 14.5% while VOC emissions increase by 75%. Non-
road diesel equipment emissions totaled 884 tons of VOCs and 8,439 tons of NOx in 2008. Converting
20% of the nonroad diesel construction equipment fleet to PuriNOx would yield a 245 ton reduction in
NOx, but an increase of 133 tons of VOCs. The cost per gallon of PuriNOx is about the same as that of
petroleum diesel, however due to the lower energy content, 15-20% more fuel is required. The total
estimated cost in OSO for this step would be $7.2 million/year and $64,200/ton averted.

Catalytic Converters on all Gasoline Lawn and Garden Engines
Newly manufactured lawn and garden equipment will require catalytic converters by 2012 (EPA:
“Lawn and Garden (Small Gasoline) Equipment”, 2010). These changes will be phased in between 2010-
2012 depending on the equipment type. In 2011, Class II engines (those above 225 cc) will require
catalytic converters, and in 2012, Class I engines (those less than 225 cc). For now, they freely pollute
(although, improvements in engine design have significantly reduced emissions from previous years).
The catalytic converters will reduce VOC and NOx emissions further by approximately 35%. This is about
1850 tons of VOCs and 306 tons of NOx per year. However, since regulations have already been passed,
a monetary cost for adding retrofit catalytic converters to lawn and garden engines was not calculated.
It is recommended to wait for the EPA regulations to take effect.

Require Oxygen Catalysts or Diesel Selective Catalytic Reduction Units for Construction
Equipment
Oxidation catalytic converters are not required for construction equipment exhaust systems at
this time. They have the potential to reduce 50-90% of VOCs, but do not reduce NOx. The way this
technology works is by oxidizing hydrocarbons (which include VOCs) to water and carbon dioxide, and

29
carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide. By installing catalytic converters on 20% of the diesel construction
vehicle fleet in OSO, and assuming 50% reduction, 70 tons of VOCs could be averted. The cost for
updating 20% of the fleet is $5,700,000 capital cost. If the life of the oxygen catalyst is assumed to be 5
years, this is approximately $1,100,000 per year, or $16,000 per ton of VOCs averted.

Diesel selective catalytic reducers (SCRs) are highly effective at reducing NOx emissions. They
have the potential to reduce 90% of NOx in exhaust gases. If 20% of the fleet were also fitted with SCRs,
this would avert approximately 1,223 tons of NOx per year. Assuming the cost of an SCR to be $4,000
per unit, applied to 20% of the construction/mining equipment fleet population of 22,733 pieces of
diesel equipment, the cost associated with this step is $242 million. This equates to $198,000 per ton of
NOx averted. This cost is a lump sum which assumes that the equipment would be installed and
emissions savings would begin to occur at once. These costs are borne by equipment owners, but
ultimately will be passed on to their clients. Also incorporated into the cost estimate are the prices of
diesel fuel and urea (a chemical needed to make the SCR units work).

Reduce Lawn Care Equipment Use by 25%
An easy, inexpensive way to reduce non-road emissions is to cut down on the frequency with
which central Floridians manicure their lawns. By stretching the time between mowing, trimming, and
edging, a reduction of 1,322 tons of VOCs and 219 tons of NOx was calculated. This would not really
affect lawn care companies as most are paid per month rather than per mow. They would actually save
money because they would spend less on fuel, as would those citizens who do their own yard work. The
savings cannot be quantified because there is no data estimating the amount of fuel used in all
commercial and residential lawn care equipment. The only cost would be for a campaign to make the
public aware of the effect frequent lawn maintenance has on the environment, particularly on high-level
ozone days. This step is very amenable to partial implementation. That is, in those months when ozone
formation potential is highest (March – June), reducing the use of lawn care equipment, may have the
best “bang for the buck.” If only implemented for that time period, the total reduction would be much
less, but the effect might be the most significant.

Reduce Idling in 20% of Diesel Tractors
There are perhaps several hours of the workday when construction tractors are left idling. This
may be due to lunch breaks, waiting for deliveries, or waiting for another piece of machinery to move or
clear things away. The NONROAD model estimated 14,339 tractors in OSO in 2008. Emissions reduction
calculations were based on the assumption that equipment idling could be reduced by 1 hour per day, 5
days per week, for 49 work weeks during the year for about 20% of all equipment. If this idling reduction
can be achieved, it would prevent 599 tons of NOx (a 5.9% reduction in nonroad NOx emissions) from
being released to the atmosphere. It was assumed that this step would be applied to newer equipment
that can be shut down and re-started frequently. Many pieces of construction equipment use about 1
gallon of fuel per hour of idling. This step would actually save construction companies $2,200,000/year,
and thus there would be a net savings of $3,700/ton averted.

30
Scrap Programs
A scrap program would encourage citizens in OSO to get rid of their older, less efficient lawn
care equipment. This has the benefit of speeding up the rate for new, cleaner machines to become part
of the equipment population. A scrap program in California was used as the basis for our estimates, and
their results were adjusted for the size of the OSO area. A similar program here was estimated to
produce a 2 to 4 ton reduction in VOCs and NOx, at a cost of approximately $18,000 per ton averted. The
costs were due to subsidies and advertising to convince people to scrap their older equipment.
However, equipment engines are emitting less than in the past, and new, even stricter EPA regulations
are currently being phased in. The benefits depend on when the scrap program is implemented, and
because lawn care equipment typically has a short life, it may be better to simply wait until after the
new EPA regulations are in full effect.

Public Education Campaigns
Public education campaigns have large variability in how to get across their messages. These
methods can include television commercials, print mailings, radio spots, and encouraging public
awareness by holding events/having a booth at an event. The basis for our estimates for public
education costs was the “ReThink Your Commute” program set up by FDOT. The original contract is for
five years and costs $1.9 million. Included in that cost are website maintenance, marketing, staffing,
and rideshare incentives. Annualized, this is $380,000 per year. Since the program began about six
months ago and still has much growth potential to be realized, emissions reduction from participants
cannot yet be estimated, and the costs/ton averted are not available.

Another campaign by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) in California
urged residents to abstain from certain activities on high-risk ozone days. A survey showed that about
8% of residents reduced their use of gasoline powered lawn equipment on those days (“Report to the
Board on the Potential Electrification Programs for Small Off-Road Engines”, 2004). This campaign was
estimated to have averted 2 tons of VOCs and NOx and cost between $20,000 and $36,000 per ton.

Commercial and Residential Ban on Leafblowers/Vacuums
Leafblowers and street vacuums serve the purpose of “clean up.” The intention is to blow the
grass clippings and leaves back into the lawn so that they can decompose naturally. Often blowers are
used improperly, and they just blow the dirt and grass clippings off the sidewalks and into the street so
that they end up in the gutters, and eventually into our lakes and streams. Blowers are also noisy and
polluting. Leafblowers and vacuums accounted for 599 tons of VOCs (3.9% of total nonroad VOC
emissions) and 59 tons of NOx (0.6% of total nonroad NOx emissions) in 2008. A ban would be one
method for the counties to reduce emissions. However, lawn care businesses would lose money (hiring
an extra person to do sweeping) and many citizens likely would oppose a ban. In some communities
where bans have been passed, people were highly in favor and in others they were highly opposed
(Crum, 2007). Central Floridians who subscribe to lawn care services expect a pristine yard. To achieve
the same effect, lawn care companies would have to hire more employees to sweep the debris or use
electric leafblowers. Both of these measures cost the companies more money. It was estimated that
such a ban would cost OSO approximately $2,607,000 or $3,960/ton VOC and NOx averted.

31
Voluntary Electric-for-Gasoline Mower Exchange
The mower exchange program would be targeted at residential users. It would work by offering
the participant a rebate on an electric mower in exchange for turning in their old gasoline one.
Adjusting a California program’s success to the OSO area’s size, it was estimated that 5 to 10 tons of
VOCs and NOx could be averted. The cost associated with such a program is about $20,300 per ton. The
costs include administration of the program, advertising, and rebates.

Voluntary Electric-for-Gasoline Handheld Exchange
This program would also be targeted at residential users. The participant would be offered a
rebate to buy hand-held electric equipment (leaf blowers, chain saws, trimmers, etc) if they turned in
their old gasoline powered piece. Participation is expected to be higher for a handheld exchange than a
mower exchange because electric powered equipment is more amenable to smaller devices. Because of
this, a higher savings was estimated – 10 to 15 tons of VOCs and NOx per year – at a lower cost –
$15,200 per ton of VOCs and NOx averted.

Reduction of Boating Emissions
The year 2010 was the first model year where boat manufacturers were required to produce
engines which will eventually reduce pleasure craft (personal boats and jet skis) emissions substantially.
It is estimated that nationally, emissions will be reduced by 70% by 2030, or about 600,000 tons of VOC
emissions and 130,000 tons of NOx emissions nationwide (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2008).
Using these EPA estimates, and the OSO portion of US population, we calculated that over the next 20
years this step could eventually reduce OSO’s portion of these emissions by 2,516 tons of VOCs and 545
tons of NOx. For this estimate, it was assumed that the annual reduction was linear. VOCs would be
reduced by 126 tons per year and NOx by 27 tons/yr. EPA estimates the net cost for this boat engine
standard is $236 million. Purchasers of watercraft in OSO will bear about $990,000 of this cost through
2030. That is $49,500 per year or $326 per ton averted.

Non-road Mobile Summary
Table 9 shows the non-road mobile emissions reduction steps discussed above. If all of these
proposed steps were to be put into action, OSO could reduce non-road mobile emissions by 3,737 tons
of VOCs and 2,651 tons of NOx annually. The largest contributors are lawn and garden equipment,
personal watercraft, and construction/mining equipment. Some of the most effective reduction
measures involved using the equipment less, and resulted in a cost savings.

The largest reduction of VOCs comes from adding catalytic converters to gasoline powered lawn
and garden equipment. Since the EPA has already passed legislation which requires the addition of
catalytic converters by 2012, OSO should take no action and wait for the regulations to take effect. The
second largest VOC reducing step is reducing overall use of lawn and garden equipment by 25%. This is
an effective measure, however it would be extremely difficult to accomplish because it would require
cooperation of almost all the residents in OSO. Also, the EPA requirement of catalytic converters on new
equipment will accomplish significant reductions, so the reduced emissions achieved by reducing lawn
care frequency would likely be less than what we have calculated. The costs for these steps were not
quantified because the associated costs for catalytic converters will be applied to equipment

32
manufacturers and the amount of gasoline used in this equipment in 2008 was not quantified. A
complete ban on the use of leafblowers and vacuum trucks would also result in large savings of VOCs,
but is considered unrealistic in central Florida at this time.

NOx reduction was best achieved by the addition of selective catalytic reducers to 20% of all
diesel construction equipment. However, the cost for this step is prohibitively high. The next largest
reduction step is to reduce tractor idling in 20% of all diesel and construction equipment by one hour
each day. There is no net cost associated with this – only a savings to the construction companies.

Table 9 - Reduction steps for non-road mobile sources

Pollutant reductions,
Cost, $/(ton of
tons/yr Cost, $/yr VOC + NOx
Reduction Step VOC NOx reduced)
Use biodiesel in diesel-powered
5 -0.5 $444,750 $98,833
lawn and garden equipment
"PuriNOx" water emulsion fuel for
-133 245 $9,744,000 $87,000
20% of construction equipment

Catalytic converters on all gasoline
1850 306 Not quantified Not quantified
lawn & garden engines

"Oxygen catalysts" installed on 20%
70 negligible $1,100,000 $15,700
of all diesel construction equip.

Diesel selective catalytic reducers
negligible 1223 $242,120,000* $197,972
installed on 20% of all tractors

Cut lawn care equipment use 25% 1322 219 Not quantified Not quantified

Reduce idling by 60 min/day for
negligible 599 -$2,200,000 -$3,673
20% of construction equipment
Scrap programs 3 Not quantified $18,000
Public education campaigns 2 Not quantified $25,000
Leafblower/Vacuum ban 599 59 $2,607,000 $3,962
Electric-for-gas mower exchange 7 Not quantified $20,300
Electric-for-gas handheld exchange 12 Not quantified $15,200
Boating emissions mandated
126 27 $49,500 $324
reductions
TOTAL EMISSION REDUCTION
3,737 2,651
POTENTIAL

* Cost to purchase SCRs; these are one-time costs, not annual operating costs.

33
Point and Area Sources
Point and area source emissions reductions were not the focus of this report. However, the
emissions inventory for 2008 submitted to MetroPlan in June 2010 found that area and point sources
contributed significantly to emissions in OSO. Figure 11 and Figure 12 show these categories and their
VOC and NOx contributions as compared to the other categories for which action steps were created.

2008 Total OSO VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 71,321 tons)
On-road
33%
Area
43%

Point Non-road
3% 21%

Figure 11 - Total VOC emissions for OSO by source category

2008 Total OSO NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 59,043 tons)
Area
Point <1%
19%

Non-road
17%
On-road
64%

Figure 12 - Total NOx emissions for OSO by source category

34
Point Sources
Point sources were identified from the US EPA Facility Emissions List and the central Florida
office of the FDEP (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Markets Division, 2010 and Ross,
2009). Point source facilities include large power plants (such as the OUC Stanton Plant), large facilities
(such as Disney World, Lockheed Martin, large graphic arts shops, and large asphalt plants), and major
airports (such as Orlando International). Each individual facility must submit annual emission records to
the FDEP to show they are operating within their permitted limits.

Table 10 shows the categories in which facilities may be classified. Point sources of VOCs are
relatively small in the OSO area. Within this category, “Airports” and “Other” sub-categories had the
highest level of VOC emissions. The “Airport” category includes aircraft emissions, but does not include
ground service equipment (GSE) emissions. GSE emissions were included in the non-road source
section. There were many small companies included in the “Other” category; some of the larger ones
were Cellofoam North America Inc., Sonoco Products Company, Walt Disney World Co., and Lockheed
Martin Missiles & Fire Control. The airports in OSO are Orlando International Airport (OIA), Orlando
Sanford International Airport, Orlando Executive Airport, and Kissimmee Gateway. OIA handled
approximately 360,000 flights during the 2008 calendar year. The OIA emissions were estimated based
on a detailed model of flight activity (data gathered directly from OIA) and using the Emissions and
Dispersion Modeling Systems (EDMS) model. EDMS is the FAA’s required model for airport emissions.
The other three airports in OSO have drastically less air traffic, so the emissions from those were
calculated as a simple factor (percentage) of OIA emissions. Airport aircraft emissions can be seen in
Table 12.

Power plants emitted significant amounts of NOx in OSO, accounting for three-fourths of all the
point source NOx emissions, and about 14% of the total regional emissions of NOx from all sources.
Most of that came from the two (2) coal fired units at the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC) Stanton
Energy Center. The NOx emissions from each power plant are tabulated in Table 11. Figure 13 and
Figure 14 graphically show the VOC and NOx emissions from point sources in OSO.

35
Table 10 - 2008 Point source emission totals for OSO

Total
Category
VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr
Airports* 473 1,469
Asphalt Plant 31 66
Chemical Plant 2 0
Electric Production 0 36
Fiberglass Products Mfg. 103 0
Food Production 297 31
Graphic Arts/Printing 146 1
Hospitals/Health Care 5 77
Misc Wood Products Mfg. 2 0
MSW Landfill 37 24
Incineration 1 32
Petroleum Storage/Transfer 80 9
Power Plants 111 8,525
Secondary Metal Production 0 1
Surface Coating Operations 249 8
All Other 364 708
TOTALS 1,901 10,987
*Airports in this table represent aircraft emissions (landings and take-offs and taxiing) but do not include ground service
equipment (GSE). This is included in the non-road inventory.

Table 11 - 2008 Annual NOx emissions of OSO power plants

Facility Name NOx, tons/yr
Curtis H. Stanton Energy Center 8,137
Orlando CoGen 144
RRI Energy Osceola 35
Reedy Creek 1
Stanton A 126
Cane Island 82
TOTALS 8,525

Table 12 - 2008 airport (aircraft) emission results

Airport VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr
Orlando International 322 1,353
Orlando Executive 40 3
Orlando-Sanford International 66 110
Kissimmee Gateway 45 3
TOTALS 473 1,469

36
2008 Point Source VOC Emissions by Source
(total = 1,901 tons)
Miscellaneous
Surface Coating 3%
Operation Airports
14% 21%
Power Plant
5% Fiberglass Products
Petroleum Mfg.
Storage/Transfer 6%
5% Others
20% Food Production
Graphic 16%
MSW Landfill Arts/Printing
2% 8%

Figure 13 - 2008 Point source VOC contributions by source for the OSO area*

* The “Miscellaneous” source category includes chemical plants, hospitals/healthcare facilities, miscellaneous wood products
manufacturing, incineration, and asphalt plants

2008 Point Source NOx Emissions by Source
(total = 10,987 tons)
Other
Airports
6%
13%
Miscellaneous
3%

Power Plant
78%

Figure 14 - 2008 Point source NOx contributions by source for the OSO area*

* The "Miscellaneous" source category includes graphic arts/printing, petroleum storage/transfer, secondary metal production,
surface coating operation, MSW landfill, asphalt plant, electric production, food production, hospitals/healthcare facilities, and
other incineration

37
Area Sources
Area source emissions data came from the US EPA 2008 National Emissions Inventory (“2008
National emissions inventory data & documentation,” 2010). The EPA has developed county-level data
for the major area-source sub-categories for every county in the United States; these are listed in Table
13. The totals for the area source emissions in the OSO region can be seen in Table 14. As can be seen
area-source emissions of VOCs in the OSO area are substantial.

The largest contributor of VOCs amongst the area sources was the chemicals and paint category,
which comprised 47% of the area source total. The chemical solvent sub-category accounted for
approximately half of that source with VOC emissions of 7,365 tons per year. The majority of area-
source NOx emissions came from residential heating. There are about 53,000 homes in central Florida
that use fossil fuels (mostly natural gas, propane, and No. 2 oil) for home heating. Open burning (yard
waste and construction land clearing biomass) can produce both VOCs and NOx but in 2008 both Orange
and Seminole counties had open burning bans, so emissions of both pollutants were low in 2008.
Emission totals for area sources (by category) can be seen graphically in Figure 15 and Figure 16.

Table 13 - List of categories included in area sources

Area Source Category Sub-categories
Coatings Architectural coatings
Industrial maintenance coatings
Other special purpose coatings
Surface coatings
Chemicals and Paints Consumer solvents
Degreasing
Dry cleaning
Graphic arts (smaller print shops)
Pesticide application
Traffic paints
Gasoline and Fuels Aviation gasoline distribution stages 1 and 2
Gasoline distribution – stage 1
Portable fuel containers
Residential heating
Stage 2 gasoline refueling
Cooking Commercial cooking
Asphalt Cutback asphalt (small operations)
Emulsified asphalt (small operations)
Land Clearing* Land clearing
Burning* Household waste burning
Open burning – yard waste
*“Land clearing” includes emissions from open burning of land clearing debris (brush, stumps, trees)
that remains after clearing land for construction of new homes, or other facilities. “Burning” means
specifically homeowner burning of brush, branches, stumps, and other yard or household waste.

38
Table 14 - 2008 Area Source Emission Totals for OSO

Sub-category VOC, tons/yr NOx, tons/yr
Asphalt 67 0
Burning 51 33
Chemicals and Paints 14,519 0
Coatings 5,229 0
Cooking 63 0
Gasoline and Fuels 10,719 125
Land Clearing 1 1
TOTALS 30,648 158

2008 Area Source VOC Emissions by Sub-category
(total = 30,648 tons)
Gasoline and Fuels
35%
Land Clearing
< 1%
Cooking
< 1%

Burning
< 1%

Asphalt
Chemicals and Paints
Coatings < 1%
48%
17%

Figure 15 - 2008 Area source VOC contributions by source for the OSO area

39
2008 Area Source NOx Emissions by Sub-category
(total = 158 tons)

Burning
21%

Gasoline and Fuels
79%

Figure 16 - 2008 Area source NOx contributions by source for the OSO area

Conclusions and Recommendations
Central Florida is at risk of becoming ozone non-attainment. The current standard set by the
EPA is 75 ppb and Orange County is close to that at 71 ppb. Since the new ozone regulations would be
based on recent data, if the EPA sets the new standard between 60 and 70 ppb, as is expected, then
OSO will become non-attainment. Orange, Seminole, and Osceola Counties are treated as one airshed
(along with Lake County). If one county goes into non-attainment, the other counties also become non-
attainment. The action steps outlined in this report provide options for local leaders for steps that can
be taken to reduce emissions. The steps have varying costs and levels of effectiveness. This report has
provided central Florida decision makers with a variety of action steps that can be taken prior to or
shortly after OSO becomes non-attainment for ozone. Implementing some of these proposed steps will
help OSO to achieve its goal of maintaining attainment status, and possibly preventing going into non-
attainment in the future. Based on a recent emissions inventory (Ross and Cooper, 2010), the major
sources of VOCs and NOx 0in OSO are as shown in Table 15 and Table 16, respectively.

40
Table 15 - Major VOC contributors by source type

Source Type Source VOCs (tons/year)
On-road Small pickups and SUVs (LDGT12) 8,228
Passenger cars (LDGV) 8,186
Big pickups and SUVs (LDGT34) 4,774
Non-road Pleasure Craft 6,339
Lawn and Garden Equipment (comm) 3,575
Lawn and Garden Equipment (resid) 1,714
Point Airports 473
Food Production 297
Surface Coating Operations 249
Area Chemicals and Paints 14,519
Gasoline and Fuels 10,719

Table 16 - Major NOx contributors by source type

Source Type Source NOx (tons/year)
On-road Big diesel trucks & buses (HDDV) 17,791
Small pickups and SUVs (LDGT12) 7,310
Passenger cars (LDGV) 6,096
Non-road Construction and Mining Equipment 6,796
Industrial Equipment 934
Commercial Equipment 771
Point Power Plants 8,525
Airports 1,469
Area Gasoline and Fuels 125
Burning 33

It is the opinion of persons in FDEP that OSO is a NOx-limited area, which means that NOx
emissions reduction strategies should be more heavily targeted than VOC reductions. The main sources
of NOx emissions are on-road vehicles (especially heavy diesel trucks), construction equipment, point
sources, and lawn and garden equipment. The majority of steps for NOx reduction are aimed at these
areas and those with a reasonable balance between tonnage reduced and cost should be utilized. The
companies who manufacture this equipment are the ones who have the greatest potential to reduce
emissions, and many are now being mandated by the EPA to redesign their engines. The most effective
steps for NOx reduction in the OSO area are reducing construction equipment idling by an hour each
day, slowing down HDDVs on I-4 and/or restricting their access to the right lanes on I-4, reducing lawn
care equipment use by 25%, and possibly implementing an I/M program. Other effective steps require
patience rather than action since the EPA has already enacted regulations to greatly reduce non-road
mobile source emissions.

However, just because OSO is NOx limited does not mean that VOC emissions reduction steps
can be ignored. The largest contributors of VOCs are area sources, with 48%, followed by on-road

41
mobile sources, with 30%. Personal watercraft and lawn and garden equipment also emit large amounts
of VOCs. Reduction measures determined to be most effective include carpooling, S2VR (if it can be
implemented quickly), reducing lawn care equipment use by 25%, considering an I/M program, and
banning the use of gasoline-powered leafblowers and vacuum trucks. Area source emissions reduction
steps were not included in this report, however their major contribution to overall emissions warrants
further investigation of reduction methods. Since area sources are comprised of many relatively small
operations, direct regulation is difficult and thus, creative strategies may be required in order to make
progress at reducing emissions from this sector.

In order to maximize the efficient use of funds spent on emissions reduction, the action steps
should be evaluated with two objectives in mind. First, what are the steps that can be used to achieve
large reductions? Second, what are the steps that have the best “bang for the buck” in terms of cost per
ton averted? The best way to deal with emissions is to plan ahead and design for minimal emissions.
Building homes and apartments near office space encourages people to live near where they work, and
will reduce commute trip distances and emissions. Designing roads to allow for public transportation to
be implemented promotes the use of such systems. Avoiding urban sprawl slows the growth of VMT
thereby reducing commuter emissions. These are just examples of things that can be done in advance
which will help keep OSO in ozone attainment and ideally render the steps discussed in this report
unnecessary.

42
References
2008 National emissions inventory data & documentation. (2010, May 17). Retrieved from

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2008inventory.html

"About Zimride." Zimride. Zimride. Web. 4 Dec 2010. <http://www.zimride.com/about>.

Brown, Jeffery, Daniel Baldwin Hess, and Donald C. Shoup. "Unlimited Access." Transportation 28

(2001): 233-267. Web. 17 Dec 2010. <http://www.uctc.net/research/papers/525.pdf>.

Champion, Wyatt. “Means to Reduce Vehicular Emissions of Ozone Precursors in the Orlando

Metropolitan Area.” Print. 13 Sep 2010.

Chandler, Kevin, Kevin Walkowicz, and Leslie Eudy. "New York City Transit Diesel Hybrid-Electric Buses:

Final Results." U.S. Department of Energy. U.S. Department of Energy, July 2002. Web. 14 Jan

2011. <http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels/fleettest/pdfs/nyct_final_results.pdf>.

Crum, Megan. “Quantification of Emissions from Lawn and Garden Equipment in Central Florida.”

Thesis. University of Central Florida, 2007. Print.

"Earn $3 a Day with Cash For Commuters!" The Clear Air Campaign. The Clear Air Campaign. Web. 23

Nov 2010. <http://www.cleanaircampaign.org/Commuter-Rewards/Select-a-Reward/3-a-Day>.

"Eleven things you should know about the carpool lanes in Los Angeles County." HOV Performance

Program. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, July 2002. Web. 23 Nov

2010. <http://www.hovworld.com/publications_assets/MTAHOVexecsum.pdf>.

"Evaluating the Emission Reduction Benefits of WMATA Natural Gas Buses." U.S. Department of Energy,

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. U.S. Department of Energy, June 2003. Web. 14 Jan

2011. <http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy03osti/33280.pdf>.

Harrington, W., McConnell, V., & Ando, A. (2000). Are vehicle emission inspection programs living up to

expectations? Transportation Research Part D, 5D(4), 153-172.

Keena, John. Telephone Interview by Jessica Ross. 14 Dec 2010.

Koch, Ph.D., Wolf H. "The Debate Continues Why ORVR Cars Will Get the Job Done." Petroleum

43
Equipment & Technology July 1997: 26. Web. 08 Nov 2010.

"Lawn and Garden (Small Gasoline) Equipment." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 27 Aug 2010.

Web. 4 Dec 2010. <http://www.epa.gov/otaq/equip-ld.htm>.

"LYNX Fast Facts." LYNX Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority. LYNX. Web. 13 Jan 2011.

<http://www.golynx.com/?id=1156155>.

"My beloved Sable--help me save her." 16 Jan 2009. Online Posting to Ford Forums. Web. 15 Nov 2010.

<http://www.fordforums.com/f138/my-beloved-sable-help-me-save-her-163136/>.

Olson, Steve. Telephone Interview by Wyatt Champion. 01 Dec 2010.

“Report to the Board on the Potential Electrification Programs for Small Off-Road Engines”, California

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board: Sacramento, CA, 2004.

Ross, Jessica. "Request for Point Sources information." Message to Michael Young. 04 Dec 2009. E-mail.

Ross, Jessica, and David Cooper. “2008 Emissions Inventory for Orange, Seminole, and Osceola
Counties.” 14 Jun 2010.

Skowronek, P.E., Douglas A., Stephen E. Ranft, and Joseph D. Slack. "Investigation of HOV Lane

Implementation and Operational Issues." Texas Transportation Institute: The Texas A&M

University System. TxDOT, July 1999. Web. 23 Nov 2010. <http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/3942-

S.pdf>.

St. Denis, Michael, and Jim Lindner. "Review of Light-Duty Diesel and Heavy-Duty Diesel Gasoline

Inspection Programs." Journal of Air & Waste Management Association. 55.12 (2005): 1876-

1884. Print.

"Transit Bus Life Cycle Cost and Year 2007 Emissions Estimation." U.S. Department of Transportation, 02

July 2007. Web. 14 Jan 2011.

<http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/WVU_FTA_LCC_Final_Report_07-23-2007.pdf>.

44
U.S. Department of Energy. Clean Cities Alternative Fuel Price Report. Energy Efficiency and Renewable

Energy, 2009. Web. 5 Jan 2011. <http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/pdfs/afpr_jul_09.pdf>.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Clean Air Markets Division. (2010). Data and maps.

Retrieved from http://camddataandmaps.epa.gov/gdm/index.cfm?fuseaction=

emissions.wizard.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Clean Cars for Clean Air: Inspection and Maintenance Programs.

Office of Mobile Sources, 1994. Web. 4 Dec 2010. <http://www.epa.gov/oms/consumer/14-

insp.pdf>.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA Finalizes Emission Standards for New Nonroad Spark-Ignition

Engines, Equipment, and Vessels. Office of Transportation and Air Quality, 2008. Web. 17 Dec

2010. <http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/nonroad/marinesi-equipld/420f08013.pdf>.

45
MetroPlan Orlando
315 East Robinson Street, Suite 355
Orlando, Florida 32801
(407) 481-5672
www.metroplanorlando.com

Related docs

Other docs by jennyyingdi

Montegrappa Exclusive Cufflinks

Views: 7 | Downloads: 0

DOMAIN Ill Cognitive Development

Views: 0 | Downloads: 0

Taddle Creek Family Health Team

Views: 27 | Downloads: 0

Engaging Clients in Fire Prevention

Views: 17 | Downloads: 0

reading eyechart pub

Views: 0 | Downloads: 0

HOME RETENTION SOLUTIONS INTAKE PACKET

Views: 0 | Downloads: 0

CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS April and

Views: 51 | Downloads: 0

Patterson Elementary School

Views: 1 | Downloads: 0

STAFF RESPONSIBILITIES

Views: 24 | Downloads: 0

TJF Red Light Appeal Opening Brief

Views: 0 | Downloads: 0