GRIP CEE 2017 / Main Report

−2.5%

−21%

+2.1%

180

175

156

145 148

−9.8%

−3.8%

124

106 102

126

114

2010 (ver. 2.c March 2007)

2010 (ver. 4.a January 2014)

2020 (ver. 4.a January 2014)

2012

2030

Diesel

CNG

Diesel

CNG

7,000

7,000

6,000 Figure 5.6: GHG emission evaluation of passenger vehicles using the JEC methodology (CO ²  eq /km)

6,000 Figure 5.7: GHG emission evaluation of passenger vehicles using DLR & Partners’ methodology (CO ²  eq /km)

5,000

5,000

4,000

4,000

In addition to the intrinsic reduction of GHG as described above, NG can easily be blended with biomethane. Such an approach is similar to the obligatory blending of petroleum-based fuels with respective bio-components. These liquid bio-compo- nents, e. g. bio-ethanol and rapeseed oil, differ chemically and change the proper- ties of the liquid fuel. As described in Chapter 5.1.2, biomethane, by contrast, does not change the properties of NG and allows NG to profit from the almost GHG-neu- tral well-to-wheel (WTW) balance of biomethane. If 20% of NG is substituted by biomethane, then, using the DLR & Partners’ meth- odology, the WTW GHG emissions of a mid-sized passenger car are the following: \\ 2012: 156g CO ²  eq /km \\ 2030: 96g CO ²  eq /km For year 2012, their methodology shows an additional 11% decrease for CNG blended with 20% of biomethane in WTW GHG emissions compared to pure CNG. Future outlooks are even more promising, due to sustainability efforts and the rising efficiency of production and transportation. Well-to-tank (WTT) emissions are expected to decrease by 2030, resulting in a 15% total decrease of WTW GHG emissions when blending NG with biomethane. 0 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 3,000 2,000 1,000

Central Eastern Europe GRIP 2017 |

67