Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Real-world automotive emissions: Monitoring methodologies, and

control measures☆
Avinash Kumar Agarwal a, *, Nirendra Nath Mustafi a, b
a
Engine Research Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Kanpur, 208016, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Rajshahi University of Engineering & Technology, Rajshahi, 6204, Bangladesh

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Vehicular emissions make significant contribution to the total ambient airborne pollutants. Global warming and
Emissions human health concerns are motivating researchers to come out with newer ways of controlling air pollution
Vehicles effectively. On the other hand, there are significant challenges in complying with current and upcoming vehicle
Real-world driving emissions
emission regulations, which are quite stringent. It is therefore quite important to monitor vehicular emissions
Dynamometers
Driving cycles
closely, which can facilitate adopting effective control measures when necessary, and also in predicting the
impact of vehicular emissions on ambient air quality. Traditionally, dynamometers (both engine and chassis)
testing has been used extensively to measure and monitor vehicular emissions, and the database generated has
been used as input in modeling the traffic-related air quality impact. Even though standard driving cycles are
followed in dynamometer tests attempting to closely replicate real-world driving conditions, they may not
necessarily represent actual real-world driving conditions and emissions thereof. Therefore, in recent years,
significant scientific efforts have been directed to measure and analyze real-world driving emissions (RDE) from
vehicles. In this paper, the state-of-the-art techniques and methods for vehicular emissions monitoring under
real-world driving conditions are reviewed and discussed in detail. Different vehicle emissions monitoring
methods are presented in comparison to dynamometer-based measurements. Several influencing factors which
affect on-road and in laboratory measurements are identified and discussed. Potential applications of different
emission control strategies are reviewed. Finally, guidelines are formulated for effective vehicular emissions
monitoring, and to minimize discrepancies between on-road and laboratory based measurements, in order to
have a sustainable road transport system in future.

[1]. In addition to combustion generated emissions, transport sector

1. Introduction
Most of the countries across the globe are experiencing rapid ur­
banization. Transport is considered as a key driver in rapid urban and
economic development as the economic status of any country depends
on the freedom to mobility i.e. how easily people, goods and services can
be moved across using an efficient transport system. Among the different
transport options, road transport emerges as the most used mode of
transport owing to its flexibility. Road transport includes variety of ve­
hicles ranging from light-duty to heavy-duty vehicles, which are mostly
powered by internal combustion (IC) engines. As IC engines fuelled by
fossil fuels emit harmful gaseous pollutants as well as particulate, road
transport sector is largely blamed for environmental and health hazards
emissions also include evaporative emissions, and abrasion emissions
generated from wear of tires, brake liners, clutches, road surfaces and
vehicle corrosion [2]. High population growth, economic development
and rapid urbanization have led to exponential growth in automotive
population, hence associated health risks have also increased propor­
tionately. It is expected that the number of cars on the road worldwide
will nearly double by 2040, with their projected numbers reaching two
billion. Another projection shows that the total number of road vehicles
would reach between 2 and 3 billion by 2050 [3]. Most of this growth in
the number of road transport vehicles is expected to take place in Asian
countries, dominated by China and India, due to their emerging econ­
omy, prosperity as well as high population growth rate. The high growth
of GDP in these regions will increase the demand for vehicles including

Formulation of future guidelines is presented for effective and precise monitoring of real-world vehicle emissions in order to achieve sustainable road transport
☆

system.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: akag@iitk.ac.in (A.K. Agarwal).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110624
Received 21 May 2020; Received in revised form 10 November 2020; Accepted 24 November 2020
Available online 14 December 2020
1364-0321/© 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624

List of abbreviations HWFET Highway Fuel Economy Test

I/M Inspection and Maintenance
ANN Artificial Neural Network ICE Internal Combustion Engine
ARTEMIS Assessment and Reliability of Transport Emission Models LDVs Light-Duty Vehicles
and Inventory Systems LEZ Low Emissions Zones
BTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene LNT Lean NOx Trap
CADC Common Artemis Driving Cycles LTC Low Temperature Combustion
CARB California Air Resources Board’s MAQS Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy
CCS Congestion Charging Scheme MEL Mobile Emission Laboratory
CH4 Methane MOVES Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator
CN Cetane Number MT Million Tons
CNG Compressed Natural Gas MTBE Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether
CO Carbon Monoxide N2O Nitrous Oxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide NEDC New European Driving Cycle
COPERT Calculation of Pollutant Emissions from Road Transport NMHC Non-Methane Hydrocarbon
CRT Continuously Regenerating Trap NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
CVS Constant Volume Sampling NOx Oxides of Nitrogen
DME Dimethyl Ether OBD On-Board Diagnostics
DOC Diesel Oxidation Catalyst OC Organic Carbon
DPF Diesel Particulate Filter PAHs Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
DTA Dynamic Traffic Assignment PCCI Premixed Charge Compression Ignition
EC Elemental Carbon PEVs Plug-in Electric Vehicles
EDAR Emissions Detection and Reporting PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
EF Emission Factor PM Particulate Matter
EFI Electronic Fuel Injection PN Particulate Number
EFM Exhaust Flow Meter PNA Passive NOx Adsorber
EGR Exhaust Gas Recirculation RCCI Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition
EHN Ethylhexyl Nitrate RDE Real Driving Emissions
ERMES European Research Group on Mobile Emission Sources RS Remote Sensing
ETBE Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
EU European Union SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction
EVs Electric Vehicles SFTP Supplemental Federal Test Procedure
FAME Fatty Acid Methyl Ester SOAs Secondary Organic Aerosols
FTP Federal Test Procedure SOF Soluble Organic Fraction
GCI Gasoline Compression Ignition SOx Sulfur Oxides
GDI Gasoline Direct Injection TDM Travel Demand Management
GDP Gross Domestic Product THC Total Hydrocarbons
GHG Greenhouse Gas TMS Traffic Management Strategies
GPF Gasoline Particulate Filter TWCs Three-Way Catalysts
GPS Global Positioning System UDDS Urban Dynamometer Driving Schedule
GWP Global Warming Potential ULSD Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel
HBEFA Handbook of Emission Factors UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
HCCI Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
HCT Hydrocarbon Traps VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds
HDDT Heavy-Duty Diesel Truck WHO World Health Organization
HDETL Heavy-duty Diesel Emission Testing Laboratory WHSC World Harmonized Stationary Cycles
HDVs Heavy-Duty Vehicles WHTC World Harmonized Transient Cycles
HEVs Hybrid Electric Vehicles WLTC Worldwide Harmonized Light-Duty Vehicle Test-Cycle
HHDDT Heavy-Heavy-Duty Diesel Trucks WLTP Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicles Test Procedure

the ones in ‘luxury’ segment. As a consequence, road transport emissions
worldwide are projected to increase further over the years.
EPA has established emission standards for six common air pollut­
ants: ground level ozone (O3), PM, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon
monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). Transport sector has
recognized as one of the major contributing source for the emission of
first four pollutants in the list [4]. A vehicle’s tailpipe plume also in­
cludes numerous semi-volatile and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
(e.g., polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), benzene, ethene,
ethylene and toluene), which are highly toxic. Therefore, vehicular
emissions form a major fraction of air pollutants, particularly in urban
areas, which has now become a serious concern due to their toxicolog­
ical effects on human health and ecosystem [5].
The experimental investigations have demonstrated that gaseous
organic compounds emitted in the vehicular exhaust (both gasoline and
diesel) lead to formation of secondary organic aerosols (SOAs), photo­
chemical smog, and ground level ozone (O3) [6]. Together, photo­
chemical smog and SOAs lead to haze formation, which is evolving as a
serious issue in developing countries like China and India [7]. Haze
results in a visibility of <10 km because of dense accumulation of fine
aerosols [8]. Tropospheric O3 being a harmful pollutant, acts as a
powerful greenhouse gas (GHG) and its high concentration leads to
respiratory problems such as asthma [9].
The greatest environmental concern is emissions of GHGs (CO2, CH4,
N2O, O3 etc.) from the global transport sector, which contributes to
global warming and subsequent climate change. Although CO2 is the

2
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
main GHG, it has the lowest global warming potential (GWP), while
methane (CH4) has 28 times more and nitrous oxide (N2O) has 265 times
more GWP than CO2 over a 100-year timescale [10]. PM from the
vehicular exhaust is usually composed of solid carbonaceous particles
and organic compounds and can remain as suspended particles in the
atmosphere or may deposit on the earth’s surfaces. Because of the tiny
sizes (μm-nm), PM is inhalable and gets easily transported through the
human respiratory system.
Toxic components such as PAHs and trace metals are associated with
PM2.5 and PM10 emissions. As per an estimate, ~2.9 million premature
deaths were associated with exposure to fine PM suspended in ambient
air in 2017 [11]. The other major pollutant in high concentration, in
urban areas, is nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and exposure to NO2 is usually
associated with asthma, particularly among children [12,13], leading to
frequent hospitalization to asthma emergency centers [12–15]. The In­
ternational Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified diesel
engine exhaust as a ‘Group-I carcinogen’ due to its association with lung
cancer [16]. Hamra et al. [17] concluded that there is a consistent evi­
dence of strong relationship between exposures to NO2 with incidences
of lung cancer. Long- and short-term exposure to toxic transport related
pollutants has a severe impact on human health ranging from eye irri­
tation, skin diseases, respiratory infections and inflammations [18],
respiratory mortality [19], cardiovascular dysfunction, cardiovascular
mortality and morbidity [19,20], decreased lung function among chil­
dren [21,22], neuropsychiatric complications to chronic diseases such as
lung cancer [23], which lead to high mortality rates [19].
Global transport sector accounts for ~64% of the total petroleum
consumption, which is equivalent to ~27% of all forms of energy
consumed worldwide [3]. Transport sector was responsible for ~18% of
the total GHG emissions globally in 2016 [24]. Nearly 24% of total
anthropogenic CO2 (the main GHG) was generated by the transport
sector worldwide in 2017 and road transport vehicles were responsible
for nearly three-quarters of the total transport CO2 emissions [25].
Transport sector is usually regarded as an important source of primary
particulate matter (PM) (~10% of total energy-related primary PM2.5
emissions). Road transport sector produces tailpipe N2O emissions either
as a byproduct of combustion or from the malfunctioning of exhaust gas
after-treatment systems. Road transport among all the other transport
subsectors accounts for as the largest source of NOx (~58%) and primary
PM2.5 (~73%) emissions [26].
Because of high health risks associated with vehicular emissions,
most countries have imposed increasingly stringent emission legisla­
tions namely: Euro-VI in European Union (EU); Tier-3 and California
standard in USA; China-6 in China; and BS-VI in India. The world-class
standards are equivalent to Euro-VI for light-duty vehicles (LDVs) and
heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs). The Euro-VI standards will motivate re­
searchers globally to explore and implement all possible modifications
and improvements in the IC engines (e.g. innovative combustion
chamber design) and their management (e.g. high fuel injection pres­
sure, variable injection quantity and time etc.) and after-treatment
system design [27].
It is crucial to identify emission sources and determine emissions
accurately for superior monitoring and control of air pollutants. Pre­
diction of vehicular emissions is often done using mobile emission factor
models, wherein the data input is based on dynamometer testing.
Dynamometer testing method measures vehicular emissions under lab­
oratory conditions based on any standard driving cycle, which simulates
real road driving conditions of the vehicle. Driving cycles consisting of
unique profile of stopping, starting, idling, constant speed cruising, ac­
celeration, and deceleration with a prescribed time frame, vary
considerably worldwide, depending on specific traffic and road condi­
tions. However, dynamometer tests are known to have limitations as
they fail in representing the actual driving conditions to a great extent
[28]. It was reported that vehicle certification tests carried out on
chassis dynamometer under standard driving cycles, underestimated
real-world emissions [29]. Previous research studies have shown that
3
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
vehicular emissions under real-driving conditions are affected by several
factors, including features of vehicles (such as vehicle type, age, emis­
sion control devices, and operating conditions), urban road type and
condition, vehicle maintenance frequency, fuel type, ambient conditions
(temperature and humidity), and traffic conditions [30]. Many
short-term events under real-world situations may do not truly get re­
flected in driving cycles hence emission measurements using dyna­
mometer tests may either over- or under-predict real-world emissions
from vehicles. Furthermore, conventional testing is often conducted
using new or well-maintained engines or vehicles, hence it fails to
adequately represent real emitters in a given vehicle fleet. This leads to
generation of significantly distorted emission inventories [31].
On-board emission measurements, on the other hand, have wider
recognition, wherein emissions data are recorded under real-world
conditions. Variations in vehicle emissions due to variations in road
characteristics, vehicle operation as per traffic conditions, driver factors
etc. can be accurately reflected in this measurement method. Different
approaches under this category include remote sensing, tunnel studies,
car chase studies etc., which can be considered as an effort to take the
laboratory measurements out into the real world. However, due to very
high costs associated with this method, on-board measurement has not
been used widely, despite the significant efforts made towards devel­
oping low-cost but reliable instruments in the last decade. Adoption of
sustainable development concept demands for coordination between
urban transport systems planning and development, and urban envi­
ronment, which have become the focus of urban transportation research
in recent times. Many researchers have studied vehicular emissions for
environment protection and to improve urban air quality [32,33].
There have been significant efforts on development of automotive
emission control technologies including exhaust gas recirculation [34];
turbochargers [35,36]; advanced low temperature combustion (LTC)
technologies including Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition
(HCCI) [37–40], Partially Premixed Compression Ignition (PPCI)
[40–42], Reactivity Controlled Compression Ignition (RCCI) [43,44],
etc.; exhaust gas after-treatment technologies [45–48]; and alternative
fuel (bio-fuel and alcohols) combustion technologies [49–55] applicable
to vehicles. However, minimizing discrepancies in measurements be­
tween dynamometer testing and real-world measurements, and effective
controls of emissions to comply with stringent emission standards re­
mains challenging. It is therefore quite important to review emerging
vehicular emissions monitoring technologies and related research
studies comprehensively for upgrading our understanding and identi­
fying the research gaps in this domain.
In this paper, the state-of-the-art methods for on-board real-world
vehicular emission measurements and dynamometer-based emissions
measurements are emphasized along with a comparative analysis. The
main objectives of the paper are to document (i) dynamometer test
based measurement systems, (ii) on-board emission measurement sys­
tems, (iii) data and sample collection, processing and analyses, (iv)
variability and uncertainty in measurements, (v) vehicle emission pre­
dictions using numerical models, and (vi) vehicular emission control
strategies. The challenges of different measurement systems are also
discussed comprehensively. Finally, guidelines are formulated for
effective vehicular emission monitoring systems for minimizing dis­
crepancies between real-world and laboratory-based emission mea­
surements, and evolve sustainable road transport systems.
2. Vehicular emission measurement and monitoring
methodologies under controlled conditions
Vehicular emission measurement generally refers to tests performed
on a chassis dynamometer or an engine dynamometer in laboratory
under controlled conditions. Measurements done under controlled
conditions exhibit good repeatability as the different variable parame­
ters and ambient conditions over the test-cycle can easily be controlled.
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
2.1. Overview of engine dynamometers
Generally, vehicles are tested using a chassis dynamometer, while
engines of the vehicles are tested on an engine dynamometer test facility
[56]. An engine dynamometer measures engine’s power output directly,
thus avoiding any transmission or driveline losses by measuring the
resistive force needed to hold engine shaft or flywheel at a preset rota­
tional speed. Usually, the engine shaft is directly coupled to the engine
dynamometer shaft, thus enabling accurate measurement of engine
power output. A typical dynamometer-based engine test cell comprises
different measurement systems and equipment incorporated with the
base engine bed as shown in Fig. 1. The performance and emissions
testing of an engine is often done on a transient dynamometer, which
enables aggressive throttle movement, speed changes (sudden acceler­
ation and deceleration), and motoring of the engine. Transient dyna­
mometers are capable of exerting and absorbing any specified load to or
from the engine under transient operating conditions. Akin to a chassis
dynamometer test cell, an engine dynamometer test cell may also have
climatically controlled chamber. The primary use of transient tests is for
emission certification of light-duty or heavy-duty automotive engines.
Transient tests follow the transient operating cycles to make the exhaust
emission measurements representative of real engine operation and
typically include the following driving conditions: cold and hot starting;
frequent accelerations and decelerations; changes of load; idling con­
ditions typical of urban driving; sub-urban or rural driving schedule; and
motorway driving.
Engine dynamometer test allows easy access to all engine compo­
nents making fine tuning of the engine under optimum operating con­
dition possible. Besides, repeatability in measurements and superior
control of test conditions are important aspects of engine dynamometer
testing. The test bench usually guarantees reproducible engine operating
conditions (even in terms of temperature and pressure), and hence saves
both, time and money required for engine development. High precision
of modern control system has made the experimental results obtained at
a test bench more reliable and significant.
Beyond performance measurements, engine dynamometer tests
Fig. 1. Schematic of a typical dynamometer based experimental system (adapted from Ref. [57]; License no. 4874041370900).
4
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
permit a variety of engine development activities such as calibration of
engine controllers, engine control unit (ECU) development, and com­
bustion and tribology investigations. It also plays a significant role in
testing suitability of new alternative fuels, and emerging engine and
aftertreatment technologies. With modern sophisticated transient con­
trol system, dynamometer tests have facilitated highly reliable mea­
surements following different transient test cycles (e.g., world
harmonized transient cycle (WHTC) and real driving emission (RDE)
test) for increasingly stringent emission norms compliance. However,
calibration of dynamometer, and other equipment of the test bench are
cumbersome, and in particular, ECU calibration is rather complicated.
Though the test bench is capable of producing accurate and reproducible
results, accurate data acquisition remains quite challenging. Transient
test facility comprises of highly sophisticated equipment (automated
test-bed with transient dynamometer having precision electronic con­
trols, fast response exhaust gas analyzers, dilution tunnels, etc.), which
demands high technical skills and knowledge, proper maintenance and
system calibration. Furthermore, engine dynamometer tests are gener­
ally criticized for their limitations in providing real-world vehicular
emissions.
2.2. Overview of chassis dynamometers
Tests using a chassis dynamometer involve simulation of resistive
road-load impacts including aerodynamics, and driveline losses etc.
under different vehicular operating conditions, that are imposed on the
wheels of the test vehicle. Though the actual road-load impacts on
wheels can vary considerably, chassis dynamometer tests provide
reasonably accurate predictions of vehicular emissions under the stan­
dard driving cycles being followed. A typical chassis dynamometer
system comprises a dynamometer coupled with drive lines through
gearboxes. The drive lines further connect vehicle wheel hubs directly or
a set of rollers, which hold the weight of the vehicle. Chassis dyna­
mometer system can be a four-wheel drive (4WD) or a two-wheel drive
(2WD) type and separate rollers are used for each drive axle of the
vehicle. Dynamometer usually facilitates necessary adjustments
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
required for driving resistance simulation. During the test, an experi­
enced or professional driver operates the vehicle, which is held sta­
tionary (but wheels and rollers rotate), following a prescribed speed vs
time profile and predefined gear-shift pattern. The speed vs time profile
and gear shift pattern based on the transient driving cycle are normally
shown on a monitor placed in front of the driver, who closely matches
the actual vehicular speed profile within the given tolerance of the pre-
defined speed profile [58–60]. Hence laboratory operators can control
the load applied to the vehicle through the rollers variably but contin­
uously. Test cell may be placed inside a thermal chamber, where tem­
perature, humidity, solar load etc. can be controlled to simulate more
realistic test conditions. Exhaust gas after-treatment systems are
removed from the vehicles prior to dynamometer testing [61]. Exhaust
gas from the vehicle is continuously collected in sample bags for offline
analyses, such as chemical analysis, or diluted by filtered ambient air
using constant volume sampling (CVS) system, in which the exhaust gas
emission analyzers as well as different particulate measuring equipment
or systems are connected for real-time online measurements (Fig. 2).
Coast-down tests are often performed prior to the chassis dyna­
mometer tests, in order to evaluate the resistant forces imposed on the
vehicles (i.e. road load coefficients) under variable speed and road
conditions. Coast-down test provides a baseline data for fuel consump­
tion, and emissions, which can be reproduced in laboratory. In this test,
vehicle is first accelerated to 120 km/h, and then gradually slowed down
to lower speed of 20 km/h and eventually stopped, while recoding of the
time and vehicle speed at regular speed intervals of ±5 km/h of the
reference speed. This provides vehicle’s mean deceleration and associ­
ated resistive forces acting on it. The resistive force is determined by
using a typical equation based on second order polynomials, which is as
follows [63].
dV (t) ∑R
Froadload = m = = f0 + f1 V + f2 V 2 (1)
dt
where, m = vehicle reference mass; v = vehicle velocity; R = resistance
acted on vehicle; and fx = road load factors (f0 = rolling resistance; f1 =
resistance proportional to velocity; and f2 = aerodynamic resistance).
2.2.1. Merits and demerits of chassis dynamometers
A chassis dynamometer based measurement system usually enables
repeatability in emissions testing and it is relatively faster and more cost
effective compared to on-road measurements [64]. It enables
Fig. 2. Schematic of a chassis dynamometer test facility for vehicular emission measurements (adapted from Ref. [62], License no. 4874050525161).
5
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
comparative analysis of performance and emissions among different
vehicles with reasonably high accuracy. It is possible to optimize road
design and traffic management by carefully simulating the driving
behavior using chassis dynamometer facility for an effective and envi­
ronmentally friendly or Eco-Driving style. It has been reported that
changing driving behavior can potentially save fuel consumption and
reduce emissions [65]. Chassis dynamometer also facilitates vehicular
testing under predetermined climatic conditions, in order to investigate
the effect of ambient environment on vehicle’s performance and emis­
sions [66].
However, chassis dynamometers also have limitations. As mentioned
previously, chassis dynamometer testing cannot replicate real-world
driving conditions completely hence can’t predict real-world vehicular
emissions precisely. Though chassis dynamometer testing can contribute
to Eco-Driving, road design and traffic management, it cannot guarantee
relieved traffic congestion because the driving conditions significantly
vary every time, while driving on the road, and driving environment
changes with city development and improving living standards. Chassis-
dynamometer testing accuracy mostly depends on how precisely the
coast-down data has been recorded, which is used in dynamometer
calibration for a specific vehicle [67]. Coast-down tests are often carried
out under artificially convenient conditions therefore cannot reflect
real-world road resistance precisely hence chassis dynamometer tests
may show lower fuel consumption and emission results compared to
real-world conditions [68].
2.2.2. Heavy-duty vehicles
Testing of a heavy-duty vehicle using chassis dynamometer can be
quite complicated since a single engine model can be used to power
many different types of chassis and transmissions, leading to significant
variations in fuel consumption and emission characteristics. Variations
in such characteristics are quite likely to occur due to the diverse nature
of in-use duty-cycle or drive-cycle. Furthermore, chassis dynamometer
testing of HDVs is generally time consuming and more expensive, and
hence less common compared to that for the LDVs. Many research lab­
oratories around the world use chassis dynamometer for HDVs testing
such as the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) heavy-duty diesel
emission testing laboratory (HDETL), South West Research Institute
(SwRI) in San Antonio, Texas, West Virginia University Transportable
Heavy-duty Vehicle Emissions Testing Laboratory, Colorado School of
Mines– Colorado Institute for Fuels and Engine Research [69], Vehicle
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
Emission Laboratory (VELA) test cell facility of the Joint Research
Centre (JRC) of EU, Environment Canada in Ottawa, Ontario, and
CATARC Automotive Test Center (Tianjin) in China. However, from
regulatory perspective, engine dynamometer testing for HDVs has been
approved for certification worldwide [70]. China is the only country
where it is mandatory to have chassis dynamometer testing for HDVs
certification [71]. Despite limitations in complete emission measure­
ments, modern engine dynamometer test cells are capable to follow
real-world HDVs duty-cycles by simulating vehicle’s torque-speed
characteristics either offline or using hardware-in-the-loop simulation
(HILS) [72]. Testing of modern HDVs using chassis dynamometer fa­
cility thus provides primary emission data for emission factor (EF)
development [67].
2.2.3. Driving cycles
A driving cycle followed during vehicular or engine testing on chassis
or engine dynamometer usually consists of pre-defined vehicle or engine
speed-time profile. Vehicle is accelerated and decelerated in order to
match the speed-time profile resembling urban or highway driving
conditions, as shown on the driver’s aid screen. Hence a driving cycle is
the backbone of the vehicle or engine testing on a chassis and engine
dynamometer and its representativeness and accuracy is quite crucial
because it strongly influences the quality of test results [73]. Significant
variations exist in driving cycles worldwide and they are modified or
expanded regularly in order to comply with the continuously evolving
regulations [74]. Driving cycles are prepared for different categories of
vehicles including cars, vans, trucks, buses, and motorcycles. Based on
variations in the engine speed and load characteristics, driving cycles
are broadly classified as steady-state cycles and transient cycles.
Steady-state cycles consist of a sequence of constant engine speed and
load modes. Transient cycles, on the other hand, accommodate vehic­
ular speeds and loads, which change more or less continuously. There­
fore, transient driving cycles are closer representatives of real-world
operating conditions including idling, acceleration and deceleration.
Transient driving cycles are mostly followed during chassis dynamom­
eter testing. Most recognized driving cycles used for emission certifica­
tion of LDVs are the ‘New European Driving Cycle’ (NEDC), the ‘Federal
Test Procedure’ (FTP), and ‘Supplemental Federal Test Procedure’
(SFTP) for EU and US, respectively. FTP is also used in Canada,
Australia, Sweden, and Switzerland. NEDC, being smooth and simplified
cycle (Fig. 3), has been extensively criticized because of its inability of
not representing the real-world driving emissions [75].
In order to overcome the limitations of NEDC, the United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) developed the ‘Worldwide
Harmonized Light Vehicles Test Procedure’ (WLTP) between 2007 and
2014. Essential changes in the WLTP over the NEDC included: a rela­
tively longer, higher speed and more transient driving cycle; higher
Fig. 3. New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) (adapted from Ref. [76], the
permission has been acquired).
6
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
vehicle test mass range; and slightly lower ambient temperature as well
as some changes in testing procedure. WTLP was first introduced in EU
in 2017 and all new cars require mandatory approval under WTLP from
September 2018 onwards [77]. WTLP is expected to be followed for
certification purposes by other countries such as Japan, India, South
Korea etc. in times to come [78]. FTP or FTP-75 cycle has different
segments such as cold-start transient phase, stabilized phase, hot soak,
and hot-start transient phase (Fig. 4).
Under SFTP, two additional tests were included in the FTP - driving
cycle US06 (Very aggressive and high speed) and driving cycle SC03
(air-conditioning test). EPA on-road fuel economy ratings are deter­
mined using the EPA 5-cycle method: two FTP tests, highway fuel
economy test (HWFET), US06 and SC03 at normal temperature [80]. In
addition to these standard driving cycles used for regulatory purposes,
many other customized test-cycles for LDVs and HDVs are also available
for specific regions. Table 1 lists all the test cycles used in different parts
of the world along with universal cycle types.
2.2.4. Applications
In addition to regulatory testing and certification purposes, engine or
chassis dynamometer tests are also performed for research and scientific
studies to investigate fuel economy and emission characteristics of a new
or specific type of engine or vehicle, effects of using alternative fuels,
and evaluating after-treatment technologies and systems for emission
controls. Depending on test cell facilities, a wide range of emission
species (regulated and non-regulated) can be measured on an engine or
chassis dynamometer system. Under controlled conditions, chassis
dynamometer tests following different driving cycles are always per­
formed in order to characterize performance and emissions of motor­
cycles [82,83]; passenger cars or LDVs [56,84,85]; and light-duty
commercial vehicles [86,87]. On the other hand, HDVs testing using
chassis dynamometer test-cell can only be conducted by highly devel­
oped and advanced laboratories.
Chassis and engine dynamometer tests are used routinely for
generating emission factors (EFs) for fleet of vehicles (both LDVs and
HDVs). For instance, extensive emission evaluation program at VTT
Finland was undertaken in 2002–2004 in Helsinki to generate emission
factors for transit buses [88]. In developed nations, mega-projects or
programs of vehicle testing are often undertaken by the government
authorities. e.g. projects implemented by the US Department of Energy’s
(DoEs) Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity (AVTA) [89]. The Advanced
Vehicle Testing and Evaluation program was conducted by Intertek
Testing Services (USA) from 2011 to 2018 to evaluate advanced vehicle
technologies intended to reduce petroleum consumption and provide
benchmark data and performance trends for advanced technology
vehicle fleet including Battery Electric Vehicles (BEV), Plug-in Hybrid
Electric Vehicles (PHEV), and internal combustion engine-powered ve­
hicles (ICEV) [90]. Vehicles EFs are also determined by individual
researcher groups using engine and chassis dynamometer tests. Huang
et al. [91] evaluated EFs for a fleet of 51 LDVs consisting of Euro-II to
Euro-V emission compliance using a chassis dynamometer. They iden­
tified catalytic convertor malfunctioning as the main reason for the
higher polluting Euro-II and Euro-III vehicles. The authors also obtained
a good agreement between EFs determined by the chassis dynamometer
and tunnel studies in Shanghai, China. In an investigation on fuel con­
sumptions of a transport fleet of 200 buses, they showed very good
agreement between the results obtained by dynamometer testing and
the actual fleet consumption data [92]. Wihersaari et al. [93] also ob­
tained good agreement between the results obtained from laboratory
and on-road transient tests (chase method), while investigating PM
emissions of a modern diesel passenger car. However, Valverde et al.
[94] obtained significant variations in EF values obtained by chassis
dynamometer tests (NEDC and WLTC cycles) and on-road tests (RDE),
while investigating 13 Euro VIb LDVs (eight diesel and five
gasoline-powered). NOx EFs obtained by NEDC cycle complied with the
approval limit, however diesel vehicles emitted 2.1 and 6.7 times more
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
Fig. 4. FTP-75 driving cycle (Duration = 1874s; Distance = 11.04 miles; Average speed = 21.19 mph) (adapted from Ref. [79], the permission has been acquired).
than the standard limit for WLTC and RDE tests respectively. Also
on-road CO2 emissions were ~33% and 41% higher than the
type-approval values for diesel and gasoline vehicles, respectively. EFs
determined over WLTC were more close to on-road RDE test values as
compared to NEDC test values in this study. Similar observations were
also reported by Triantafyllopoulos et al. [95] during an investigation on
CO2 and NOx emissions from Euro VI diesel vehicles under various
chassis dynamometer and on-road RDE tests (using PEMS). They iden­
tified that CADC drive cycle was even better than WLTC cycle for pre­
dicting real-world emissions.
Chen et al. [96] explored the effect of fuel type, and drive cycle on
the EFs of Euro-VI diesel HDVs by chassis dynamometer testing. In
general, the EFs for HC, CO, PM and NOx were higher with Chinese
WHTC drive cycle compared to those obtained with ETC drive cycle.
Obviously, China-VI standard diesel fuel performed better than China-V
standard diesel in terms of NOx and PM EFs. Significant variations in
measurements between real-world driving cycle, ARTEMIS and official
European driving cycle operations was also reported by Alves et al. [97],
while testing eight in-use gasoline and diesel passenger cars. The re­
searchers concluded that the emission behavior is sensitive to the ‘speed
and stop parameters’ for diesel vehicles and to ‘acceleration’ for petrol
vehicles.
Numerous research studies were also conducted using engine and
chassis dynamometer to investigate emissions characteristics that are
influenced by engine or vehicle type, technology, operating parameters,
ambient environment, fuel type, after-treatment devices etc. Cai et al.
[98] measured PM2.5 mass, EC/OC and 190 organic compounds in the
exhaust of 21 vehicles (motorcycles, gasoline LDVs, gasoline HDVs,
diesel LDVs and HDVs) in China using the chassis dynamometer-dilution
tunnel test facilities. The emission of higher trace quantities of larger
PAHs such as Benzo[ghi]perylene and Coronene from gasoline fuelled
vehicles compared to diesel fuelled vehicles was one of the important
findings of this study. Researchers explored the effect of eco-driving on
fuel economy and EFs using chassis dynamometer and reported that
eco-driving effectively decreases fuel consumption as well as the emis­
sions from transport vehicles [99].
The use of alternative fuels in transport vehicles has been routinely
investigated both on engine and chassis dynamometers with the objec­
tive of improving urban ambient air quality. Serrano et al. [92] evalu­
ated fuel economy and emissions of a Volvo bus engine for seven
different blends of mineral diesel and biodiesels (soybean 40% + rape­
seed 60%) ranging from B0 to B100. Driving cycles followed during the
engine dynamometer test simulated normal use of bus in urban and
extra-urban circuits. Up to 20% (v/v) biodiesel blending showed
improved fuel economy, while NOx emissions in general increased with
biodiesel blending with diesel, compared to baseline diesel operation. In
7
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
another study, Na et al. [100] conducted experiments in the CARB’s
HDETL on a chassis dynamometer to investigate environmental impact
of biodiesel (soy-based and animal-based fatty acid methyl ester
(FAME)), renewable diesel and their blends (20% and 50% v/v) for
powering in-use heavy-heavy-duty diesel trucks (HHDDT). Two driving
cycles used in this study were UDDS and more aggressive CARB HHDDT
driving cycle with 80 km/h cruise. The results revealed that the driving
cycles influenced PM, total hydrocarbons (THC), and CO emissions,
showing higher emissions in the UDDS cycle with medium load than the
highway cruise cycle with high load, on per km basis. PM, THC, and CO
emissions decreased with increasing blending ratio of biodiesels and
renewable diesel compared to the emissions level observed for CARB
ULSD (Fig. 5).
Between renewable diesel and biodiesel blend operations, the latter
one was found to be more effective in reducing these regulated emis­
sions. However, significantly higher NOx emissions were recorded for
soy- and animal-based biodiesel blends for 50% biodiesel blends and
100% biodiesels. Lim et al. [101] conducted tests on a chassis dyna­
mometer following CVS-75 cycle and explored the effect of
oxygenate-gasoline blending on both, the regulated and unregulated
emissions from light-duty, medium-duty, and heavy-duty gasoline ve­
hicles in Korea. The oxygenates used for blending included ethanol,
methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE), and ethyl tertiary butyl ether
(ETBE) (with oxygen contents of 0.82 wt% 1.65 wt%, and 2.74 wt% of
the test fuels, respectively). NOx emissions decreased for MTBE and
ETBE and reduction in CO emissions from LDVs was in the following
order: Ethanol > ETBE > MTBE. Use of oxygenates was found to be
relatively more effective for HDVs in reducing NMHC emissions. BTEX
reduction was observed to follow the following order: Toluene > Ben­
zene > Ethylbenzene > Xylene for MTBE- and ETBE-gasoline blends.
However, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde emissions increased sub­
stantially for oxygenate blended with gasoline.
Performance evaluation of after-treatment technologies for vehicle
emission controls is often done on the chassis dynamometers [92,
102–105]. The after-treatments devices and strategies included lean
NOx trap (LNT) and SCR [87]; diesel oxidation catalysts (DOC) [102];
DPF and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) [103,105]; cooled EGR plus
DPF, and cooled EGR and DPF plus SCR with ammonia [104]. Vehicles
range included from diesel cars to heavy-duty diesel trucks (HDDTs) in
these studies.
Traditionally, data obtained from chassis and engine dynamometer
measurements have been used as an input to different emission models,
in order to predict real-world vehicle emission trends. For example,
Oduro et al. [106] validated hybrid models by the data obtained by
chassis dynamometer testing and on-board measurements to predict
vehicular emissions more accurately. Barth et al. [107] developed a
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624

Table 1 Table 1 (continued )

Driving or emissions test cycles for light-duty, heavy-duty engines and vehicles Light-Duty (LD) Heavy-Duty (HD) Heavy-Duty (HD)
in different parts of the world [81]. Vehicles Engines Vehicles
Light-Duty (LD) Heavy-Duty (HD) Heavy-Duty (HD) cycle for emission modes - Used for certification through the
Vehicles Engines Vehicles testing and Euro II stage.•ESC (OICA): Steady-state
International •Worldwide •World •World certification – cycle for truck and bus engines. The ESC test
Harmonized Harmonized Harmonized comprises 4 ECE is used for emission certification of HD
Light Vehicles Stationary Cycle Vehicle Cycle Urban Driving diesel engines from the Euro III stage.•ELR:
Test Cycles (WHSC): A steady- (WHVC): A non- Cycles, one Extra for smoke opacity determination during
(WLTC): CD test state engine regulatory chassis Urban Driving emission certification of HD diesel engines
cycles for LD dynamometer cycle dynamometer test Cycle (EUDC). The from the Euro III stage.•ETC (FIGE):
vehicles used for for HD engines for cycle for HD cold-start version Transient test cycle for truck and bus
vehicle emission engine emission vehicles. of the test is engines - used, together with the ESC, for
certification type certification/type referred to as the HD engine certification.
approvals approvals New European
conducted in the worldwide.•World Driving Cycle
EU and other Harmonized (NEDC).•Common
countries. Transient Cycle Artemis Driving
(WHTC): A Cycles (CADC):
transient engine CD test cycles
dynamometer cycle (urban, rural road
for HD engines for and motorway)
engine emission developed under
certification/type the Artemis
approvals project.•ADAC
worldwide. Highway Cycle
USA •FTP 72/75: •FTP Transient: A •Urban (BAB 130): CD test
transient test transient engine Dynamometer cycle representing
cycles performed dynamometer cycle Driving Schedule high speed
on a chassis for HD truck and (UDDS): EPA highway driving
dynamometer for bus engines. Used transient chassis used for ADAC
emission for emission dynamometer (CD) EcoTest car
certification certification test cycle for testing.•RTS 95
testing.•SFTP testing.• HDVs.•Central Cycle: CD test
US06/SC03: A Supplemental Business District cycle representing
supplemental FTP Emissions Test (CBD): Transient aggressive driving.
to simulate (SET): Steady-state CD test cycle for Japan •10-Mode Cycle: •6-Mode Cycle:
aggressive test cycle for HDVs.•Business Urban driving cycle Two 6-mode cycles
highway driving/ emission Arterial for emission testing for HD vehicles: one
with air certification of Commuter (BAC): from LD vehicles, for diesel vehicles
conditioning heavy-duty diesel A composite HDVs later replaced by and one for
units.•New York engines.•Low Load fuel economy the 10–15 mode gasoline/LPG
City Cycle: EPA Cycle: An engine cycle.•City cycle.•10–15 vehicles.•13-Mode
NYCC for and chassis Suburban Cycle & Mode Cycle: Cycle: A newer
simulating low dynamometer cycle Route (CSC): CD Urban driving cycle cycle for HD
speed city for HD engines and test cycle for for emission vehicles replacing
driving.•Highway for urban tractor HDVs.• certification and the 6-mode cycles –
Fuel Economy and vocational Neighborhood fuel economy include 13
Test: EPA vehicles.•NTE Refuse Truck determination of stabilized engine
dynamometer (Not-To-Exceed) Cycle: Transient CD LD vehicles.•JC08 modes. It has also
driving cycle for Testing: US EPA test cycle for a Cycle: New urban two versions for
fuel economy testing cycle for refuse truck.•New driving cycle for diesel, and gasoline
test.•California emission York Composite: emission and fuel and LPG engines
Unified Cycle certification of HD Transient CD test economy tests of having different
(UC, LA92): A diesel engines.• cycle for HDVs LD vehicles since weighting factors.•
more aggressive AVL 8-Mode operating in NY 2011. JE05 Cycle: New
dynamometer Heavy-Duty city.•New York transient driving
driving cycle than Cycle: A steady- Bus (NYBus): cycle for HD diesel
the federal FTP- state test designed Transient CD test and gasoline
75.•IM240: I/M by AVL similar to cycle for urban vehicles which
driving cycle for the US FTP transit buses.• replaced the 13-
emission Transient test.• Heavy Heavy-Duty mode cycle.
measurements Constant-Speed Diesel Truck
from in-use Variable-Load (HHDDT): Four-
vehicles.• Cycle (CSVL): A mode CD test HDDT model for predicting emissions, which was calibrated by the data
Standard Road transient test developed by the obtained from the extensive testing on a variety of trucks under a wide
Cycle (SRC) and developed by the California Air range of operating conditions at University of California Riverside’s
Standard Bench US EPA for Resources Board.•
Cycle (SBC): constant-speed WVU 5-Peak: 5-
Mobile Emissions Research Laboratory. Kear and Niemeier [108] pre­
Dynamometer and engines.•CTA: speed CD test cycle sented a model derived from chassis dynamometer test data, for devel­
engine bench tests Chicago Transit for HD trucks oping correction factors to rectify heavy-duty diesel PM emission rates
for emission Authority engine developed by the measured on standard test-cycles for real-world conditions. Pavlovic
durability cycle. West Virginia
et al. [109] explored variations between the NEDC and WLTP test pro­
determination. University.
EU •ECE þ EUDC/ •ECE R49: Steady state engine cedures and their impact on CO2 emissions using an in-house developed
NEDC: A dynamometer test cycle for HD truck simulation software CO2 Model for Passenger and Commercial Vehicles
combined CD test engines - Consists of a sequence of 13 test Simulation (CO2 MPAS). In a research project under the 5th Framework
Program of the European Commission, Pelkmans and Debal [56]

8
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
Fig. 5. Regulated emissions (NOx, PM, THC, and CO) for different driving cycles and fuels (in g/km) (adapted from Ref. [100], License no. 4874070366243).
developed a software package for vehicular fuel economy and emission
predictions. The input data for the model were obtained from LDV tests
on the engine and chassis dynamometers. The researchers suggested that
vehicle’s instantaneous fuel consumption could be modeled more pre­
cisely using engine dynamometer test data.
The emerging powertrain technologies such as Hybrid Electric Ve­
hicles (HEVs) and full-electric vehicles (EVs) would require modified
test benches to explore essential features such as power consumption,
CO2 emissions, and electric power flow among the driveline compo­
nents. Researchers have proposed a methodology to evaluate power
consumption, emissions of PHEVs along with life-cycle assessment
considerations based on the SAE J1711 standard and modified dyna­
mometer testing [110]. Hu et al. [111] presented the tank-to-wheel
analysis of a series PEVs (buses) operated in Gothenburg, Sweden.
These models required input data generated on the engine or chassis
dynamometer testing.
2.3. Summary
Dynamometer tests of transport engines and vehicles are usually
conducted for regulatory and certification purposes. Authorities in
developed world undertook mega-projects or programs of vehicle
testing using engine and chassis dynamometer to generate EFs for the
transport fleet, in order to establish vehicle performance baseline, for
evaluating fuel consumption of the vehicle fleet and emission charac­
teristics of advanced and emerging engine technologies. Similar in­
vestigations were also conducted by individual researcher groups to
explore the effect of fuel and vehicle type, operating parameters,
9
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
ambient environment, after-treatment devices, eco-driving on fuel
economy and EFs using engine and chassis dynamometer. Though a few
researchers reported about good agreement between the results of EFs
obtained by dynamometer tests and on-road tests such as tunnel studies
or using RDE cycles, disagreement between the laboratory and on-road
tests was generally reported by many other researchers. Variation in
results also existed for using different drive cycles during the tests; e.g.
NEDC, WLTC and CADC drive cycles, in which the CADC cycle provided
the best performance. Researchers identified ‘speed and stop parame­
ters’ for diesel vehicles and ‘acceleration’ of petrol vehicles as important
influencing factors affecting fuel economy and emissions. Research
studies were routinely conducted using both the engine and chassis
dynamometer to explore the effect of using alternative fuels on emission
characteristics of transport vehicles. Up to 20% (v/v) biodiesel blending
with diesel showed improved fuel economy, PM, THC, and CO emis­
sions, while NOx emissions in general increased with biodiesel appli­
cations. Results of using oxygenate-gasoline blending in light-duty,
medium-duty, and heavy-duty gasoline vehicles revealed that use of
ethanol, MTBE, ETBE effectively reduced NOx, CO, NMHC and BTEX
emissions but with a compromise in aldehyde emissions. Traditionally,
data obtained from dynamometer measurements have been used to
validate emission models, which are used to predict real-world vehicle
emission trends. Vehicle’s instantaneous fuel consumption could be
modeled more precisely using engine dynamometer test data. The
development of emerging powertrain technologies such as HEVs, PHEVs
etc. and their performance and emissions characteristics were also
evaluated using engine or chassis dynamometer.
The above discussion interprets the significance of using engine and
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624

chassis dynamometer tests in the context of investigations on fuel

economy and emissions characteristics of transport vehicles. However,
development of realistic drive cycles that can perfectly replicate the real-
world vehicle operations remains as a great challenge.

3. Vehicular emission measurements and monitoring

methodologies under real-world driving conditions

Vehicular emission characteristics under real-world conditions can

vary significantly from what are measured in laboratory or predicted by
emission modeling. Therefore, real-world vehicular emission measure­
ments are quite important since they unveil trends of actual vehicular
emissions.

3.1. Overview of real-world vehicular emission measurements

The real-world driving is complex in nature and non-repetitive hence

quite hard to replicate through either developing a driving-cycle or
developing a model to predict it perfectly. Profile of driving cycle varies
with vehicle characteristics, driver’s behavior, road factors, traffic vol­
ume and traffic control devices, which make the actual real-world
driving-cycle highly transient [112]. Measuring vehicular emissions
perfectly under real-world conditions remains a great challenge.
Compared to laboratory testing on engine or chassis dynamometers,
real-world emission measurement technologies usually suffer from
lower precision and poor or near-zero repeatability. The rate of exhaust
emissions from vehicles depend on different factors including vehicle
type, age, driving cycle, ambient conditions, etc. Significant challenges
remain in parametric evaluation of these factors, as well as in the
evaluation of multiple sources of variability simultaneously [113].
Nevertheless, the emissions inventories developed by the real-world
measurements are quite valuable because they can meaningfully
contribute to develop emission models, to their validation, as well as to
identifying gaps between modeling results and real-world driving
emissions. Emission measurements under real-world conditions are also Fig. 6. Schematic of remote sensing emission measurement devices: (a) cross-
crucial to justify the vehicular EFs obtained from laboratory testing. road remote sensing: the light source and detector in one side with the
reflecting mirror at the other side of the road; the speed and acceleration de­
3.2. Real-world vehicular emission measurements using remote sensing tectors; and the number plate recorder, (b) top-down remote sensing system
(EDAR) (adapted from Refs. [116], the permission has been acquired).

Remote sensing (RS) emission measurement systems use absorption

spectroscopy technique to quantify real-time emission levels in the
exhaust plume of in-use vehicles without any interference with the ve­
hicles or on-road traffic. Cross-road RS system based on absorption
technique was first successfully developed and demonstrated at the
University of Denver and the Ford Motor Company by Bishop et al. in the
late 1980s [114,115]. Generally, light sources (infrared, ultraviolet or
laser sources) are placed at such a height either on roadsides or above
the roadways so that the light beams can easily traverse through the
exhaust plume of the passing vehicles (Fig. 6a). Detectors, sitting on the
other side, measure the pollutant concentrations by quantifying the
lights of certain wavelengths absorbed by the pollutants, while they
interact with the light source.
The amount of light of a particular wavelength absorbed is propor­
tional to the concentration of the respective pollutant that absorbs this
wavelength. The difference between pollutant concentration measure­
ments before and during crossing the light beam by vehicle’s exhaust
plume gives the actual pollutant concentration emitted in the exhaust of
the vehicle, which just passed by. Every individual data is recorded
within a fraction of second for an average 10 to 25 valid measurements
[116]. In general, the path length of exhaust plume remains unknown
because it varies substantially from vehicle-to-vehicle. As a result, the
remote sensor measures the ratios of CO, HC, and NO to exhaust CO2,
which is also proportional to quantity of fuel consumed by the vehicle at
a given operating condition [117]. These concentration values of the
pollutants are finally expressed as fuel-specific EF; i.e. pollutant emitted
by the vehicle per unit mass of fuel burned (g/kg of fuel). For
comparison, these fuel specific EFs were further converted into
distance-specific emission rates (in g/km) [118]. All regulated emission
species such as CO, CO2, HC (in infrared band) and NOx (in ultraviolet
band) can be measured by RS techniques in real time [119], while
exhaust plume opacity can give trend of PM emissions (or black carbon
(BC) content). Instrumentation of RS system may include a source and a
detector unit consisting of a NDIR component for measuring CO, CO2,
and HC, and a dispersive ultraviolet (UV) spectrometer for measuring
the NOx. Further modifications of this RS system provided options to
include additional channels for NO2, NH3 and SO2 measurements [120].
Other integrated path spectrometric techniques were previously used by
researchers in cross-road applications include Light Detection and
Ranging (LIDAR) [121], Tunable Infrared Diode [122], Tunable Infrared
Laser Differential Absorption Spectrometer (TILDAS) [123], and Dif­
ferential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy (DOAS) RS system [124].
However, these approaches have not been widely adopted or commer­
cialized. In the recent past, the Emission Detection And Reporting
(EDAR) system, an infrared laser-based RS system was introduced by
Hager Environmental & Atmospheric Technologies (HEAT LLC) having
several novel features [125]. EDAR system was based on Differential
Absorption LIDAR (DiAL), which exhibited greater sensitivity and
resolving power compared to conventional absorption
spectroscopy-based RS systems [125,126]. Laser pulses were used in
EDAR system permitting EDAR to be comfortably tuned for novel ap­
plications, such as monitoring individual hydrocarbons. Recently, EDAR
was employed to evaluate evaporative fuel losses from US vehicles by

10
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
EPA [127]. EDAR is an above-road unit also comprises a down-facing
camera configuration (Fig. 6b), offers advantages over the conven­
tional cross-road traditional RS systems.
Other hardware units (which generate parallel infrared beams)
measure vehicle speed and acceleration, in order to estimate the engine
load or vehicle specific power, and a camera that records the registration
number plate of the vehicle, enabling easy access to the technical data of
that particular vehicle [116]. Finally, ambient conditions such as tem­
perature, pressure, and relative humidity are recorded by additional
sensors, in order to complete the measurements using RS systems.
Calibration of instruments was performed by introducing a puff of gas
containing certified amounts of different species including CO, CO2,
propane, and NO (Praxair) into the instrument’s inlet path, and the ra­
tios of species to CO2 were evaluated. These values were then used as
inputs for the remote sensor’s software as reference values, which scaled
the actual emission ratios for the passing vehicles [117]. The new EDAR
instruments have has shown high accuracy in pollutant concentration
measurements and have also demonstrated capability to measure spe­
cific hydrocarbons such as methane (CH4) and ethylene (C2H4) [128].
The main attraction of RS based real-time emission measurements is
that a single RS instrument cluster is capable of measuring the real-
world emissions for a large number of vehicles within a short period
of time and in a cost-effective manner [129]. RS based emission mea­
surements is commonly regarded as an instantaneous road-side mea­
surement at the vehicle tailpipe under real-world conditions.
Instantaneous data obtained by RS measurements provide insights in to
the air quality differences in urban areas so that smart actions can be
taken into consideration to improve the air quality. Recorded data can
provide information of emissions from the entire fleet as well as specific
sub-group, if any, in the fleet. Measurements at different locations in
urban areas or measurements at different geographic regions for similar
fleet of vehicles can provide complete emission characteristics of the
fleet covering entire driving range and under different ambient condi­
tions. RS based real-time emission measurements enable detection of
highly polluting vehicles in a fleet or in a vehicle sub-group [130,131].
Particularly, the new laser-based RS system EDAR demonstrated very
good agreements in EFs results in comparison to either PEMS or chase
method, thus indicating its high potential in providing a representative
measurement or monitoring of vehicle emissions under real-world
conditions [128]. However, a single RS based emission measurement
provides information on vehicular emissions, which is limited to a single
driving condition at a specific location. Unlike laboratory measure­
ments, RS based emission measurements cannot provide actual tailpipe
emission behaviors since the measurements deal with the exhaust
plumes, which get diluted immediately after escaping from the tailpipe
with enormous amount of ambient air. Therefore, these measurements
cannot provide emission behavior of vehicles at cold-start, idling,
deceleration or low-speed operating conditions. Furthermore, RS mea­
surements are effective, when the vehicles are passing through a single
lane. Uncertainty in measurements increases at adverse ambient con­
ditions such as heavy rainfall or typhoon like weather conditions.
Retrieving vehicle’s technical data from the number plates or registra­
tion database may not provide the current state of the vehicle under test.
Since, the pollutant species are expressed relative to CO2, it is difficult to
identify the emissions, which are not directly correlated with CO2 such
as evaporative emissions [118]. Overall, the resolution of RS based
measurements is rather limited compared to either laboratory mea­
surements or on-board real-time measurements, since the results under
RS based measurements are based on the snapshot of vehicular
emissions.
3.2.1. Research studies
RS based real-time emission measurement is not a new technique for
vehicular emissions monitoring or measurements. It has been in oper­
ation since the late 1980s in the US and since the 1990s in Europe and
other parts of the world [116]. Zhang et al. [132] presented an analysis
11
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
and comparison of emissions profile of 22 vehicle fleets (>1,000,000
vehicles) measured by RS based real-time emission measurement tech­
nique developed by the University of Denver in different regions around
the world, which was the first practical approach for routinely charac­
terizing real-world, on-road vehicular CO and HC emissions. From the
measurements and data analysis, they concluded that better mainte­
nance practices prevail in Gothenburg (Sweden) compared to other lo­
cations such as Los Angeles (California), and Melbourne (Australia).
Carslaw and Rhys-Tyler [133] demonstrated the first direct measure­
ments of NO, NO2 and NH3 from ~70,000 vehicles with vehicle model
years ranging from 1985 to 2012 using RS based real-time emissions
measurement technique in the UK. Gasoline fuelled vehicles exhibited
considerable reduction in NOx emissions over the past 15–20 years,
while diesel vehicles even equipped with NOx after-treatment systems
failed to show improvements over the same period. They showed that
urban buses with SCR system emitted comparable NOx emissions as that
of Euro-V vehicles using EGR. NH3 emissions were important for older
catalyst-equipped gasoline vehicles and SCR-equipped buses.
Chen and Borken-Kleefeld [134] analyzed large data of RS based
real-time emission measurements recorded over 15 years, in order to
observe long-term emission characteristics (NOx, in particular) of diesel
fuelled cars and LCVs in Zurich, Switzerland. They reported that NOx
emissions deteriorated for Euro-II and Euro-III diesel vehicles, while
Euro-I and Euro-IV vehicles exhibited stable behavior over time. Moni­
toring the stability of emission control, particularly for high-mileage
LCVs and HDVs, was examined in this study critically. Ghaffarpasand
et al. [135] reported that NOx emissions improved from EURO-V to
EURO-VI for nearly all vehicle types (ranging from LDVs to heavy goods
vehicles (HGVs); both gasoline and diesel operated), while investigating
NOx, and PM emissions from 94,940 vehicles in 5 UK based field cam­
paigns using EDAR system. They observed significantly higher PM
emissions for Euro-VI HGVs compared to EURO-V vehicles. However,
another study based on RS technique confirmed poor real-world NOx
performance for even Euro IV or Euro V diesel LDVs [136]. Huang et al.
[137] conducted a 3-year long RS based real-time emission measure­
ment study in Hong Kong along with an extensive chassis dynamometer
testing program to monitor the emission behavior of in-service diesel
fuelled light goods vehicles (LGVs), and to find out a set of RS cut-points
for detecting high-emitters. Chassis dynamometer testing data ensured
the accuracy of the proposed cut-points on the real-world diesel fleet.
Many researchers employed RS technique to identify high emitters in a
vehicle fleet [116,136,138]. Smit and Kingston [136] identified 0.6% of
the vehicles in the full dataset (n = 8991 vehicles) as high emitters by
using RS device along with other devices such as additional license plate
number camera, automatic pneumatic loop detectors and a IR thermal
imaging camera. The thermal IR signatures of individual vehicles further
confirmed that nearly 35% of the high emitters likely operated in cold
start mode, which would stabilize within a few minutes of running.
Hence, RS based monitoring could potentially incorrectly identify a
significantly high proportion of high emitters.
The Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department (HKEPD)
established the use of RS based real-time emission measurements to
identify high-emitting vehicles for regulatory purposes, effective from
September 1, 2014 [139]. The program in Hong Kong was quite suc­
cessful in dealing with the LDVs (gasoline and LPG operated) having
excessive emission issues [129]. RS data were also successfully applied
to compare and validate several emission models. Sjödin and Jerksjö
[140] employed on-road emission data obtained from RS measurement
campaign (in 2007 in Göteborg, Sweden) to evaluate the major road
transport emission models in Europe, namely the Computer Program to
Calculate Emissions from Road Transport (COPERT-IV) model, the
Handbook of Emission Factors (HBEFA 2.1), and the ARTEMIS Road
Model. In this study, the performance of three emission models was
validated for several vehicle categories, traffic situations and pollutants.
In some cases, some incompatibility in model performance was
observed; for instance, NOx emissions from gasoline passenger cars at
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
higher speeds and from diesel vehicles (both light- and heavy-duty) were
under-predicted by the models compared to the real-world on-board
measurements. However, Hueglin et al. [141] reported that the EFs
obtained from long-term roadside RS based real-time emission mea­
surement by the Swiss national air pollution monitoring network were in
a reasonably good agreement with those derived from the HBEFA model.
Fujita et al. [142] reported that on-road transport EFs studied at a tunnel
in Van Nuys, California in 2010, by the Desert Research Institute using
RS based real-time emission measurements were compared with the
corresponding modeled EFs calculated by EPA’s MOVES 2010a and
mobile source emission (MOBILE6.2) models, and CARB’s EMission
FACtors (EMFAC2007) emission model. With some exceptions, average
values of CO and NOx EFs obtained by emission models were in
reasonable agreement with the fleet-averaged RS based real-time
emission tunnel measurement values.
Measurement by RS technique can be quite useful to evaluate the
EFs, when the vehicles run at a certain altitude, which cannot be easily
simulated in laboratory. Burgard et al. [143] performed on-road mea­
surements of 1641-HD diesel trucks to determine EFs using RS based
real-time emission measurement technique and they reported that CO
and NO emissions showed increasing trend with increased altitude.
Based on numerous research studies, it can be concluded that RS based
real-time emission measurement technique can be regarded not only as
an effective tool to monitor the on-road emissions from the vehicles and
to assess them under real-world conditions but also to explore the effect
of implementing emission standards on urban air quality improvement
[144].
Emissions monitoring of in-use vehicle fleet by RS technique has
been performed by numerous researchers. For instance, Pujadas et al.
[145] developed a global database of emission data (NO/CO2, HC/CO2
and CO/CO2 for >190,000 vehicles) during 2014 and 2015 in the
Madrid region under the framework of the CORETRA project, which
represented Spanish circulating fleet.
3.2.2. Summary
RS methods exhibit a high potential to measure or monitor different
emissions from the transport fleet comprising a large number of vehicles
under real-world situation within a short time and at relatively low cost,
which has essentially supplemented laboratory testing. It also contrib­
utes to assessing and implementing environmental policies. High-
emitting vehicles are usually identified using RS method and exemp­
ted from I/M program. However, as the screening of high-emitters
mostly depends on the set cut-points, the results can be affected by
false detections. False detection of high-emitters were seen during cold
start operation of the vehicles. RS method is only a snapshot measure­
ment or monitoring of exhaust pollutants, therefore results can vary
significantly in comparison to the results obtained either in laboratory or
real-driving conditions. Previous research studies identified anomalies
between the complying limits and real-world driving emissions partic­
ularly in diesel NOx emissions [129,133,134,144,145]. Further research
with RS method is sought to resolve these issues and challenges in
particular for diesel vehicles.
3.3. Onboard emission measurements
Even with introduction of the WLTC, discrepancies still exist be­
tween the on-road vehicular emissions under real-world conditions and
those estimated in laboratories on engine and chassis dynamometers for
type approvals [109]. To minimize the gaps between measurements
under these two conditions, and to control use of illegal strategies, the
EU prescribed ‘Real driving emissions’ (RDE) test procedure for the
Euro-VID emission norms from 2017 onwards [146,147], which estab­
lished mandatory use of a PEMS for RDE emission measurements. PEMS
is commonly regarded as the complete arrangements of devices
on-board the vehicle to measure the vehicular emissions under
real-world driving conditions, which are suitably adapted to be carried
12
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
in the vehicle under test (i.e. for LDVs, buses) or mounted on a trailer
and moved along with the test vehicle (e.g. for HDDT) [148]. PEMS is
capable of monitoring and recording real-time on-board emissions
behavior of a vehicle by measuring different pollutants (i.e. HC, CO,
CO2, NOx [or NO + NO2] and PM) as well as the ambient parameters
with satisfactory level of accuracy. A typical PEMS integrates advanced
gas emission analyzers with a provision of heated sampling line, an
exhaust gas mass flow meter, a weather station, a global positioning
system (GPS), a power supply, an engine diagnostic scanner, and an
on-board computer, thus providing all measured data on the go, such as
emissions, fuel consumption, engine or vehicle speed, temperatures at
different locations, throttle position, and other parameters under
investigation [146,149]. A typical installation of PEMS in a car is shown
in Fig. 7. Sometimes, other instruments including accelerometers to
record instantaneous acceleration, altimeters to measure altitude, and
video or photographic devices to record traffic conditions during test
runs etc. may also be incorporated with the PEMS [150]. Typical data
acquisition frequency of the integrated devices of PEMS is 1 Hz. Emis­
sion control regulations have also established vehicle testing re­
quirements, such as the maximum and minimum test duration, distance
covered, speed range, ambient boundary conditions including the
maximum and minimum altitude and temperature, and the test tour,
which includes urban, suburban and highway operations [151].
Due to technological advances, modern PEMS possess features such
as highly compact in size, light weight, minimized connectivity through
cables and pipes, enhanced accuracy in measurements, minimized
response time of the exhaust gas analyzers etc. These advanced features
of modern PEMS have demonstrated insignificant discrepancies between
the laboratory measurements and the on-board measurements for
developing EFs.
Therefore, on the positive side, PEMS is now-a-days regarded as a
very useful and powerful measuring tool for developing emission in­
ventories owing to its capability of providing emission behavior of ve­
hicles under a wide range of real-world and real-time operating
conditions that otherwise would be difficult to simulate in the laboratory
(e.g., large road gradients, heavily transient operating conditions such as
strong accelerations, deceleration etc. and variations in altitude and
ambient conditions) [152]. PEMS measurements are quite fast and
relatively simple and inexpensive compared to laboratory facilities.
They can be conveniently incorporated with a wide variety of vehicles;
especially they are most suitable for HDVs. PEMS is thus becoming an
important regulatory tool for HDVs [153]. On-board emission mea­
surements by PEMS have significantly increased in recent past and will
continue to increase, not only for regulatory purposes (i.e. Euro-V and
Euro-VI vehicles) but also due to their attractive features such as
robustness and high reliability for surveillance of vehicles on the roads
[154,155]. In addition, they provide support to vehicle manufacturers in
developing new vehicles. In the US, authorities have even imposed
vehicular emission regulation requirements based on PEMS measure­
ment features [156].
However, on the negative side, PEMS is heavy and lumpy, generate
additional air drag and require substantially higher power to operate
them. Therefore, when it shares power from vehicle’s power generation
system, it increases the engine load. If it is run by a separate power
generator, it would require increased air-conditioning to cool down the
cabin continuously, which would again increase the engine load [157].
Because of synchronization of many sub-systems in PEMS, uncertainty
issues associated with the measurements exist, which can influence
emission calculations. The Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the EU [149]
recognized EFM, gas analyzers, and their drift as the main sources of
uncertainty in PEMS measurements. Proper functioning of PEMS is
verified via a validation test, which evaluates the deviation between
PEMS and laboratory measurements. Permissible differences in EU
regulations include 15% or 15 mg/km for NOx, 10% or 10 g/km for CO2,
whichever is larger. PEMS showed limited repeatability, depending on
real-world operation variability compared to laboratory tests, although
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
Fig. 7. Typical PEMS installation in a car showing distances before and after the exhaust flow meter (EFM) (adapted from Ref. [151], the permission has
been acquired).
PEMS is capable of measuring a limited number of pollutants compared
to laboratory tests. Many previous studies have shown good agreement
between PEMS measurements and chassis dynamometer tests using
different driving cycles [158,159], but large differences exceeding
permissible tolerances between them were also reported in some studies
[160]. Accurate allocation of PEMS emission data to the target vehicles
or engine states is difficult, which can hinder the use of transient PEMS
data for deriving engine emission maps. Furthermore, on-board engine
power or torque measurements (or its calibration) is more difficult
compared to chassis dynamometer testing. Besides, the uncertainty in
road gradient can affect signals, hence can affect the measured values.
3.3.1. Research studies
Like other real-world vehicular emission measurement systems,
PEMS has also been used on different platforms worldwide. It has
traditionally been used to develop and validate EFs for a wide variety of
vehicles, type approval of the vehicles, develop and validate emission
models, and to investigate effects of new alternative fuels, newer engine
and combustion technologies, newer powertrains (such as HEVs), and
various after-treatment systems. In Japan in the year 2000, Miyazaki
et al. [161] used an initial version of simple PEMS using a Zirconia NOx
sensor for a medium-duty freight vehicle testing to investigate the effects
of road infrastructure, traffic conditions, driver’s behavior and vehicle
running conditions on NOx emissions. Around the same time, another,
but more developed PEMS with additional features was demonstrated in
Edmonton, Canada, which recorded ambient conditions, driving
behavior, vehicle operating parameters, fuel consumption, and exhaust
emissions simultaneously [162]. The system employed a laptop com­
puter based data acquisition system and a number of add-on sensors
such as a five-gas emission analyzer and fast-response lambda sensor.
The R&D of PEMS were carried out continuously by numerous re­
searchers globally, aiming to attain desirable accuracy and repeatability
in measurements [163–167]. Often, in these research studies, the
measured data from PEMS were compared with chassis dynamometer
test results. PEMS usually records tailpipe emissions and vehicle dy­
namics in transient basis. However, response time of the equipment may
differ, thus it does affect the accuracy of measurements. In a research
study [168], the effect of response time of a PEMS was evaluated
experimentally based on the measurements of calibration gases for NO,
HC, CO, and CO2. Further modeling and simulations performed in this
13
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
study suggested that necessary corrections in the response time would
improve the measurement accuracy. Johnson et al. [169] compared
PEMS results with the results from a mobile emission laboratory (MEL)
meeting federal standards. They calculated brake-specific emissions to
detect errors between the PEMS and MEL for the Not-To-Exceed (NTE)
engine operating zone. The results of PEMS were found to be consis­
tently biased high relative to the MEL in this study. PN emissions from
modern GDI engines are big concern now-a-days. Gallus et al. [170]
measured PN-to-Soot ratio using PEMS in a Euro-V GDI engine equipped
passenger car and suggested that PEMS was capable of on-road test
measurements with reasonably good agreement w.r.t. chassis dyna­
mometer test results.
It has conclusively emerged that laboratory measurements fail to
replicate real-world driving variations such as sudden accelerations,
which significantly influence the emission pattern of vehicles. Fortu­
nately, PEMS with continuous technological advancements has proved
itself as suitable alternative to resolve these issues with greater accuracy.
Varella et al. [171] investigated the effect of outdoor temperatures
(ranging between 1◦ and 17 ◦ C) on the NOx emissions of Euro-VI vehi­
cles, particularly at cold-start condition in RDE tests. Driver variability
significantly affects real-world vehicular emissions and the influence of
such a parameter has been investigated using PEMS by different re­
searchers [172–174]. Varella et al. [173] showed that driving behavior
could lead to variations of up to 7% in CO2 and 55% in NOx emissions.
The effect of the traffic signal timing and coordination and
non-coordination at emission hot spots, such as arterial corridors or at
intersections in busy urban areas on the vehicular emissions, has been
investigated using PEMS by numerous researchers [174–176]. HDVs
operations under low-speeds and accelerations, in particular, have
shown negative impact on fuel economy and exhaust emissions during
PEMS testing [177,178]. Many research studies are also available in the
literature, which investigated the performance of emission control
technologies employed in vehicles. Grigoratos et al. [178] performed
experimental investigations on the performance of after-treatment sys­
tems under different speed conditions and they measured real-world
gaseous pollutants and PN of diesel fuelled Euro-VI compliant HDVs
using PEMS. This study concluded that modern vehicles emit lower
pollutants compared to vehicles using older technology. Researchers
performed experiments using PEMS to evaluate the performance of a
continuously regenerating trap (CRT) in real-time PM reduction [179]
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
and a combination of SCR and CRT for simultaneous reduction of NOx
and PM emissions [180]. Bishop et al. [181] investigated the emissions
from (i) GDI vehicles using three-way catalysts; (ii) diesel vehicles with
SCR; and (iii) diesel vehicles with lean NOx traps, using PEMS. This data
were used to develop quantile regression (QR) powertrain models.
O’Driscoll et al. [182] explored PEMS data recorded from (39 nos.)
Euro-VI diesel passenger cars, equipped with EGR, LNT and SCR tech­
nologies over a test route comprising urban roads and motorways. The
results exhibited a wide variability in NOx emissions from 1 to 22 times
the type approval limit.
Emission models were validated and their reliability was enhanced
by numerous researchers using PEMS data. Ntziachristos et al. [157]
used on-road emissions obtained from PEMS and emissions obtained
from laboratory tests over real-world driving cycles for Euro-V and
Euro-VI compliant LDVs in the most popular EU vehicle emission models
(COPERT, HBEFA and VERSIT+) for comparative analyses. The main
goal of this study was to check whether currently used EFs in the popular
emission models adequately reflect the reality. Lee et al. [183] validated
GT-DRIVE + vehicle model estimating fuel economy, GHG and NOx
emissions using PEMS and EPA’s GPS vehicle data. They reported a good
agreement between the model-simulated results and PEMS vehicle test
emission data.
3.3.2. Summary
PEMS is capable of monitoring and recording real-time on-board
emission behavior of a vehicle by measuring different pollutants (i.e.
HC, CO, CO2, NOx [or NO + NO2] and PM) with satisfactory accuracy.
Real-time instantaneous vehicle emissions data with a confidence level
similar to laboratory measurements can be possibly obtained from PEMS
measurements. The use of PEMS for real-world emissions testing has
now been endorsed in emissions norms in the USA, Europe and China,
for certification purposes in order to control the key pollutants including
NOX, and PM [149,184]. PEMS can contribute to determine
high-resolution EFs or their validations. Numerous researchers have
used PEMS method to investigate the influence of driving and ambient
conditions, emerging fuels and powertrain technologies, and
Fig. 8. A typical arrangement for chase measurement of vehicular emissions (adapted from Ref. [191], License no. 4874200688231).
14
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
performance of in-use and emerging after-treatment technologies.
However, accurately allocation of PEMS data to the target vehicles or
engine states is difficult. PEMS installation is complicated and on-board
torque measurement, and its calibration is also difficult. Akin to other
real-time measurement methods, PEMS also suffers from the issue of
data reproducibility.
3.4. On-road chase measurements
Chase measurement is another on-board vehicular emission mea­
surement technique under real-world conditions using fast response
emission measurement equipment placed in the on-road mobile emis­
sion laboratory (MEL) [185–188]. As the name implies, during chase or
plume chase measurements, the vehicle under investigation is chased or
followed by another van or trailer carrying the MEL (Fig. 8). The MEL
usually comprises fast response and high sensitivity pollution mea­
surement instruments such as TILDAS instrument for measuring select
gaseous pollutants, Proton Transfer Reaction Mass Spectrometer
(PTR-MS) for measuring select VOCs, Chemiluminescence detector (1-s
mode activation) for measurement of NOx, non-diffractive infrared
(NDIR) detectors for detection of CO2, and Aerosol Mass Spectrometer
(AMS), and Condensation Particle Counter (CPC) etc. for detecting the
PM. The use of such instruments permits the MEL to capture highly
temporal pollutant concentrations in turbulent exhaust plumes of the
target vehicle, which immediately disperse into the surrounding
ambient air [189]. Additionally, the MEL includes a power supply
module, which ensures an uninterrupted power supply for several hours,
meteorological and GPS instruments, a video camera to monitor traffic
situations, and data acquisition and processing module [188,190].
A MEL usually records the emissions data repeatedly within a short
time period. Similar to real-time RS based emission measurement
technique, pollutant concentrations are expressed as the ratio of the
pollutant species to the CO2 (a tracer of combustion) [192]. Since the
MELs follow the target vehicles closely to capture the exhaust plume,
chase method is capable of monitoring real-world emissions under a
wide range of operating and environmental conditions. In addition to
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
individual vehicle class measurements, chase technique is also capable
to characterize emissions of an entire vehicle fleet (in fleet average
measurement mode). However, due to traffic safety concerns, chase
measurements are suitable for a test track only. Furthermore, it has
another issue of maintaining a minimum distance of 10 m between the
target vehicle and the MEL van. It may not be an issue to consider, if the
MEL is mounted on a trailer of the target vehicle itself [193].
3.4.1. Research studies
Traditionally chase measurements have been used by the researchers
[187,193–197] to measure and characterize on-road PM emissions (with
or without after-treatment devices) from vehicles, which helps in
exploring the characteristics of secondary PM formed just after exhaust
escape from the tailpipe. Moreover, PM measurement artifacts with
dilution tunnel which arise during dynamometer testing, can be avoided
in chase measurements. In addition, other real-time exhaust emissions
from the on-road vehicles were also characterized by numerous re­
searchers. For instance, Lau et al. [190] employed plume chasing
method to record a large amount of on-road vehicle emission data on
Hong Kong highways, in order to explore emission characteristics of the
fleet and to identify the influence of high and super-emitting vehicles for
reduction in total emissions, and trends of NO2 emissions from vehicles
complying with newer emission standards. Wild et al. [198] conducted
on-road vehicle emission measurements using fast response O2/NOx in
plumes to evaluate NO2/NOx emission ratios of the vehicle in Denver,
Colorado, USA. Wen et al. [199] measured concentrations of five
emission species from gasoline and diesel vehicles namely NOx, CO,
CO2, BC and PN. They estimated the corresponding EFs using chase
measurement technique. They found higher CO emissions from high
emitter gasoline vehicles. Also high-emitting HDDT emitted ~3 to13
times more pollutants than normal trucks. MELs have also been
employed for mapping traffic pollution [200,201]. Recently, Wang et al.
[202] conducted concurrent PEMS-chasing tests for HDDTs in China and
reported that relative errors of vehicle-specific NOx EFs were within
±20% and ±4% for fleet average, compared to the PEMS results.
3.4.2. Summary
Plume chasing is usually influenced by complex atmospheric air
dilution processes thus the pollutants measured by the MEL are more
realistic compared to regulatory monitoring methods (e.g., dynamom­
eter or PEMS). This is particularly important for PM emissions. MEL
housed with fast response equipment is capable of measuring all emis­
sion species w.r.t. CO2 concentration. It is possible to monitor vehicle
emissions effectively for real-world driving patterns and environment by
employing chase method. Akin to other real-world monitoring methods,
chase method also contributes to the development and validation of EFs.
However, chase testing may have traffic safety issues thus may require
closed tracks. Chase measurement is expensive and have limitations in
linking emission measurement to driving conditions. Furthermore, un­
certainty in measurements can be induced due to real-world unknown
dilution ratios at the sampling point.
3.5. Tunnel studies
In urban areas, road tunnels are constructed either to overcome
topographic constraints or to avoid traffic congestion [203]. Depending
on the location and the importance of the corresponding urban area,
average vehicle speed may reduce in the tunnel hence the exposure time
and concentration of vehicle-origin pollutants inside the tunnel may
increase, posing relatively greater health risks. At present, among the
different methods of studying real-world vehicular emissions, the
tunnel-based experimental studies have gained special interest since
they are generally not affected by the environmental conditions but
primarily influenced by the emissions inside the tunnel [204]. Also the
emissions from a large number of vehicles sampled at the same time can
be quantified under actual driving conditions [205]. Pollutant
15
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
concentrations are generally measured at the tunnel’s entrance and exit
points [206] but it may also include additional points at the middle of
the tunnel and outside (as background) [207,208] to estimate average
EFs of the vehicles under the tunnel studies (Fig. 9). Due to availability
of spaces in the tunnel, many instruments can be easily deployed in
tunnel studies, which facilitate direct measurements of EFs as well as
applying sampling and indirect analysis. Standard equipment used in
tunnel studies include NDIR analyzers for CO and CO2 emissions,
chemiluminescence detectors for NOx, GC-flame ionization detection
(GC-FID) or mass spectrometry (GC-MS) method or solid-phase ab­
sorption trap sampling and thermal desorption techniques for HC or
THC, VOCs, and NMHCs measurements [209,210] and PM measuring
and characterizing devices such as conventional Tapered Element
Oscillating Mass (TEOM) method [210], MOUDI [211], Condensation
Particle Counter (CPC) [211], ELPI [212], DMPS [210], SMPS [213],
light scattering photometer DUST TRAK8530 [214], along with sam­
pling for post analysis of PAHs. Akin to RS based real-time emission
measurements or on-road chase measurements, ambient weather con­
ditions measurements (such as temperature, relative humidity, baro­
metric pressure) and air velocity are also performed simultaneously. In
addition, a video camera is installed at some measurement point to re­
cord traffic license data. In recent times, use of a mobile on-board
platform equipped with high resolution and fast air monitors, and
drive-through approach to measure on-road vehicular emissions in
tunnel studies have also been reported [215]. The estimation of EFs
representative of the traffic conditions only because of elimination of
most atmospheric processes remains one of the major strengths of tunnel
studies [216].
Another benefit of tunnel study is that a wide range of gaseous
(including VOCs, PAHs) and PM emissions can be measured and char­
acterized without the effect of photochemistry and meteorology [218].
Unlike plume chasing or RS based real-time emission measurements,
wind dynamics in tunnel studies is well defined, and hence average
absolute values of emissions (rather than CO2 based estimations) can
also be obtained. Additionally, tunnel studies enable to explore the ef­
fect of evaporative emissions, brake liner wear, tire wear, and emissions
of secondary aerosols from chemical transformations of PM inside the
tunnel.
A major limitation of tunnel study is that it represents only a limited
range of operating conditions (typically smooth, uncongested, relatively
high-speed driving). Tunnel geometry such as uphill and downhill gra­
dients can also affect the measurements compared to other on-road
measurement techniques. Another notable weakness of tunnel studies
is the difficulty in estimating the EFs of a specific vehicle class in the
fleet, unless a dedicated tunnel bore is specifically used for the mea­
surements [219]. Furthermore, measurement artifacts can exist due to
induced in-tunnel air-flows [220].
3.5.1. Research studies
Traditionally, for decades now, tunnel study has been employed by
numerous researchers globally as a useful on-road vehicular emissions
measurement tool. In most cases, determining real-world representative
EFs for different emission species was the main objective of those studies
[208,218,221,222]. Measurement and characterization of a wide range
of both regulated and unregulated gaseous pollutants as well as PM
emissions have been covered in these tunnel studies. Ait-Helal et al.
[223] estimated the EFs of pollutants including non-methane volatile
organic compounds (NMVOCs), NOx and CO2 emitted by LDVs in the
Leopold-II tunnel in Brussels city center, Belgium. The concentrations of
a number of pollutants in the exhaust plumes of diesel trucks were
investigated to calculate the fleet-averaged EFs in a highway tunnel in
Oakland, CA, USA by Dallmann et al. [224]. Pollutants covered in this
study included NO, NO2, CO, formaldehyde, ethene, and BC, as well as
optical properties of emitted particles. Deng et al. [205] conducted an
optimized tunnel experiment in Longchuan Tunnel, Hefei, in eastern
China, in order to investigate the spatial and temporal characteristics of
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
Fig. 9. Schematic of experimental configuration of a typical tunnel study (adapted from Ref. [217], License no. 4874090842306).
VOCs within the tunnel. They analyzed 51 VOCs quantitatively in this
study and EFs of different VOCs were predicted. Hung-Lung and
Yao-Sheng [207] measured and characterized the PM emitted by the
on-road vehicles in the Chung-Liao tunnel, Taiwan. The measurements
included PM number-size distributions, PM composition (i.e., EC/OC),
and 11 water-soluble ionic species, and trace metal elements. Jamriska
et al. [225] estimated the EFs of PM number and mass concentrations of
a bus fleet consisting of ~300 diesel-powered buses using scanning
mobility particle sizer (SMPS) and DustTrak instruments in a tunnel
study under well-controlled conditions in Brisbane, Australia. In a rural
tunnel study, Gaga et al. [226] determined EFs for PM, trace metals,
EC/OC, benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes (BTEX), PAHs,
polychlorinated naphthalenes (PCNs), and polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs). In a recent study in Nanjing, China, Fang et al. [227] evaluated
the EFs for PAHs in PM10 and PM2.5 samples collected from a road
tunnel. They observed significantly higher EFs for the higher molecular
weight PAHs compared to lower molecular weight PAHs. The PAHs were
found to be distributed more dominantly in the finer PM compared to
the coarser PM. Vehicular EFs derived from different emission models
have been extensively used to compare and validate the results obtained
from tunnel studies [219,220,228,229]. However, such approach has a
drawback since tunnel studies often provide EFs only for a lump average
of all vehicle categories, passing through the tunnel. Tunnel studies have
also exhibited potential to achieve measurement repeatability. Repeat
measurements for years have been conducted to assess the impact of
changes in vehicle technologies, emission norms, use of alternative fuels
etc. on the EFs [230–232]. The effect of real-world sources of variability
such as road gradients, day-to-day and seasonal transport emission
variations of on-road vehicle emission measurements have also been
investigated by numerous researchers as well [216,233,234].
3.5.2. Summary
Capability to measure exhaust emissions of a large number of vehi­
cles at the same time, under real driving conditions is an attractive
feature of tunnel-studies. Measurements are generally not affected by
the environmental conditions but influenced by emissions in the tunnel.
Most emissions species measured in dynamometer testing, can also be
measured in tunnel studies. Numerous research studies were conducted
to monitor VOCs emissions, PM mass, and PN emissions from specific
vehicle or vehicle fleet, and to characterize PM, and PAHs in tunnel
studies. Unlike other methods, real-world dilution is considered here
during PM measurements. In addition, PM generated due to brake lining
wear, tire wear and formation of secondary PM in the tunnel can be
easily monitored. Assessment of long-term vehicle emission trends is
possible by repeating these experiments using same setup and location.
Tunnel study certainly contributes to real-world validation of EFs.
Depending on the tunnel geometry, vehicles may not run freely thus
16
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
only a limited range of vehicles operating conditions can be covered in
this emissions monitoring, which is a major limitation of tunnel study.
Uphill and downhill road gradients can affect the measurements
compared to other on-road measurement techniques. Tunnel study
provides lump average of vehicles thus evaluating EFs of a specific
vehicle class in the fleet is rather difficult.
4. Vehicular emission estimation using modeling approaches
Estimation and prediction of vehicular emissions are crucial (i) to
plan the transport fleet complying with the existing and upcoming
emission norms, (ii) to develop emission inventories, (iii) to monitor and
model the urban air quality, and above all (iv) to assess the impact of
vehicular emissions on the environment and human health. The ma­
jority of these tasks can be performed by employing vehicle emission
models developed by researchers worldwide over the past few decades.
Depending on specific goals, emission models can perform analysis at
different scales i.e. local, national or even global scale. For instance,
models may be employed to assess impact of new road projects or new
traffic management systems on the local air quality [235]. The models
also aid in development of emission inventories that are crucial for
assessment and prediction of air quality on regional or national scale and
check the compliance with international agreements (e.g. CO2 level).
Regional assessment generally involves modelling of key pollutants such
as NOx, CO2, SO2, PM10 and PM2.5 [236]. Over the past few decades,
numerous vehicular emission models have been developed worldwide;
reviews of which are available in open literature [237–239]. The
emission models are often broadly classified into two categories in the
literature (i) macroscopic modeling approach and (ii) microscopic
modeling approach [240–242]. Macroscopic models use average values
of the aggregate network parameters to estimate emission rates covering
a large area, e.g. an urban or national network simulating performance
and behavior of a traffic stream on urban road network. The important
macroscopic emission models include US federal’s traditional Mobile
Source Emissions Factor (MOBILE6.2) [243], California’s EMission
FACtors (EMFAC2007) [244] and European COPERT-III [245]. These
models usually generate results faster, however, they have issues with
accuracy since they ignore microscopic vehicle movements leading to
incorrectly estimated emission rates [246]. The use of average vehicle
speed is a major limitation of these models such as COPERT, which does
not take into account the variability of vehicle operation or driving
behavior. Microscopic models, on the other hand, consider the move­
ment of individual vehicles in space and time i.e. they use individual
vehicle’s speed or acceleration data, hence they can generate data
correlated with driving behavior. Among the various microscopic
emission models, the Comprehensive Modal Emissions Model (CMEM)
[247], the Virginia Tech Microscopic (VT-Micro) emission model [248],
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
the VERSIT + model [249], and the MOVES model [250] are preferably
used for predicting emission rates in urban areas. These models over­
come the limitations of the previous modelling approaches, such as
those of the MOVES model, and the fuel consumption and emissions are
correlated to the vehicle speed and acceleration in different driving
cycles at 1 s interval. Wang and McGlinchy [251] classified vehicle
emission models into four categories: (i) aggregated emission factors
models (simple; a single EF represents a specific broad category of ve­
hicles; national atmospheric emissions inventory (NAEI) or MOBILE
model); (ii) average speed models (most commonly used; COPERT
model); (iii) traffic situation models (incorporate both speed and driving
dynamics; HBEFA and ARTEMIS models); (iv) instantaneous or modal
models (highest level of complexity, emission rates are estimated using
instantaneous combination of two variables, typically at 1 s interval
including instantaneous speed and acceleration; Passenger car and
Heavy-duty Emission Model (PHEM)). Vehicle emission models were
classified in the most extensive way perhaps by Faris et al. [239], who
divided all models into five categories: (i) modelling based on the scale
of the input variables, (ii) modelling based on the formulation approach,
(iii) modelling based on the type of explanatory variables, (iv) modelling
based on the state variables, and (v) modelling based on the number of
dimensions. These broadly categorized models were again
sub-categorized by Faris et al. [239] as shown in Fig. 10. Assumptions,
relative limitations, strengths, characteristic parameters, data collection
techniques, accuracy etc. of these emission models (i.e. each
sub-category models) were extensively reviewed and discussed in this
study [241].
In real-world driving conditions, variability in vehicle’s operational
parameters usually greatly affects exhaust emissions. These issues are
also addressed in dynamic traffic assignment (DTA) models, which are
able to capture real-time traffic dynamics on the urban road networks,
thus providing more realistic output of vehicular emissions. These DTA
models are also classified into macroscopic and microscopic categories
and their detailed studies are available in the literature [252,253].
Considering the limitations associated with these two categories, re­
searchers have developed models combining macroscopic and micro­
scopic DTA models [242]. Recently, soft-computing techniques (such as
artificial neural network; ANN) have emerged as feasible alternative
tools to estimate vehicular emissions. These techniques have exhibited
their potential applications in many real-world traffic issues of high
complexity, which are non-linear and stochastic in nature, and are
difficult to be tackled by traditional methods [254]. Jaikumar et al.
[255] developed an exhaust emission prediction model based on ANN
for on-board emission measurements under heterogeneous traffic con­
ditions. In recent times, HEVs have attracted significant interest among
academic and industry researchers due to their potential of significantly
enhanced fuel economy and reduced exhaust emissions. A comprehen­
sive review of modelling and control of HEVs was authored by Enang
and Bannister [256]. Yu et al. [257] proposed to incorporate passenger
Fig. 10. Exhaustive classification of vehicular emission models.
17
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
load factor in modeling the bus emissions and fuel consumption based
on Vehicle Specific Power (VSP). The results indicated that as the pas­
senger load increased, per-passenger emissions and fuel consumption
decreased. They concluded that significant errors could be observed, if
passenger load factor was not considered in modeling, particularly for
high vehicle speed and high VSP bins.
Besides different vehicular emission models, a wide variety of traffic
simulation software has been developed for computer simulation, both
with macroscopic and microscopic perspective namely Simulation of
Urban Mobility (SUMO), Multi-Agent Transport Simulation (MATSim),
MIcroscopic Traffic SIMulation Laboratory (MITSIMlab), Advanced
Interactive Microscopic Simulator for Urban and non-urban Networks
(AIMSUN), Corridor Simulation - a microscopic simulation model
(CORSIM) designed for the analysis of freeways, urban streets, and
corridors or networks, 3D traffic simulation (Paramics), SimTraffic,
Verkehr In Stadten – SIMulation (VISSIM), Transportation Analysis
SIMulation System (TRANSIMS), Integrated simulation and traffic
assignment model (INTEGRATION) etc. Now-a-days, computer simula­
tion of traffic is widely used by researchers for efficient traffic system
modelling, planning and development of traffic networks and systems
[258]. Comprehensive reviews of traffic simulation software with their
relative strengths and limitations have been published in the open
literature [258–260]. Model validation studies have revealed indecisive
evidences that certain models perform better than others or certain
models exhibit suitability for all situations. Therefore, model prediction
accuracy remains a challenging research area and answers are sought to
a few relevant research questions including how much accuracy a spe­
cific emission model should have in practice, and under which circum­
stances. Vehicle emission models vary in their technical approaches, and
in the requirement of their input data. A particular model, whether it is
best suited for given applications and situations, depends on spatial and
temporal scales required, and on the decisions, whether they will verify
relative changes from different scenarios or will predict emissions
accurately at a given time or place. Several new vehicle emission models
such as MOVES and ARTEMIS seem to have more preference since they
enable reliable simulation of driving dynamics in relatively simpler
ways [258]. A comparative analysis revealed relatively higher accuracy
in emission estimations from VERSIT + model w.r.t. compared to
COPERT model [249]. It is noticed that the complexity in vehicle
emission modelling approaches has increased significantly over the
years due to the incorporation of various aspects such as increased
number of pollutants, emission types, vehicle types, transient vehicle
operating parameters, and driving behavior. Furthermore, the models
have now evolved based on significantly higher number of test vehicles,
leading to greater reliability and confidence in predictions despite a
large inter-vehicle variability in emissions trends. Future models have to
be more extended and comprehensive in nature in order to incorporate
the diversification of the on-road vehicle fleet, new vehicle technologies,
and use of alternative fuels [241].
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
4.1. Summary
Prediction of vehicular emissions by modeling approach has multiple
applications including future transport planning, complying with
emerging emission norms, developing emission inventories, monitoring
urban air quality, and assessing the impact on environment and health.
Numerous vehicular emission models developed worldwide can be
classified into two major groups: microscopic (CHEM, VERSIT+, MOVES
etc.; for large area or traffic stream), and macroscopic (e.g. MOBILE,
COPERT etc.; vehicle specific) models. DTA models are capable to
capture real-time traffic dynamics, thus can predict more realistic
vehicular emissions. Several researchers reported that ANN could be a
useful tool for real-world emissions modeling. Besides these models, a
wide variety of computer simulation software has been developed for
both macroscopic and microscopic models e.g. SUMO, MATSim, AIM­
SUN, CORSIM, VISSIM, TRANSIMS, INTEGRATION etc., which have
been used for efficient traffic system modelling, planning and develop­
ment of traffic networks and systems. Model development and valida­
tion is crucial before it can be employed for any specific purpose.
Usually, real-world emissions data obtained from different measure­
ments (e.g. PEMS, plume chasing or tunnel studies) are used as input for
these models. Future models have to be more extended and compre­
hensive in nature in order to incorporate the diversification of the on-
road vehicle fleet, new vehicle technologies, and use of alternative fuels.
5. Vehicular emissions control strategies
Increasingly stringent vehicular emission regulations are being
adopted worldwide, with an objective of reducing the on-road emissions
of HC, CO, NOx, and PM to an accepted level. Both the academic and the
industry-based researchers are actively involved in exploring different
emission control strategies in order to comply with these emission reg­
ulations. This section briefly discusses different vehicle emission control
strategies that have been commonly adopted globally over past few
decades. Challenges encountered in controlling vehicular emissions are
also highlighted in the following sub-sections.
5.1. Exhaust gas after-treatment technologies
Gasoline vehicles are high emitters of HC, CO and NOx and diesel
vehicles, on the other hand, are criticized for high emissions of NOx and
PM. Diesel vehicles emit significantly higher level of NOx compared to
gasoline vehicles. Therefore, a variety of after-treatment systems have
been adopted to control the emissions over the past couple of decades.
The design and development of efficient after-treatment systems has
emerged as a very important research area. Traditionally, three-way
catalysts (TWCs) have been effectively used on the gasoline engines or
vehicles for more than 35 years now to reduce HC, CO and NOx emis­
sions simultaneously by converting them to less harmful CO2 and non-
harmful H2O and N2. TWC starts performing once the light-off temper­
ature of the catalysts is attained after a cold-start (which is ~250–400 ◦ C
depending on the catalysts and exhaust gas species) [261,262]. Diesel
Fig. 11. Typical exhaust gas after-treatment system suit for Euro-VI diesel vehicles (adapted from Refs. [266], License no. 4874090842306).
18
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
vehicles deploy a number of devices for controlling emissions including
diesel oxidation catalysts (DOCs) (for HC/CO/SOF control), SCR catalyst
with urea injection (for NOx control), and DPF (for PM control). Modern
diesel vehicles are also equipped with an additional device, ammonia
slip catalyst (ASC), which removes excess ammonia (NH3) from the
system, as shown in Fig. 11. The exhaust gas temperatures of diesel
engines are relatively lower than their gasoline counterparts because
they usually operate under lean conditions, which necessitates longer
lead time (of the order of ~1–3 min) before the after-treatment device
catalysts become active following a cold-start [263–265].
DOCs have been widely used in Euro-II/III cars and heavy or
medium-duty diesel engines. DPFs have been the mainstream technol­
ogy to control PM mass and number emissions from all types of diesel
vehicles worldwide, complying with Euro-V and US Tier-II and later
light-duty diesel vehicles, all US-2007 and Euro-VI and later heavy-duty
vehicles and for retrofit solutions. Ceramic wall-flow filters are found to
be the most effective in removing almost entire PM from the exhaust gas,
including fine particles (<100 nm diameter) with a very high efficiency
(usually >95%) over a wide range of vehicle operating conditions [267].
DOCs are also PM controlling device (but less effective than DPFs),
which have limited commercial applications in select (EGR-equipped)
Euro-IV heavy-duty diesel vehicles and in some light-duty diesel vehi­
cles. Urea-SCR catalysts are the mainstream technology used for effec­
tive NOx reduction in US EPA-2010, US Tier-II, Euro-V/VI heavy-duty
and light-duty diesel vehicles [268]. Almost all modern gasoline vehicles
operate on GDI mode due to their higher fuel economy and lower carbon
footprint. However, GDI vehicles emit significantly higher PM compared
to either conventional or port-fuel injection gasoline engines [269],
which must be controlled to comply prevailing, stringent PM emission
norms. Like DPF application on diesel vehicles, the gasoline particulate
filters (GPFs) can potentially provide a reliable solution in controlling
ultrafine particles emanating from GDI vehicles over a wide range of
driving conditions [270–272]. GPFs have been increasingly used in
Euro-VI light-duty GDI vehicles and are expected to be widely used in
future GDI vehicles in other parts of the world such as in China-VI
compliant vehicles.
Research studies have confirmed that majority of pollutants are
emitted from the vehicles from cold-start until the catalyst light-off
[273,274]. Different approaches have been employed to attain catalyst
light-off temperatures within a short time interval so that they become
active at the soonest possible. Quite often, an excess amount of fuel is
post-injected into the engine combustion chamber and burned to in­
crease the exhaust gas temperature, in order to supply additional heat to
raise the catalyst temperature quickly, though this strategy affects the
fuel economy [275]. Despite use of advanced vehicle and emission
control technologies, cold-start emission issue from IC engines still re­
mains not completely solved. In general, gasoline vehicles are not
blamed for PM emissions, however use of excess fuel during
cold-starting can produce considerable amount of particles. To help
reduce cold-start emission issue, measures such as electrically heated
catalysts (EHC) have been used by the researchers and developers in
both, gasoline and diesel engines. Hydrocarbon traps (HCT) have been
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
previously used for controlling HC emissions during cold-start period.
HCT first captures the HCs during cold-start period from the engine
exhaust, which are subsequently burned to CO2 and H2O when some
threshold temperature is achieved. In case of diesel or lean-burn engines,
oxygen availability is not an issue and this excess oxygen in the exhaust
induces oxidation of adsorbed HCs. However, in gasoline engines (which
are stoichiometric combustion engines), it requires additional excess
oxygen supply, which may be achieved by air injection in the exhaust,
downstream of the TWC (for simultaneous reduction of NOx and HC
emissions), or by operating the engine in lean conditions during this
period, or using certain materials having good HC adsorption properties
at low temperatures such as zeolites and good desorption property at
high temperatures in the wash-coat of the HCT (Fig. 12). The use of
passive NOx adsorber (PNA) is another strategy that can control NOx
emitted by both, gasoline and diesel engines, during cold-start period.
PNA adsorbs NOx at low temperatures and converts it to N2 at higher
temperatures in the stoichiometric gasoline engines, while in diesel
engines, PNA desorbs the captured NOx back into the exhaust down­
stream to be further treated by urea or SCR system.
Lee et al. [276] reviewed HCT and PNA technologies applicable to
vehicles with a focus on efficient adsorbing materials for such applica­
tions. PNA catalysts have been used for stand-alone NOx reduction in
some US Tier-II and Euro-V/VI light-duty diesel vehicles and for NOx
reduction from some Euro-VI diesel vehicles with SCR during cold-start.
NOx adsorber catalysts have also been commonly used in lean-burn
(stratified charge) GDI engine equipped vehicles in Europe in 2000s
[268]. The fuel composition not only contributes to pollutant formation
during combustion but also affects efficient operation of exhaust gas
after-treatment devices. For instance, fuel sulfur and a few fuel additives
may poison the exhaust gas after-treatment devices. Therefore, burning
cleaner fuels is prioritized to achieve efficient performance of these
devices. Sulfur content of conventional fuels (i.e. gasoline and diesel
with <10 ppm sulfur) has already been regulated in Europe since 2005.
Based on the above discussion, it can be concluded that proven tech­
nologies exist for controlling CO, HC, NOx, PM and PN emissions from
both, gasoline and diesel vehicles. Regular improvements in catalysts,
substrates and coating technologies, along with modern electronic
controls and enhanced fuel quality, make it possible to comply with
increasingly stringent vehicular emission norms under a wide range of
operating conditions.
5.2. Implementing emission norms and I/M programs
Worldwide emission standards have been deployed by regulatory
bodies of the respective countries, in order to control emissions of
Fig. 12. Configuration of HCT and PNA for (a) gasoline engine (i.e. stoichiometric), and (b) diesel engine (i.e. lean) applications (adapted from Ref. [276], License
no. 4874171389393).
19
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
harmful pollutants such as CO2, CO, HCs, NOx and PM emitted from the
vehicle fleet. Emission regulations usually impose quantitative limits on
pollutant species concentrations, beyond which, the vehicles are not
permitted to release over specified timeframes. Standards are usually set
for all types of vehicles including light-duty (LD) passenger cars, LD
commercial vehicles, heavy-duty (HD) commercial vehicles, buses,
trucks, freight vehicles etc., which are commonly categorized by gross
vehicle weight rate (GVWR) parameter. Introduction of the stringent
emission norms not only affects vehicle or engine designs,
manufacturing, control systems, fuel choice etc. but also the vehicle
market and potential customer base. Engine researchers and manufac­
turers thus remain always under pressure to develop and evaluate
feasible solutions so that both the existing and future vehicles can
comply with the prevailing and upcoming emission norms. Emission
norms have been strictly implemented in the developed world as well as
in some Asian countries since they are majority users of vehicles.
Leading countries include USA, EU, Brazil, Russia, Japan, South Korea,
China and India. Though different countries have implemented their
own national emission standards, they usually vary only a little quan­
titatively. In the US, two different authorities EPA and CARB set and
implement emission standards namely Federal Standards (Tier-1 to Tier-
3) and California Standards (Low emission vehicles; LEV–I, II and III),
respectively. A series of emission standards that have been set and
implemented in EU between 1995 and 2017 are from Euro-I to Euro-VI
(a,b,c,d). Though emission standards in other parts of the world may
have different nomenclature, they seem to be the derivatives or equiv­
alent of these three main emission norms from EU and USA. According to
the current emission norms such as Tier-3 or Euro-VI, NOx and PM
emissions are so tightly regulated that their accurate measurements has
become an issue [277]. In addition to PM mass, PM number emissions
for GDI vehicles has also been included for the first time in Euro-VI
emission norms. Once standards are set, it is expected that all new ve­
hicles, whether it is a big luxury car or a small passenger car that are
sold, must be compliant with these emission norms before they can be
sold to appear on the roads.
In vehicle emission control and reduction pathways, implementation
of vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) program is commonly
regarded as a prime step to monitor fleet’s pollution status, whether they
are in acceptable levels, and to identify polluting vehicles in a fleet or in
a particular vehicle category. I/M programs represent a key step among
emission control strategies, by testing the on-road vehicles periodically
and identifying vehicles, which do not comply with emission norms for
necessary actions such as immediate repairing. The programs also
ensure that a vehicle’s advanced emission control systems such as
exhaust gas after-treatment systems are working efficiently. If vehicle’s
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
exhaust gas after-treatment systems are not adequately maintained,
even a new vehicle will emit the pollutants [278]. Currently I/M studies
are based on the on-board diagnostics (OBD), a requirement as per the
US EPA and EU legislations, which can involve visual inspection, OBD
emissions measurements (using plume chasing, PEMP or RS based
real-time emission measurement), and/or use of on-board computer
codes of the OBD-equipped vehicles. I/M program is usually imple­
mented by the national authority of the respective country. For instance,
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE), Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality (VA DEQ), CARB of USA implement their own I/M programs on
a regular basis to ensure desired air quality in designated urban areas.
Evaluation reports on the implemented I/M programs are normally
prepared annually or biennially by the respective authorities, such as
New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) implements
enhanced OBD I/M programs regularly and submit evaluation reports to
US EPA annually or biennially. Many of these published reports (such as
‘I/M Program Annual Report 2018’ [279] can be found on the web,
which often outlines failure and waiver rates of the registered vehicles
under OBD test, statistics of registered and emission tested vehicles etc.
Besides these reports, articles related to implementation of I/M pro­
grams in different parts of the world have also been published in open
literature. For instance, Organ et al. [280] reported a RS-based I/M
program in Hong Kong titled ‘strengthened emissions control of gasoline
and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) vehicles’. A large RS data-set
(recorded between 2012 and 2016) was analyzed in the program and
the results revealed that the EFs of HC, CO, NO reduced significantly for
the vehicle fleet consisting of gasoline and LPG vehicles. They concluded
that RS based OBD emission testing effectively identified poorly per­
forming vehicles for repair, which helped reduce emissions from the
vehicle fleet. Wu et al. [184] reviewed on-road vehicle emission controls
in China and identified I/M programs as the key tool for controlling the
in-use vehicular emissions. Although older I/M programs were based on
steady and transient driving cycle based laboratory tests, the future I/M
programs would be based on OBD. They found that despite an increasing
trend of vehicle population in China, the EFs of major pollutants
decreased due to successful establishment of integrated emission control
policies and measures. Kholod and Evans [281] assessed the black car­
bon emissions in Russia and reported that the commercial insurers were
responsible for I/M programs, which was believed to be an ineffective
approach. They recommended that vehicle-inspection centers should be
supervised by the governmental bodies to make the I/M programs suc­
cessful. Eisinger and Wathern [282] compared two aspects of I/M pro­
gram implementation in the USA namely (i) RS based inspection and (ii)
computer-assisted OBD-based inspection, and recommended that RS or
exhaust-based tests should not be replaced by computer-assisted
OBD-based I/M inspections, rather OBD-based inspection could be
considered as supplements for the exhaust-based tests. It was also re­
ported that the emission test-based I/M programs are more expensive
and time-consuming. Therefore, researchers proposed other
cost-effective and less time consuming techniques including internet of
things (IoT) and traffic lights based I/M programs [283], or wireless
inspection and notification system (WINS) based I/M programs [284].
5.3. Fuel quality enhancement and use of alternative fuels
Fuel quality significantly influences combustion and exhaust emis­
sion behavior of the engine or vehicles. Previous studies have confirmed
that PM emissions from diesel vehicles are greatly affected by diesel fuel
quality [285,286]. Different fuel properties including density, distilla­
tion point, cetane number (CN), FAME, ETBE, PAHs and sulfur content
are now specified in petroleum diesel quality standard (EN590) under
European directive 2009/30/EC [287]. EN590 was introduced to
regulate the quality of fuels so that increasingly stringent emissions
regulations can be complied within the EU. Gasoline, diesel and biofuels
are specified under European directive 2009/30/EC. Gasoline in EU now
20
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
has a minimum RON of 95, max. aromatic content of 35% (v/v), max.
benzene content of 1% (v/v) and almost free from lead (max. 0.005 g/l).
Diesel, on the other hand, has a minimum CN of 51, max. PAH content of
8% (v/v), and up to 7% (v/v) FAME. In both cases, the sulfur content in
the fuel has been regulated below 10 ppm [288]. Similar fuel specifi­
cations have either already been implemented or will be implemented
soon in other countries worldwide in order to comply with newer
stringent emission legislations. The enhancement in the fuel quality by
implementing the quality standards has obviously contributed to
reduced vehicular emissions. For instance, vehicles using fuels with
reduced density, lower PAH content [289–291] and increased FAME
[292] content results in significantly lower PM emissions from diesel
vehicles [289]. It is well established that fuels with iso-paraffinic and
n-paraffinic structures exhibit lower tendency to PM formation
compared to the fuels with cyclo-paraffinic structures [293]. Addition­
ally, the fuel containing lower aromatic content also reduces the PM
emissions [294]. Gasoline with lower aromatic and benzene contents
significantly reduces toxic benzene emissions in the vehicular exhaust
[289]. Lowering the distillation temperature along with increased
paraffin or naphthene ratio simultaneously reduces the soot, NO and CO
emissions from diesel engines [295]. CN being one of the important
indicators of diesel fuel quality has been investigated in order to explore
its effects on combustion and emissions. CN can be improved by using
both (i) fuel additives, and (ii) adding fuel components having naturally
higher CN [296]. Higher CN usually results in higher in-cylinder tem­
peratures, which enhance combustion efficiency thus reducing un­
burned HC emissions [297]. Biodiesels usually exhibit higher CN due to
their longer chain structures and higher degree of saturation, which
shortens the ignition delays, reducing the peak heat release rate and
hence reducing the NOx emissions [298,299]. Agarwal et al. [300] re­
ported that biodiesel and its blends with mineral diesel could reduce HC
and CO emissions significantly in low pressure fuel injection system
equipped engines. The authors added that use of biodiesel resulted in
lower PM mass, lower aromatic and lower PAHs emissions compared to
baseline mineral diesel. Rajaeifar et al. [301] demonstrated that using
waste cooking oil- and poultry fat-based biodiesel blends in urban buses
could be an environmentally friendly solution. An experimental inves­
tigation carried out on a CRDI diesel engine by Lilik et al. [302]
demonstrated that using diesel with high CN significantly reduced both
HC and CO emissions. Another study by Ladommatos et al. [303]
demonstrated that the fuel with higher CN resulted in lower NOx and HC
emissions but increased smoke from a cooperative fuel research (CFR)
diesel engine, while varying the CN (using additives) from 40 to 62.
Use of renewable alternative fuels in transport sector has been pro­
moted worldwide in recent times. EU has included a 10% share in
transport fuels to be produced from renewable sources by 2020 under
European directive 2009/28/EC. Similarly, in USA, a target of 36 billion
gallons of renewable fuel for blending with gasoline by 2022 has been
set by the US EPA [304,305]. Alternative fuels such as hydrogen, natural
gas (NG), dimethyl ether (DME), and biofuels (biodiesel, biogas, bio­
ethanol) have relatively lower carbon footprint compared to conven­
tional petroleum based liquid fuels and can contribute to reduction in
consumption of petroleum based liquid fuels, thus contributing to
mitigating GHG emissions [306,307]. Different oxygenates including
bio-alcohols (e.g. methanol, ethanol) and ethers (e.g. MTBE, ETBE) have
been commonly used as fuel additives in order to enhance the fuel’s ON
along with their potential to reduce exhaust emissions [308]. Ethanol
has already been identified as a high quality alternate transport fuel,
which contributes to reduction in emissions. Theoretically, CO2 emis­
sion reduces from an engine fuelled with gasoline-ethanol blends due to
lower carbon content of alcohol component of the test fuel [309]. This
can be further enhanced by improving thermal efficiency by optimiza­
tion of the ignition timing [310]. For increased ethanol content in fuel
blends, hydrocarbon compounds of lower molecular weights are
emitted, which exhibit relatively lower secondary organic aerosol for­
mation tendency compared to heavier aromatic hydrocarbons emitted
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624

by conventional petroleum based liquid fuels [311]. Ethanol exhibits
relatively lower adiabatic flame temperature compared to gasoline,
which contributes to reduction of NOx emissions [312]. Blending of
ethanol with gasoline also contributes to reduction of PM emissions as
well since fuel oxygen prevents the formation of soot precursors. In
addition, it lowers test fuel’s aromatic content and increases the Reid
vapor pressure (RVP). Many researchers have reported that primary
alcohols (ethanol, methanol etc.) and ethers (MTBE, ETBE etc.) blended
with gasoline in different proportions can certainly improve CO, CO2,
HC, NOx, NMHC, and BTEX emissions [94,313,314]. Gaseous alterna­
tive fuels such as NG, biogas or bio-methane, and hydrogen have very
low or zero C/H ratio thus they contribute significantly towards exhaust
emission reductions, especially GHG emissions reduction from vehicles.
The major component of NG, biogas or bio-methane is methane, which is
a clean fuel because of the absence of carbon-to-carbon bond [315].
With optimization of ignition timing, biogas and syngas (containing H2)
fueling exhibited superior thermal efficiency and reduction of CO and
NOx emissions. H2 addition to syngas or methane certainly extended
combustion limits [316] and NOx emissions reduced with increasing H2
content in the test fuel mixture [317]. Many studies have been per­
formed to investigate the effect of compressed natural gas (CNG) or
biogas and biomethane fueling on emissions from engines or vehicles.
Lower emissions (e.g. CO2, NOx and PM) have been reported in each
case [318–322]. These results proved that CNG, biogas or biomethane
could be recognized as promising alternative fuels for transport sector.
Fuel composition also plays an important role in controlling emis­
sions from GDI engine equipped vehicles. Yang et al. [323] reported that
the emissions of NMHC, THC, formaldehyde, and BTEX from GDI ve­
hicles reduced with lowering aromatic content of gasoline. However,
variations of either aromatics or ethanol content in gasoline didn’t affect
NOx emissions significantly. Fatouraie et al. [324] studied the effect of
gasoline composition on PN emissions from a modern GDI engine. PM
mass and BC emissions decreased significantly from low aromatic gas­
oline compared to high aromatic gasoline. The long-chain aromatic
hydrocarbons (i.e. C9/C9+ aromatics) exhibited the highest impact on
PN emissions. The authors also showed that fuel-bound oxygen could
decrease the sooting tendency. Experimental investigations by Myung
et al. [325] on PM and other emissions from a GDI car fuelled with
different ethanol-gasoline blends showed very high levels of PN reduc­
tion rate for E30-E50 and E85 blends. According to Abrar and Bhas­
karwar [326], micro-emulsions could also be considered as promising,
and clean alternative to conventional petroleum fuels. The authors
reviewed previous studies on micro-emulsions for CI engines and re­
ported that micro-emulsion fuels exhibit comparable thermal efficiency
or even higher than that of baseline diesel fueling, along with simulta­
by Agarwal et al. [328]. RCCI engines have demonstrated superior
performance in terms of fuel economy, NOx and PM emission reductions
at medium and high engine loads compared to diesel engines operating
in CI mode, suggesting that RCCI engines can be very useful and must be
explored for on-road applications [329]. Since LTC engines can achieve
very high efficiency, and specific fuel consumption is quite low, they can
potentially save the environment by emitting lower pollutants compared
to vehicles operating in conventional combustion modes namely SI and
CI. Recently, a new engine technology named gasoline compression
ignition (GCI) has been developed, which offers benefits of gasoline and
diesel engines in a single engine. GCI engines exhibited great potential to
attain very high thermal efficiency along with significantly lower NOx
and PM emissions, while using less refined fuel [330,331]. GCI engines
provide diesel-like efficiencies using relatively cheaper, low octane
gasoline fuels (~70 research octane number (RON)). Research studies
have demonstrated that these low octane gasoline fuels have greater
resistance to auto-ignition, permit more time for fuel-air mixture prep­
aration in a diesel engine like environment (high compression ratio) and
hence produce extremely low soot and NOx emissions [332]. Table 2
provides an overview of various emerging advanced engine technolo­
gies, which are aimed at CO2 reduction compared to comparable GDI
engines, their current status of research and development, imple­
mentation, and some key challenges or issues.
5.5. Hybrid vehicles and EVs
Vehicles with electric powertrains are attracting interest globally due
to their perceived potential in minimizing the GHG emissions of the
transport sector. Improved overall efficiency, especially during transient
operations, as well as electricity production using regenerative braking
are the major attractions of these electric vehicles (EVs) [334]. Though
EVs exhibit zero on-road tailpipe emissions, they are limited to
short-range applications, high initial capital cost and high operating cost
compared to conventional IC engine powered vehicles. It is essential that
the electricity used by EV powertrains must be green in order to validate
their claim of being green mode of transport, which is not the case in
Table 2
Emerging advanced engine technologies for CO2 reduction vis-à-vis comparable
GDI engine technology, current status of the technology, and some key chal­
lenges [333].
Engine Technology CO2 Emission Issues Current Status
Emission
Reduction

neous reductions in NOx, and PM emissions. GDI base; turbo 0 Particulate Implemented
stoich; baseline Number (PN)
Stratified GDI 5–8% PN Under
5.4. Advanced engine technologies Implementation
Cylinder de-activation 5–8% – Implemented
GHG emission regulations are the primary driver in the automotive Spark-assisted GCI 5–10% – Under Research
markets worldwide, and both advanced light-duty and advanced heavy- Homogeneous lean SI 5–10% Lean NOx Under Development
RCCI 15% Low Under Research
duty engine technologies have demonstrated impressive gains in the
temperature HC
market. Engine manufacturers are facing challenges in complying with & CO
evolving emissions norms for 2020 and beyond. Due to high tempera­ HEV 7–15% PN Under
ture and pressure in-cylinder environment, CI engines emit high levels of Implementation
NOx and PM. Low temperature combustion (LTC) techniques such as Downsized GDI, High 10–15% PN Under
BMEP & CR, Miller Implementation
homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI), premixed charge Stoich.
compression ignition (PCCI), and reactivity controlled compression Dedicated and Cooled 10–15% Cold starts and Under
ignition (RCCI) have attracted serious attentions among engine re­ EGR Controls Implementation
searchers globally due to their potential for remarkable improvement in Lean-burn GDI 10–20% Lean NOx, PN Under
Implementation
engine efficiency as well as in reduction in emissions. Previous studies
Light-duty diesel 15–20% Lean NOx Implemented
have revealed that these advanced combustion technologies successfully Gasoline Compression 15–25% Lean NOx, Low Under Research
lowered NOx and PM emissions simultaneously, and could easily comply Ignition temp. HC (Advanced
with Euro-VI emission norms even without the exhaust gas after- Engineering)
treatment [327]. An extensive review on LTC combustion engine tech­ Diesel 2-stroke 25–35% Lean NOx Under Development
opposed piston
nologies, their prospects, challenges and path forward was undertaken

21
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624

most countries in the world. Hence, rather than full EVs, vehicles with
partially electric power-trains, known as HEVs seem to be a more
techno-economically feasible solution in the present context and also a
more practical solution [335]. HEVs using plug-in technology and bio­
fuels have demonstrated significantly enhanced fuel economy hence
reduced GHG emissions compared to ICE-powered vehicles [336,337].
Benajes et al. [338] analyzed the potential of different HEVs [dual-fuel
mild (MHEV), full (FHEV), plug-in (PHEV)] in reducing brake specific
fuel consumption (BSFC) and exhaust emissions over conventional ve­
hicles. RCCI combustion being a proven technology with significantly
lower NOx and PM emissions was also incorporated with HEVs in this
study. The results of life cycle analysis (LCA) of these technologies
demonstrated that PHEV had the highest potential in reduction of BSFC
and vehicular emissions. Additionally, a combination of RCCI technol­
ogy and PHEV demonstrated significant benefits in fuel economy and
emission reduction, which enables compliance with Euro-VI emission
norms. It was reported that 30% higher life-cycle CO2 emission reduc­
tion was achieved by RCCI-PHEV compared to comparable conventional
diesel vehicle (Fig. 13). Similar trends were also reported by other
research studies demonstrating the effect of HEVs on fuel economy and
emissions [339–341].
O’Driscoll et al. [341] investigated CO2 and NOx emissions from 149
Fig. 14. Comparative analysis of diesel, gasoline and hybrid vehicles in terms
Euro-V/VI diesel, gasoline and hybrid passenger cars using PEMS and of NOx and CO2 emissions (adapted from Ref. [341], License no.
reported that HEVs were superior in reduction of both CO2 and NOx 4935750529606).
emissions (Fig. 14).
Traffic management strategies (TMS) may include providing guide­
5.6. Transport planning and traffic management lines for travel activity (assigning appropriate number of trips, and their
distribution in space and time), selection of effective travel mode (e.g.
Transport planning and traffic management are considered as single-passenger vehicles, multi-passenger vehicles, private or public
important elements in the comprehensive strategy for reduction of transport, motorized or non-motorized transport etc.), vehicle speed
vehicular emissions. Several strategies could be taken into consideration control (influenced by traffic conditions, driver behavior), and vehicle
for controlling the effects of traffic congestion on the urban air quality type selection (based on engine and fuel characteristics, ownership,
such as (i) vehicle operating restrictions, (ii) road pricing, (iii) traffic usage and maintenance decisions etc.). TMS may also involve extension
operation improvements, (iv) traffic calming as immediate action, (v) of existing infrastructure by adding new transit lines or roadways, which
promotion of active transportation, and (vi) car-pooling as a soft mea­ requires large capital investment [343]. TMS have been successfully
sure. Most cities around the world employ road charging systems mainly implemented in London aimed at improving air quality primarily by
for collecting revenues for road building or maintenance and reducing minimizing vehicular emissions, which include congestion charging
congestion, but a few schemes are aimed at protecting the environment scheme (CCS), fitting of particulate traps on the London buses, intro­
specifically. For instance, the Swiss scheme encourages usage of rail ducing low emissions zones (LEZ), and Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy
travel instead of heavy-goods vehicles to mitigate environmental impact (MAQS). These strategies have certainly contributed to reductions in
in the Alpine region [342].

Fig. 13. LCA analysis of CO2 and GHG emissions for different hybrid and non-hybrid vehicles (OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturer; DF: Dual Fuel; WTP: Wells-
to-Pump; PTW: Pump-to-Wheels) (adapted from Ref. [338], License no. 4935750953891).

22
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
ambient NOx, ozone, and PM emissions in London. Here, ambient
monitoring remains an important tool for assessing existing and future
schemes. CCS substantially improved traffic speed and reduced the
vehicle-kilometers in the targeted urban areas, leading to reduced
emissions. LEZ strategy typically imposes levies and daily charges for
non-LEZ compliant vehicles to discourage and prevent the drivers of
such polluting vehicles to enter the LEZ. The important features of the
MAQS included running the buses complying with Euro-V emission
norms and hybrid rollout (~50% fleet); use of NOx SCR for pre-Euro-IV
buses (~30% fleet); imposing age limits on taxis and minimum Euro-IV
emission norms compliance for all newly licensed privately hired vehi­
cles from 2012 onwards; making London a ‘no-idling zone’. These
strategies supported introduction of low-emission vehicles, such as
electric cars and vans, implementing eco-driving training for drivers of
buses, taxis, and other vehicles, implementing different phases of LEZs
and ultra-low emission zone (ULEZ) etc. [344]. Bigazzi and Mohamed
[345] reviewed the impact of implementing 22 potential TMS on
vehicular emission reduction in Canada. This study reflected that envi­
ronmental motivations were often cited by regional governments for the
two mostly implemented strategies: (i) area road pricing, and (ii) LEZ,
which yielded significant air quality benefits. They concluded that other
strategies including road pricing, speed management, and traffic signal
and intersection control improvements should also be emphasized to
realize even greater environmental benefits. Replacement of older ve­
hicles and improving fuel quality can potentially improve the ambient
air quality and environment. Similarly, managing traffic signal control
strategy efficiently is considered as a cost-effective method to control
vehicular emissions and reducing fuel consumption [346].
Travel Demand Management (TDM) policies should discourage and
reduce the demand for car ownership, motorbike use, by promoting
public transport usage. Parking policies are considered as practical TDM
strategy, which being properly formulated and designed, could poten­
tially control urban traffic sprawl by discouraging car usage. Pricing by
imposing fuel taxes may be beneficial to improve air quality by favoring
vehicles running on alternative fuels and newer engines with greater
fuel economy, and other environmental benefits. Traffic restraint mea­
sures such as ban on heavy-duty vehicles, identifying traffic-calmed
areas, and traffic-free pedestrian schemes may be effective to control
vehicular emissions in big cities from the Asian perspective [347].
6. Summary and conclusions
The world is experiencing rapid motorization due to high population
growth rate, rapid economic development and fast urbanization hence
leading to raised associated environmental and health risks. As a result,
in order to mitigate vehicular emissions, different emission norms have
been adopted, in addition to implementation of emission control stra­
tegies and programs globally. This review paper has comprehensively
discussed and compared different vehicle emission measurement and
monitoring methods including on-board, real-world measurements, and
laboratory based methods. Research studies on both the laborator­
y–based measurements as well as the real-world measurements have
been reviewed here comprehensively. It has been established by these
research studies that in most cases, results from real-world measure­
ments vary significantly from those obtained from dynamometer-based
measurements counterpart due to challenges involved in replicating the
actual driving cycles in laboratory. However, the contribution of
dynamometer-based measurements can never be ignored due to their
high flexibility in operations, precisely maintained ambient environ­
ment, and high measurement accuracy and repeatability. The real-world
monitoring of vehicular emissions by on-board monitoring methods is
preferable for determining real-world EFs, emission inventories of the
transport fleet, existing vehicular emission trends and for predicting
future emission trends. However, conducting real-world emission mea­
surements accurately remains a great challenge due to poor to negligible
repeatability. In situ methods (e.g. RS and tunnel study) offer the most
23
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
practical real-world monitoring option since many measuring equip­
ment can be deployed at the monitoring site for conducting multiple
emission species or novel species measurements simultaneously. The
other notable advantage of in-situ methods is their capability of moni­
toring large number of vehicles within a short time span at very low cost
compared to in-vehicle measurement counterpart. However, measure­
ment uncertainty can be crucial for in-situ methods as there is typically
little or no journey history information of the vehicles (whether they are
on cold-starting mode or warm mode). In-vehicle methods (PEMS and
chase methods) are superior over the in-situ methods because they
provide opportunities to investigate the interrelated parameters such as
journey history or driving cycle vs. emissions, driver behavior vs.
emissions, and ambient conditions vs. emissions. Therefore, in-vehicle
measurement methods are considered as the most readily deployable
real-world emissions monitoring tools. PEMS usage has already been
included in regulatory tests in the U.S., and in the EU. However, in-
vehicle methods require instruments to be fitted into and operated
within the vehicle itself or in another moving vehicle, which are in many
cases restricted due to lack of enough on-board space and operational
flexibility. They produce small amount of data and are usually costlier
than in-situ methods. Due to the dynamic nature of driving and moni­
toring, perfect time alignment between them is crucial for data accuracy.
In most cases, time offsets are seen, which affect the recorded data ac­
curacy. Based on these research studies, it can be concluded that perhaps
using a combination of both categories such as use of RS (EDAR system)
and PEMS methods together can provide the best results.
Vehicular emissions monitoring or prediction by modelling approach
has also been identified as an important tool that can contribute to a
number of activities such as planning the future transport fleet
complying with the upcoming emission norms, developing emission
inventories, monitoring and modeling of the urban air quality, and
above all, assessing the impact of vehicular emissions on environment
and human health. The most commonly used vehicular emission models
have been reviewed and discussed briefly. In addition to emission
modelling, various computer simulation software are widely used by
researchers for efficient traffic system modelling, planning, and devel­
opment of traffic networks and systems. The complexity in vehicle
emission modelling increased significantly due to incorporation of
various aspects such as increased number of pollutants, vehicle types,
transient vehicle operating parameters, transient driving behavior etc.
Though prediction accuracy of modelling approach remains a chal­
lenging research area, recent models showed high reliability and con­
fidence in predictions as they were developed based on significantly
higher amount of data obtained from the large number of test vehicles.
Future models have to be even more extended and comprehensive in
order to incorporate significant increase in diversification of on-road
vehicle fleet, newer vehicle technologies and use of alternative fuels.
A number of vehicular emissions control strategies are reviewed and
discussed briefly. Reliable after-treatment technologies exist for con­
trolling CO, HC, NOx, and PM emissions from both gasoline and diesel
vehicles. However, regular improvements in catalysts, substrates and
coating technologies, along with modern electronic controls and
enhanced fuel quality, would be essential for continued compliance with
existing and upcoming emission legislations. Implementing emission
standards and effective I/M programs has been recognized as a key tool
for controlling on-road vehicle emissions in different parts of the world.
Maintaining prescribed fuel quality along with the use of cleaner alter­
native fuels can certainly contribute to reduction in vehicular emissions.
Different test fuel properties including density, distillation point, CN,
FAME, PAHs, and sulfur content are now specified and controlled tightly
in fuel quality standards. Alternative fuels including hydrogen, CNG,
DME, and biofuels (biodiesel, biogas, bioethanol) have low carbon foot-
print hence thus significantly contribute in mitigation of GHG emissions.
Several advanced engine technologies have demonstrated that up to
35% CO2 reduction is possible relative to a conventional turbocharged
GDI baseline engine. Downsizing GDI engines and using dedicated and
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
highly cooled-EGR can contribute to GHG emission reduction as well.
LTC engine technologies including HCCI, PCCI, and RCCI has the po­
tential to be effective for emissions reduction and fuel economy
improvement. GCI engine technology is highly promising, and 15–25%
CO2 reduction is attainable, while using cheaper fuels. Both light-duty
and heavy-duty diesel engine technologies are improving continuously
due to superior combustion controls, reduction in pumping losses and
waste heat recovery options. PHEVs with biofuels have shown high fuel
economy and hence significantly reduced GHG emissions. Combination
of RCCI-PHEV technology has demonstrated 30% higher life-cycle CO2
emission reduction compared to conventional diesel vehicles. Finally,
optimized transport planning and implementation of effective traffic
management systems are essential since they are considered as impor­
tant and integral parts of the comprehensive strategy for vehicular
emission reduction.
7. Guidelines for the future work
Several key issues and challenges are identified related to vehicular
emissions measuring and monitoring and their controls in this review
paper. They must be addressed properly and resolved in order to attain
satisfactory measurement accuracy and reliability in short term and to
attain a sustainable road transport sector in the long term. A set of
guidelines are provided in this section with a view to attain those goals.
The key issues and challenges as per the previous studies can be iden­
tified as: (1) minimizing or removing statistical uncertainties in real-
world measurements; (2) developing more realistic driving cycles and
minimizing their uncertainties; (3) developing testing options in terms
of reduced costs, complexity, but with enhanced accuracy, and reli­
ability; (4) minimizing or removing fuel type and quality uncertainties;
(5) implementation of emission control strategies effectively. These key
issues are detailed below:
(1) It is recommended to attain homogeneity in experimental con­
ditions. However, it is difficult to attain, therefore the factors affecting
the homogeneity such as different mileage traveled, different engine
model year, engine type, engine oil type, and viscosity should be taken
into account and analyzed. For accurately estimating the experimental
errors, replication or having a sample size more than one could be
beneficial [338]. Ambient and vehicle factors should be well docu­
mented during the test period. While investigating an urban fleet, the
validity and extendibility of results can be enhanced by including
various vehicle routes comprising different geographical and road con­
ditions [257]. Selection of vehicles should represent the existing vehicle
fleet. Data should be collected in different traffic situations and in
different seasons and times. Application of different statistical tools is
recommended (e.g. analysis of covariance [348]).
(2) Instead of using standard driving cycles, carefully designed cycles
(using GPS data) based on the geographical location, and road specifi­
cations (urban, suburban, highway, city center, rural driving etc.) of the
vehicle fleet under investigation should be employed [349]. Design and
development of new cycle with more real-world driving features is of
great necessity [350]. Replication of tests both under controlled as well
as real-world environments and validation with computer modeling can
be suggested for this purpose.
(3) Developing appropriate testing procedure in terms of cost,
technological simplicity, high measurement accuracy and reliability is a
major challenge. Research and development efforts should be continued
on these aspects and international researchers should collaborate with
each other. Concurrent test methods such as using PEMS with RS (EDAR
system) or chase method with tunnel studies demonstrated superior
results [202]. Furthermore, dynamometer tests with more realistic drive
cycles should be used as baseline test method.
(4) One of the main reasons of having experimental data uncertainty
is the fuel type variability during real-world tests as well as during
tailpipe emission tests [351]. Therefore, the fuel used for tests should be
identical, while comparing results obtained from different tests. Even for
24
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
a single test, establishing the measured results should be based on the
same fuel properties. Fuel specifications are now strictly regulated in
prevailing and upcoming emissions norms.
(5) Implementation of emission control strategies effectively remains
always as a great challenge to control transport generated pollutants.
Substantial research works are essential to make the existing after­
treatment systems more responsive and effective by minimizing instru­
mental response time to zero second and less sensitive to the ambient
conditions. This will be helpful in design and development of emerging
aftertreatment technologies. R&D efforts on DPF [e.g. 352] and GPF
development should be emphasized as they play a great role in PM
controls. Establishing locally and regionally fit but complying interna­
tional emissions norms should be prioritized. Eco-driving concept has
demonstrated its potential to reduce vehicular emissions significantly.
Therefore, this concept should be recognized and practiced by the
drivers. Use of renewable biofuels such as bio-alcohols, ethers and
biogas or biomethane, and other emerging alternative fuel such as
hydrogen should be included in the national policy. More R&D work on
emerging vehicle (e.g. HEVs)and engine technologies (such as LTCs)
[353] are essential in order to make them user-friendly. Lessons from the
countries successful in implementing emission control strategies, should
be followed in other parts of the world. Attaining sustainable transport
system remains a challenge, which crosses the boundaries of individual
countries or regions. It is therefore quite important for the global sci­
entific community to reconsider the issue of monitoring and measuring
real-world road transport emissions and to control them in a more sys­
tematic way if a low-carbon and sustainable global transport ecosystem
is to be achieved.
References
[1] Transport, environment and health. In: Dora C, Phillips M, editors. Copenhagen:
WHO regional office for Europe. European Series: WHO Regional Publications;
2000. p. 89. http://www.euro.who.int/document/e72015.pdf. [Accessed 2
August 2019].
[2] Sinha A, Ischia G, Menapace C, Gialanella S. Experimental characterization
protocols for wear products from disc brake materials. Atmosphere 2020;11:
1102. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11101102.
[3] Transport overview. World Bank; 2019. http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/tr
ansport/overview. [Accessed 2 August 2019].
[4] Grambsch A. Climate change and air quality, the potential impacts of climate
change on transportation. https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/fi
les/docs/grambsch_CC_Air_Quality.pdf. [Accessed 2 August 2019].
[5] Papapostolou V, Lawrence J, Diaz EA, Wolfson JM, Ferguson ST, et al. Laboratory
evaluation of a prototype photochemical chamber designed to investigate the
health effects of fresh and aged vehicular emissions. Inhal Toxicol 2011;23.
https://doi.org/10.3109/08958378.2011.587034. 495–05.
[6] Nordin EZ, Eriksson AC, Roldin P, Nilsson PT, Carlsson JE, Kajos MK, et al.
Secondary organic aerosol formation from idling gasoline passenger vehicle
emissions investigated in a smog chamber. Atmos Chem Phys 2013;13(12):
6101–16. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-13-6101-2013. 2013.
[7] Liu Q, Schauer JJ. Local-acting air pollutant emissions from road vehicles. In:
Harrison RM, Hester RE, editors. Environmental impacts of road vehicles: past,
present and future. The Royal Society of Chemistry; 2017. p. 46–85. https://doi.
org/10.1039/9781788010221-00046. 2017.
[8] Han S, Wu J, Zhang Y, Cai Z, Feng Y, Yao Q, et al. Characteristics and formation
mechanism of a winter haze–fog episode in Tianjin, China. Atmos Environ 2014;
98:323–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.08.078.
[9] Tropospheric ozone: a growing threat, Acid deposition and oxidant research
center. In: Akimoto H, editor; 2006. Japan, https://www.acap.asia/wp-content/
uploads/Ozone.pdf. [Accessed 10 August 2019].
[10] Ritchie H, Roser M. CO2 and greenhouse gas emissions. Our World in Data. https:
//ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions. [Accessed 5
August 2019].
[11] GBD 2017 Risk Factor Collaborators, Stanaway JD, Afshin A, Gakidou E, Lim SS,
Abate D, Abate KH, Murray CJL. Global, regional, and national comparative risk
assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic
risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic
analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 2018;392(10159).
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32225-6. 1923–94.
[12] Achakulwisut P, Brauer M, Hystad P, Anenberg SC. Global, national, and urban
burdens of pediatric asthma incidence attributable to ambient NO₂ pollution:
estimates from global datasets. The Lancet Planetary Health 2019;3(4):166–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30046-4. 2019.
[13] Anenberg SC, Henze DK, Tinney V, Kinney PL, Raich W, Fann N, et al. Estimates
of the global burden of ambient PM2.5, ozone, and NO2 on asthma incidence and
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
emergency room visits. Environ Health Perspect 2018;126(10):107004. https://
doi.org/10.1289/EHP3766.
[14] Orellano P, Quaranta N, Reynoso J, Balbi B, Vasquez J. Effect of outdoor air
pollution on asthma exacerbations in children and adults: systematic review and
multilevel meta-analysis. PloS One 2017;12:0174050. https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0174050.
[15] Khreisa H, Hoogh de K, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ. Full-chain health impact assessment
of traffic-related air pollution and childhood asthma. Environ Int 2018;114:
365–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.03.008.
[16] Silverman DT. Diesel exhaust causes lung cancer – now what? Occup Environ
Med 2017;74(4):233–4. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2016-104197.
[17] Hamra GB, Laden F, Cohen AJ, Raaschou-Nielsen O, Brauer M, Loomis D. Lung
cancer and exposure to nitrogen dioxide and traffic: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. Environ Health Perspect 2015;123:1107–12. https://doi.org/
10.1289/ehp.1408882.
[18] MacIntyre EA, Gehring U, Mölter A, Fuertes E, Klümper C, Krämer U, et al. Air
pollution and respiratory infections during early childhood: an analysis of 10
European birth cohorts within the ESCAPE Project. Environ Health Perspect
2004;122(1):107–13. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1306755.
[19] Héroux ME, Anderson HR, Atkinson R, Brunekreef B, Cohen A, Forastiere F, et al.
Quantifying the health impacts of ambient air pollutants: recommendations of a
WHO/Europe project. Int J Public Health 2015;60(5):619–27. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s00038-015-0690-y.
[20] Hoek G, Krishnan RM, Beelen R, Peters A, Ostro B, Brunekreef B, et al. Long term
air pollution exposure and cardio-respiratory mortality: a review. Environ Health
2013;12(1):43. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-12-43.
[21] Ierodiakonou D, Zanobetti A, Coull BA, Melly S, Postma DS, Boezen HM, et al.
Ambient air pollution, lung function, and air way responsiveness in asthmatic
children. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2015;137(2):390–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jaci.2015.05.028.
[22] Barone-Adesi F, Dent JE, Dajnak D, Beevers S, Anderson HR, Kelly FJ, et al. Long-
term exposure to primary traffic pollutants and lung function in children: cross-
sectional study and meta-analysis. PloS One 2015;10(11):0142565. https://doi.
org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142565.
[23] Raaschou-Nielsen O, Andersen ZJ, Beelen R, Samoli E, Stafoggia M, Weinmayr G,
et al. Air pollution and lung cancer incidence in 17 European cohorts: prospective
analyses from the European Study of Cohorts for Air Pollution Effects (ESCAPE).
Lancet Oncol 2013;14(9):813–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)
70279-1.
[24] Ritchie H, Roser M. CO₂ and Greenhouse gas emissions. OurWorldInData.org
2017. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions/.
[Accessed 10 August 2019].
[25] The global transportation sector: CO2 emissions on the rise. Planete Energies
2017. https://www.planete-energies.com/en/medias/close/global-transportati
on-sector-co2-emissions-rise/. [Accessed 10 August 2019].
[26] Lapuerta M, Rodríguez-Fernández J, Herreros JM. Gaseous and particle
greenhouse emissions from road transport. In: Harrison RM, Hester RE, editors.
Environmental impacts of road vehicles: past, present and future. The Royal
Society of Chemistry; 2017. p. 25–45. https://doi.org/10.1039/9781788010221-
00025. 2017.
[27] Williams M, Minjares R. A technical summary of Euro 6/VI vehicle emission
standards. The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) 2016.
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_Euro6-VI_briefing_june
2016.pdf/. [Accessed 5 August 2019].
[28] Denis MJSt, Cicero-Fernandez P, Winer AM, Butler JW, Jesion G. Effects of in-use
driving conditions and vehicle/engine operating parameters on “off-cycle”
events: comparison with federal test procedure conditions. J Air Waste Manag
Assoc 1994;44(1):31–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/1073161X.1994.10467235.
[29] Khan T, Frey HC. Comparison of real-world and certification emission rates for
light duty gasoline vehicles. Sci Total Environ 2018;622(3):790–800. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.286.
[30] Xue H, Jiang S, Liang B. A Study on the model of traffic flow and vehicle exhaust
emission. Math Probl Eng 2013;2013:736285. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/
736285.
[31]] Wenzel TP, Singer BC, Slott RR, Stedman DH. Short-term emissions deterioration
in the California and Phoenix I/M programs. 2004 Transp Res D Transp Environ
2004;9(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2003.09.001. 107-24.
[32] Wang G, Cheng S, Lang J, Li S, Tian L. On-board measurements of gaseous
pollutant emission characteristics under real driving conditions from light-duty
diesel vehicles in Chinese cities. J Environ Sci 2016;46:28–37. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jes.2015.09.021.
[33] Malik L, Tiwari G, Thakur S, Kumar A. Assessment of freight vehicle
characteristics and impact of future policy interventions on their emissions in
Delhi. Transp Res D Transp Environ 2019;67:610–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trd.2019.01.007.
[34] E J, Han D, Deng Y, Zuo W, Qian C, Wu G, et al. Performance enhancement of a
baffle-cut heat exchanger of exhaust gas recirculation. Appl Therm Eng 2018;134:
86–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.01.109.
[35] J E, Zhao X, Qiu L, Wei K, Zhang Z, Deng Y, et al. Experimental investigation on
performance and economy characteristics of a diesel engine with variable nozzle
turbocharger and its application in urban bus. Energy Convers Manag 2019;193:
149–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.04.062.
[36] J E, Zhang Z, Tu Z, Zuo W, Hu W, Han D, et al. Effect analysis on flow and boiling
heat transfer performance of cooling water-jacket of bearing in the gasoline
engine turbocharger. Appl Therm Eng 2018;130:754–66. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2017.11.070.
25
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
[37] Agarwal AK, Singh AP, Lukose J, Gupta T. Characterization of exhaust
particulates from diesel fueled homogenous charge compression ignition
combustion engine. J Aerosol Sci 2013;58:71–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jaerosci.2012.12.005.
[38] Maurya RK, Agarwal AK. Experimental investigations of particulate size and
number distribution in an ethanol and methanol fueled HCCI engine. J Energy
Resour Technol 2015;137(1):012201. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4027897.
[39] Singh AP, Agarwal AK. Diesoline, diesohol, and diesosene fuelled HCCI engine
development. J Energy Resour Technol 2016;138(5). https://doi.org/10.1115/
1.4033571. 2016, 052212.
[40] Benajes J, García A, Domenech V, Durrett R. An investigation of partially
premixed compression ignition combustion using gasoline and spark assistance.
Appl Therm Eng 2013;52(2):468–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2012.12.025.
[41] Benajes J, Molina S, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J, Durrett R. Performance and
engine-out emissions evaluation of the double injection strategy applied to the
gasoline partially premixed compression ignition spark assisted combustion
concept. Appl Energy 2014;134:90–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2014.08.008.
[42] Singh AP, Bajpai N, Agarwal AK. Combustion mode switching characteristics of a
medium-duty engine operated in compression ignition/PCCI combustion modes.
J Energy Resour Technol 2018;140(9):092201. https://doi.org/10.1115/
1.4039741.
[43] Benajes J, Molina S, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J. Effects of low reactivity fuel
characteristics and blending ratio on low load RCCI (reactivity controlled
compression ignition) performance and emissions in a heavy-duty diesel engine.
Energy 2015;90:1261–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.06.088.
[44] Paykani A, Kakaee AH, Rahnama P, Reitz RD. Effects of diesel injection strategy
on natural gas/diesel reactivity controlled compression ignition combustion.
Energy 2015;90:814–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.07.112.
[45] J E, Zhao X, Xie L, Zhang B, Chen J, Zuo Q, et al. Performance enhancement of
microwave assisted regeneration in a wall-flow diesel particulate filter based on
field synergy theory. Energy 2019;169:719–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2018.12.086.
[46] J E, Zhao X, Liu G, Zhang B, Zuo Q, Wei K, et al. Effects analysis on optimal
microwave energy consumption in the heating process of composite regeneration
for the diesel particulate filter. Appl Energy 2019;254:113736. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113736.
[47] E J, Zhao M, Zuo Q, Zhang B, Zhang Z, Peng Q, et al. Effects analysis on diesel
soot continuous regeneration performance of a rotary microwave-assisted
regeneration diesel particulate filter. Fuel 2020;260:116353. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.fuel.2019.116353.
[48] Rathore RS, Srivastava DK, Agarwal AK, Verma N. Development of surface
functionalized activated carbon fiber for control of NO and particulate matter.
J Hazard Mater 2010;173(1–3):211–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jhazmat.2009.08.071.
[49] Wu G, Wu D, Li Y, Meng L. Effect of acetone-n-butanol-ethanol (ABE) as an
oxygenate on combustion, performance, and emission characteristics of a spark
ignition engine. J Chem 2020:7468651. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/7468651.
[50] J E, Liu G, Zhang Z, Han D, Chen J, Wei K, et al. Effect analysis on cold starting
performance enhancement of a diesel engine fueled with biodiesel fuel based on
an improved thermodynamic model. Appl Energy 2019;243:321–35. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.03.204.
[51] J E, Pham HM, Deng Y, Nguyen T, Duy V, Le HD, et al. Effects of injection timing
and injection pressure on performance and exhaust emissions of a common rail
diesel engine fueled by various concentrations of fish-oil biodiesel blends. Energy
2018;149:979–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.02.053.
[52] Singh AP, Agarwal AK. Evaluation of fuel injection strategies for biodiesel-fueled
CRDI engine development and particulate studies. J Energy Resour Technol 2018;
40(10):102201. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4039745.
[53] Patel C, Hwang J, Chandra K, Agarwal RA, Bae C, Gupta T, et al. In-cylinder spray
and combustion investigations in a heavy-duty optical engine fueled with waste
cooking oil, Jatropha, and Karanja biodiesels. J Energy Resour Technol 2019;141
(1):012201. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4040579.
[54] J E, Pham M, Zhao D, Deng Y, Le DH, Zuo W, et al. Effect of different technologies
on combustion and emissions of the diesel engine fueled with biodiesel: a review.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;80:620–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2017.05.250.
[55] Agarwal AK. Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications as fuels for internal
combustion engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2007;33(3):233–71. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.pecs.2006.08.003.
[56] Pelkmans L, Debal P. Comparison of on-road emissions with emissions measured
on chassis dynamometer test-cycles. Transp Res D Transp Environ 2006;11:
233–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2006.04.001.
[57] Pan M, Tong C, Qian W, Lu F, Yin J, Huang H. The effect of butanol isomers on
diesel engine performance, emission and combustion characteristics under
different load conditions. Fuel 2020;277:118188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2020.118188.
[58] Wang WG, Clark NN, Lyons DW, Yang RM, Gautam M, Bata RM, et al. Emissions
comparisons from alternative fuel buses and diesel buses with a chassis
dynamometer testing facility. Environ Sci Technol 1997;31(11):3132–7. https://
doi.org/10.1021/es9701063.
[59] Nine RD, Clark N, Daley JJ, Atkinson C. Development of a heavy-duty chassis
dynamometer driving route. Proc Inst Mech Eng - Part D J Automob Eng 1999;
213(6):561–74. https://doi.org/10.1243/0954407991527107. 1999.
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
[60] Yanowitz J, McCormick RL, Graboski MS. In-use emissions from heavy-duty
diesel vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 2000;34(5):729–40. https://doi.org/
10.1021/es990903w.
[61] Artelt S, Kock H, König H, Levsen K, Rosner G. Engine dynamometer experiments:
platinum emissions from differently aged three-way catalytic converters. Atmos
Environ 1999;33(21):3559–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00109-
0.
[62] Franco V, Kousoulidou M, Muntean M, Ntziachristos L, Hausberger S, Dilara P.
Road vehicle emission factors development: a review. Atmos Environ 2013;70:
84–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2013.01.006.
[63] Mock P, German J. The future of vehicle emissions testing and compliance.
International Council on Clean Transportation, https://theicct.org/sites/default/
files/publications/ICCT_future-vehicle-testing_20151123.pdf. [Accessed 13
August 2019].
[64] Yang Z, Deng B, Deng M, Huang S. An overview of chassis dynamometer in the
testing of vehicle emission. MATEC Web Conf 2018;175:02015. https://doi.org/
10.1051/matecconf/201817502015. IFCAE-IOT 201802015.
[65] Mierlo JV, Maggetto G, Burgwal EVD, Gense R. Driving style and traffic
measures—influence on vehicle emissions and fuel consumption. Proc Inst Mech
Eng - Part D J Automob Eng 2004;218(1):43–50. https://doi.org/10.1243/
095440704322829155.
[66] Dardiotis C, Fontaras G, Marotta A, Martini G, Manfredi U. Emissions of modern
light-duty ethanol flex-fuel vehicles over different operating and environmental
conditions. Fuel 2015;140:531–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.09.085.
[67] Carlos A, Villela S, Nascimento de CR, Vicentini PC. Vehicle coastdown
coefficients determination in chassis dynamometer - an alternative to track tests.
SAE Technical Paper 2016. https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-36-0405, Paper no.:
2016-36-0405.
[68] Mellios G, Hausberger S, Keller M, Samaras Z, Ntziachristos L. Parameterisation
of fuel consumption and CO2 emissions of passenger cars and light commercial
vehicles for modelling purposes. European Commission Joint Research Centre
Technical Report EUR 24927 EN, Luxembourg 2011. http://publications.jrc.ec.
europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC66088. [Accessed 15 August 2019].
[69] Traver M, Tennant C, McDaniel T, McConnell S, Bailey BK, Maldonado H. Inter-
laboratory cross-check of heavy-duty vehicle chassis dynamometers. SAE
Technical Paper 2002. https://doi.org/10.4271/2002-01-2879, Paper No.:2002-
01-2879. 2002.
[70] Sharpe B, Lowell D. Certification procedures for advanced technology heavy-duty
vehicles: evaluating test methods and opportunities for global alignment. SAE Int
J Commer Veh 2012;5(2):534–45. https://doi.org/10.4271/2012-01-1986.
[71] Sharpe B. Testing methods for heavy-duty vehicle fuel efficiency: trends from
regulatory programs around the world and implications for India. Work Pap
2015;3. 2015ICCT, www.theicct.org. [Accessed 5 September 2019]. https://the
icct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_HDV-test-procedures_India_2015
0420.pdf/.
[72] Lee W, Yoon M, Sunwoo M. A cost- and time-effective hardware-in-the-loop
simulation platform for automotive engine control systems. Proc Inst Mech Eng -
Part D J Automob Eng 2003;217(1):41–52. https://doi.org/10.1243/
095440703762702969.
[73] André M, Rapone M. Analysis and modelling of the pollutant emissions from
European cars regarding the driving characteristics and test-cycles. Atmos
Environ 2009;43(5):986–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.03.013.
[74] André M, Joumard R, Vidon R, Tassel P, Perret P. Real-world European driving
cycles, for measuring pollutant emissions from high- and low-powered cars.
Atmos Environ 2006;40(31):5944–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2005.12.057.
[75] Sileghem L, Bosteels D, May J, Favre C, Verhelst S. Analysis of vehicle emission
measurements on the new WLTC, the NEDC and the CADC. Transp Res D Transp
Environ 2014;32:70–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2014.07.008.
[76] Mock P, German J, Bandivadekar A, Riemersma I. Discrepancies between type-
approval and “Real-World” fuel-consumption and CO2 values. Working paper
2012–02 International Council on Clean Transportation 2012. https://theicct.or
g/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_EU_fuelconsumption_workingpaper_
2012.pdf/. [Accessed 5 September 2019].
[77] The worldwide harmonised light vehicle test procedure (WLTP). Vehicle type
Approval through VCA (vehicle certification agency) worldwide. https://www.
vehicle-certification-agency.gov.uk/fcb/wltp.asp. [Accessed 7 September 2019].
[78] Fontaras G, Zacharof NG, Ciuffo B. Fuel consumption and CO2 emissions from
passenger cars in Europe - laboratory versus real-world emissions. Prog Energy
Combust Sci 2017;60:97–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2016.12.004.
[79] EPA federal test procedure (FTP). EPA, Environmental Protection Agency; 2017.
www.epa.gov/emission-standards-reference-guide/epa-federal-test-procedure-ftp
/. [Accessed 7 September 2019].
[80] FTP-75. Emission test cycles: FTP-75. www.dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/
ftp75.php. [Accessed 7 September 2019].
[81] Emission test cycles. https://dieselnet.com/standards/cycles/index.php.
[Accessed 15 September 2019].
[82] Chen KS, Wang WC, Chen HM, Lin CF, Hsu HC, Kao JH, et al. Motorcycle
emissions and fuel consumption in urban and rural driving conditions. Sci Total
Environ 2003;312(1–3):113–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-9697(03)
00196-7.
[83] Tsai JH, Huang PH, Chiang HL. Air pollutants and toxic emissions of various
mileage motorcycles for ECE driving cycles. Atmos Environ 2017;153:126–34.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.01.019.
26
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
[84] Li T, Chen X, Yan Z. Comparison of fine particles emissions of light-duty gasoline
vehicles from chassis dynamometer tests and on-road measurements. Atmos
Environ 2013;68:82–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2012.11.031.
[85] Jung S, Lim J, Kwon S, Jeon S, Kim J, Lee J, et al. Characterization of particulate
matter from diesel passenger cars tested on chassis dynamometers. J Environ Sci
2017;54:21–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2016.01.035.
[86] Joumard R, André M, Vidon R, Tassel P. Characterizing real unit emissions for
light-duty goods vehicles. Atmos Environ 2003;37(37):5217–25. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.02.001.
[87] Talibi M, Hellier P, Watkinson M, Ladommatos N. Comparative analysis of H2-
diesel co-combustion in a single cylinder engine and a chassis dynamometer
vehicle. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2019;44(2):1239–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2018.11.092.
[88] Nylund NO, Ikonen M, Laurikko J. Heavy-duty vehicle in use emission
performance. In: Proceedings of DEER 2003, 9th diesel engine emission reduction
conference; August 24-28, 2003. Newport, Rhode Island, USA, https://www.osti.
gov/servlets/purl/829627.
[89] Carlson R, Wishart J, Stutenberg K. On-road and dynamometer evaluation of
vehicle auxiliary loads. SAE Int J Fuels Lubr 2016;9(1):260–8. https://doi.org/
10.4271/2016-01-0901.
[90] Jeremy D. Advanced vehicle testing and evaluation final technical report
encompassing project activities from October 1, 2011 to April 30, 2018. United
States: N. p.; 2018. www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1481912.
[91] Huang C, Tao S, Lou S, Hu Q, Wang H, Wang Q, et al. Evaluation of emission
factors for light-duty gasoline vehicles based on chassis dynamometer and tunnel
studies in Shanghai, China. Atmos Environ 2017;169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2017.09.020. 193-03.
[92] Serrano LMV, Câmara RMO, Carreira VJR, Gameiro da SMC. Performance study
about biodiesel impact on buses engines using dynamometer tests and fleet
consumption data. Energy Convers Manag 2012;60:2–9. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enconman.2011.11.029.
[93] Wihersaari H, Pirjola L, Karjalainen P, Saukko E, Kuuluvainen H, Kulmala K, et al.
Particulate emissions of a modern diesel passenger car under laboratory and real-
world transient driving conditions. Environ Pollut 2020;265(B):114948. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114948.
[94] Valverde V, Mora BA, Clairotte M, Pavlovic J, Suarez-Bertoa R, Giechaskiel B,
et al. Emission factors derived from 13 Euro 6b light-duty vehicles based on
laboratory and on-road measurements. Atmosphere 2019;10(5):243. https://doi.
org/10.3390/atmos10050243.
[95] Triantafyllopoulos G, Dimaratos A, Ntziachristos L, Bernard Y, Bernard Y,
Dornoff J, et al. A study on the CO2 and NOx emissions performance of Euro 6
diesel vehicles under various chassis dynamometer and on-road conditions
including latest regulatory provisions. Sci Total Environ 2019;666:337–46.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.144.
[96] Chen L, Wang Z, Liu S, Qu L. Using a chassis dynamometer to determine the
influencing factors for the emissions of Euro VI vehicles. Transp Res D Transp
Environ 2018;65:564–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.09.022.
[97] Alves CA, Lopes DJ, Calvo AI, Evtyugina M, Rocha S, Nunes T. Emissions from
light-duty diesel and gasoline in-use vehicles measured on chassis dynamometer
test-cycles. Aerosol Air Qual Res 2015;15(1):99–116. https://doi.org/10.4209/
aaqr.2014.01.0006.
[98] Cai T, Zhang Y, Fang D, Shang J, Zhang Y, Zhang Y. Chinese vehicle emissions
characteristic testing with small sample size: results and comparison. Atmos
Pollut Res 2017;8(1):154–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2016.08.007.
[99] Gao J, Chen H, Li Y, Chen J, Zhang Y, Dave K, Huang Y. Fuel consumption and
exhaust emissions of diesel vehicles in worldwide harmonized light vehicles test-
cycles and their sensitivities to eco-driving factors. Energy Convers Manag 2019;
196:605–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.06.038.
[100] Na K, Biswas S, Robertson W, Sahay K, Okamoto R, Mitchell A, et al. Impact of
biodiesel and renewable diesel on emissions of regulated pollutants and
greenhouse gases on a 2000 heavy-duty diesel truck. Atmos Environ 2015;107:
307–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.02.054.
[101] Lim CS, Lim JH, Cha JS, Lim JY. Comparative effects of oxygenates-gasoline
blended fuels on the exhaust emissions in gasoline-powered vehicles. J Environ
Manag 2019;239:103–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.039.
[102] Olfert JS, Symonds JPR, Collings N. The effective density and fractal dimension of
particles emitted from a light-duty diesel vehicle with a diesel oxidation catalyst.
J Aerosol Sci 2007;38:69–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2006.10.002.
[103] Biswas S, Verma V, Schauer JJ, Sioutas C. Chemical speciation of PM emissions
from heavy-duty diesel vehicles equipped with diesel particulate filter (DPF) and
selective catalytic reduction (SCR) retrofits. Atmos Environ 2009;43:1917–25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.12.040.
[104] Dixit P, Miller JW, Cocker III DR, Oshinuga A, Jiang Y, Durbin TD, et al.
Differences between emissions measured in urban driving and certification testing
of heavy-duty diesel engines. Atmos Environ 2017;166:276–85. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.06.037.
[105] Jiang Y, Yang J, Cocker III D, Karavalakis G, Johnson KC, Durbin TD.
Characterizing emission rates of regulated pollutants from model year 2012+
heavy-duty diesel vehicles equipped with DPF and SCR systems. Sci Total Environ
2018;619–620:765–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.11.120.
[106] Oduro SD, Ha QP, Duc H. Vehicular emissions prediction with CART-BMARS
hybrid models. Transp Res D Transp Environ 2016;49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trd.2016.09.012. 188–02.
[107] Barth M, Scora G, Younglove T. Modal emissions model for heavy-duty diesel
vehicles. Transport Res Rec 2004;1880(1):10–20. https://doi.org/10.3141/1880-
02.
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
[108] Kear T, Niemeier DA. On-road heavy-duty diesel particulate matter emissions
modeled using chassis dynamometer data. Environ Sci Technol 2006;40(24):
7828–33. https://doi.org/10.1021/es060177e.
[109] Pavlovic J, Ciuffo B, Fontaras G, Valverde V, Marott A. How much difference in
type-approval CO2 emissions from passenger cars in Europe can be expected from
changing to the new test procedure (NEDC vs. WLTP)? Transp Res Part A Policy
Pract 2018;111:136–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.02.002.
[110] Silva C, Ross M, Farias T. Evaluation of energy consumption, emissions and cost of
plug-in hybrid vehicles. Energy Convers Manag 2009;50:1635–43. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2009.03.036.
[111] Hu X, Murgovski N, Johannesson L, Egardt B. Energy efficiency analysis of a series
plug-in hybrid electric bus with different energy management strategies and
battery sizes. Appl Energy 2016;111:1001–9. 0.1016/j.apenergy.2013.06.056.
[112] Chauhan BP, Joshi GJ, Parida P. Driving cycle analysis to identify intersection
influence zone for urban intersections under heterogeneous traffic condition.
Sustain Cities Soc 2018;41:180–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.05.039.
[113] Liu B, Frey HC. Comparative assessment of variability in light duty vehicle
exhaust emission rates based on vehicle types, age, driving cycles, and ambient
conditions. Paper 257303. Pittsburgh, PA: Annual Conference and Exhibition of
the Air & Waste Management Association; June .
[114] Bishop GA, Starkey JR, Ihlenfeldt A, Williams WJ, Stedman DH. IR long-path
photometry: a remote sensing tool for automobile emissions. Anal Chem 1989;61.
https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00185a746. 671A-7A.
[115] Stephens RD, Cadle SH. Remote sensing measurements of carbon monoxide
emissions from on-road vehicles. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 1991;41:39–46.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.1991.10466823.
[116] Borken-Kleefeld J, Dallmann T. Remote sensing of motor vehicle exhaust
emissions. Washington DC, USA: White Paper, International Council on Clean
Transportation; Feb 2018. https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Re
mote-sensing-emissions_ICCT-White-Paper_01022018_vF_updated.pdf. [Accessed
4 October 2019].
[117] Bishop GA, Stedman DH. A decade of on-road emissions measurements. Environ
Sci Technol 2008;42:1651–6. https://doi.org/10.1021/es702413b.
[118] Dallmann T. Use of remote-sensing technology for vehicle emissions monitoring
and control.” true - the real urban emissions initiative. International Council on
Clean Transportation; Dec. 2018. https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publica
tions/ICCT_remote-sensing_brief_201812.pdf. [Accessed 5 October 2019].
[119] Bishop GA, Stedman DH. Measuring the emissions of passing cars. Acc Chem Res
1996;29:489–95. https://doi.org/10.1021/ar950240x.
[120] Burgard DA, Bishop GA, Stedman DH. Remote sensing of ammonia and sulfur
dioxide from on-road light duty vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 2006 a;40:
7018–22. https://doi.org/10.1021/es061161r.
[121] Moosmüller H, Mazzoleni C, Barber PW, Kuhns HD, Keislar RE, Watson JG. On-
road measurement of automotive particle emissions by ultraviolet LIDAR and
transmissometer: instrument. Environ Sci Technol 2003;37:4971–8. https://doi.
org/10.1021/es034443p.
[122] Barrass S, Gérard Y, Holdsworth RJ, Martin PA. Near-infrared tunable diode laser
spectrometer for the remote sensing of vehicle emissions. Spectrochim Acta Mol
Biomol Spectrosc 2004;60(14):3353–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
saa.2003.11.038.
[123] Jimenez JL, Mcrae GJ, Nelson DD, Zahniser MS, Kolb CE. Remote sensing of NO
and NO2 emissions from heavy-duty diesel trucks using tunable diode lasers.
Environ Sci Technol 2000;34(12):2380–7. https://doi.org/10.1021/es9911622.
[124] Dragomir CM, Constantin DE, Voiculescu M, Georgescu LP, Merlaud A,
Roozendael MV. Modeling results of atmospheric dispersion of NO2 in an urban
area using METI–LIS and comparison with coincident mobile DOAS
measurements. Atmos Pollut Res 2015;6(3):503–10. https://doi.org/10.5094/
APR.2015.056.
[125] Hager JS. Vehicle remote sensing - next generation – results. PEMS Conference &
Workshop No. 5, University of California Riverside, USA, 25–26 March 2015.
[126] Abshire JB, Riris H, Allan GR, Weaver CJ, Mao J, Sun X, et al. Pulsed airborne
LIDAR measurements of atmospheric CO2 column absorption. Tellus B 2010;62
(5):770–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0889.2010.00502.x.
[127] Hart C, Hawkins D, Fulper C, Stanard A, DeFries TH, Kishan S, et al. Canister
degradation study. 25th CRC on-road vehicle emission workshop. 2015. Long
Beach, California, 22–25 March 2015.
[128] Ropkins K, DeFries TH, Pope F, Green DC, Kemper J, Kishan S, et al. Evaluation of
EDAR vehicle emissions remote sensing technology. Sci Total Environ 2017;609:
1464–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.137.
[129] Huang Y, Organ B, Zhou JL, Surawski NC, Hong G, Chan EFC, et al. Remote
sensing of on-road vehicle emissions: mechanism, applications and a case study
from Hong Kong. Atmos Environ 2018;182:58–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2018.03.035.
[130] Chan TL, Ning Z, Leung CW, Cheung CS, Hung WT, Dong G. On-road remote
sensing of petrol vehicle emissions measurement and emission factors estimation
in Hong Kong. Atmos Environ 2004;38(14):2055–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2004.01.031.
[131] Ko YW, Cho CH. Characterization of large fleets of vehicle exhaust emissions in
middle Taiwan by remote sensing. Sci Total Environ 2006;354(1):75–82. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.05.040.
[132] Zhang Y, Stedman DH, Bishop GA, Guenther PL, Beaton SP. Worldwide on-road
vehicle exhaust emissions study by remote sensing. Environ Sci Technol 1995;29:
2286–94. https://doi.org/10.1021/es00009a020.
[133] Carslaw DC, Rhys-Tyler G. New insights from comprehensive on-road
measurements of NOx, NO2 and NH3 from vehicle emission remote sensing in
27
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
London, UK. Atmos Environ 2013;81:339–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2013.09.026.
[134] Chen Y, Borken-Kleefeld J. NOx emissions from diesel passenger cars worsen with
age. Environ Sci Technol 2016;50:3327–32. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.
est.5b04704.
[135] Ghaffarpasand O, Beddows DCS, Ropkins K, Pope FD. Real-world assessment of
vehicle air pollutant emissions subset by vehicle type, fuel and EURO class: new
findings from the recent UK EDAR field campaigns, and implications for emissions
restricted zones. Sci Total Environ 2020;734:139416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2020.139416.
[136] Smit R, Kingston P. Measuring on-road vehicle emissions with multiple
instruments including remote sensing. Atmosphere 2019;10:516. https://doi.org/
10.3390/atmos10090516.
[137] Huang Y, Organ B, Zhou JL, Surawski NC, Yam YS, Chan EFC. Characterisation of
diesel vehicle emissions and determination of remote sensing cutpoints for diesel
high-emitters. Environ Pollut 2019;252:31–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envpol.2019.04.130.
[138] Sjödin Å, Andréasson K, Wallin M, Lenner M, Wilhelmsson H. Identification of
high-emitting catalyst cars on the road by means of remote sensing. Int J Veh Des
1997;18:326–39. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVD.1997.062057.
[139] Strengthened emissions control for petrol and LPG vehicles. Environmental
Protection Department, HKEPD; 2018. https://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/engli
sh/environmentinhk/air/guide_ref/remote_sensing_Petrol_n_LPG.htm/. [Accessed
10 October 2019].
[140] Sjödin Å, Jerksjö M. Evaluation of European road transport emission models
against on-road emission data as measured by optical remote sensing. 17th
International Conference ‘Transport and Air Pollution’. Graz; 2008. 2008, http
://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.519.7085&rep=rep
1&type=pdf/. [Accessed 25 September 2019].
[141] Hueglin C, Buchmann B, Weber R. Long-term observation of real-world road
traffic emission factors on a motorway in Switzerland. Atmos Environ 2006;40.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.03.020. 3696-09.
[142] Fujita EM, Campbell DE, Zielinska B, Chow JC, Lindhjem CE, DenBleyker A, et al.
Comparison of the MOVES2010a, MOBILE6.2, and EMFAC2007 mobile source
emission models with on-road traffic tunnel and remote sensing measurements.
J Air Waste Manag Assoc 2012;62(10):1134–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10962247.2012.699016.
[143] Burgard DA, Bishop GA, Stedman DH, Gessner VH, Daeschlein C. Remote sensing
of in-use heavy-duty diesel trucks. Environ Sci Technol 2006;40(22):6938–42.
https://doi.org/10.1021/es060989a.
[144] Carslaw DC, Beevers SD, Tate JE, Westmoreland EJ, Williams ML. Recent
evidence concerning higher NOx emissions from passenger cars and light-duty
vehicles. Atmos Environ 2011;45:7053–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2011.09.063.
[145] Pujadas M, Domínguez-Sáez A, De la Fuente J. Real-driving emissions of
circulating Spanish car fleet in 2015 using RSD Technology. Sci Total Environ
2017;576:193–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.049.
[146] Varella RA, Giechaskiel B, Sousa L, Duarte G. Comparison of portable emissions
measurement systems (PEMS) with laboratory grade equipment. Appl Sci 2018;8
(9):1633. https://doi.org/10.3390/app8091633.
[147] Hooftman N, Messagie M, Mierlo JV, Coosemans T. A review of the European
passenger car regulations – real driving emissions vs local air quality. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2018;86:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.01.012.
[148] Frey HC, Unal A, Rouphail NM, Colyar JD. On-road measurement of vehicle
tailpipe emissions using a portable instrument. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 2003;53
(8):992–1002. https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.2003.10466245.
[149] Giechaskiel B, Clairotte M, Valverde-Morales V, Bonnel P, Kregar Z, Franco V,
et al. Framework for the assessment of PEMS (portable emissions measurement
systems) uncertainty. Environ Res 2018;166:251–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envres.2018.06.012.
[150] Opresnik SR, Seljak T, Bizjan F, Katrasnik T. Exhaust emissions and fuel
consumption of a triple-fuel spark-ignition engine powered passenger car. Transp
Res D Transp Environ 2012;17(3):221–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trd.2011.08.002.
[151] Giechaskiel B, Vlachos T, Riccobono F, Forni F, Colombo R, Montigny F, et al.
Implementation of portable emissions measurement systems (PEMS) for the real-
driving emissions (RDE) regulation in Europe. JoVE 2016;118:e54753. https://
doi.org/10.3791/54753.
[152] Cicero-Fernández P, Long JR, Winer AM. Effects of grades and other loads on on-
road emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. J Air Waste Manag Assoc
1997;47:898–904. https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.1997.10464455.
[153] Baldino C, Tiegte U, Muncrief R, Bernard Y, Mock P. Road tested: comparative
overview of real-world versus type-approval NOx and CO2 emissions from diesel
cars in Europe. In: White paper. International council on clean transportation
Europe (ICCT); 2017. Berlin, Germany, https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/
publications/ICCT_RoadTested_201709.pdf.
[154] Rubino L, Bonnel P, Hummel R, Krasenbrink A, Santiet MGD, Perotti M, et al.
PEMS light duty vehicles application: experiences in downtown Milan. SAE
Technical Paper 2007. https://doi.org/10.4271/2007-24-0113, Paper No.:2007-
24-0113.
[155] Merkisz J, Pielecha J, Bielaczyc P, Woodburn J. Analysis of emission factors in
RDE tests as well as in NEDC and WLTC chassis dynamometer tests. SAE Technical
Paper 2016. https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-0980. Paper No.:2016-01-0980.
[156] 40 CFR Subpart J: Field testing and portable emission measurement systems.
Legal Information Institute, http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/40/part-1065/
subpart-J [accessed 15 November 2019].
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
[157] Ntziachristos L, Papadimitriou G, Ligterink N, Hausberger S. Implications of
diesel emissions control failures to emission factors and road transport NOx
evolution. Atmos Environ 2016;141:542–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2016.07.036.
[158] Andersson J, May J, Favre C, Bosteels D, de Vries S, Heaney M, et al. On-road and
chassis dynamometer evaluations of emissions from two Euro 6 diesel vehicles.
SAE Int. J. Fuels Lubr 2014;7:919–34. https://doi.org/10.4271/2014-01-2826.
[159] Kwon S, Park Y, Park J, Kim J, Choi K, Cha J. Characteristics of on-road NOx
emissions from Euro 6 light-duty diesel vehicles using a portable emissions
measurement system. Sci Total Environ 2017;576:70–7. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.101.
[160] Czerwinski J, Zimmerli Y, Comte P, Butler T. Experiences and results with
different PEMS. J Earth Sci Geotech Eng 6:91-106, http://www.scienpress.com/
Upload/GEO/Vol%206_4_6.pdf.
[161] Miyazaki T, Takada Y, Iida N. Development of on-board system to measure
running condition and actual NOx emissions from freight vehicle. SAE Technical
paper 2002. https://doi.org/10.4271/2002-01-0613. Paper No.:2002-01-0613.
[162] Hawirko JD, Checkel DM. Real-Time, on-road measurement of driving behavior,
engine parameters and exhaust emissions. SAE Technical paper 2002. https://doi.
org/10.4271/2002-01-1714. Paper No.:2002-01-1714.
[163] Oestergaard K, Akard M, Porter S, Carder D. Further investigation into the
performance of two different on-board emissions measurement system compared
to laboratory measurement. SAE Technical Paper 2004. https://doi.org/10.4271/
2004-01-3480. Paper No.:2004-01-3480.
[164] Daham B, Andrews G, Li H, Ballesteros R, Bell M, Tate J, et al. Application of a
portable FTIR for measuring on-road emissions. SAE Technical Paper 2005 2005.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2005-01-0676. Paper No.2005-01-0676.
[165] Dearth MA, Butler JW, Colvin A, Gierczak C, Kaberline S, Korniski T. SemtechD:
the chassis roll evaluation of a commercial portable emission measurement
system (PEMS). SAE Technical Paper 2005 2005. https://doi.org/10.4271/2005-
01-0673. Paper No.:2005-01-0673.
[166] Durbin T, Johnson K, Cocker III D, Miller J, Maldonado H, Shah A, et al.
Evaluation and comparison of portable emissions measurement systems and
federal reference methods for emissions from a back-up generator and a diesel
truck operated on a chassis dynamometer. Environ Sci Technol 2007;41(17):
6199–204. https://doi.org/10.1021/es0622251.
[167] Rubino L, Bonnel P, Carriero M, Krasenbrink A. Portable emission measurement
system (PEMS) for heavy-duty diesel vehicle PM measurement: the European PM
PEMS Program. SAE Int J Eng 2010;2(2):660–73. https://doi.org/10.4271/2009-
24-0149.
[168] Gallus J, Kirchner U, Vogt R, Börensen C, Benter T. On-road particle number
measurements using a portable emission measurement system (PEMS). Atmos
Environ 2016;124:37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.11.012.
[169] Zhang K, Frey C. Evaluation of response time of a portable system for in-use
vehicle tailpipe emissions measurement. Environ Sci Technol 2008;42(1):221–7.
https://doi.org/10.1021/es062999h.
[170] Johnson KC, Durbin TD, Cocker III DR, Miller WJ, Bishnu DK, Maldonado H, et al.
On-road comparison of a portable emission measurement system with a mobile
reference laboratory for a heavy-duty diesel vehicle. Atmos Environ 2009;43:
2877–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2009.03.019.
[171] Varella RA, Duarte G, Baptista P, Villafuerte PM, Sousa L. Analysis of the
influence of outdoor temperature in vehicle cold-start operation following EU real
driving emission test procedure. SAE Int J Commer Veh 2017;10(2):596–607.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-24-0140.
[172] Daham B, Li H, Andrews G, Tate J Ropkins K, Bell MC. Driver variability
influences on real-world emissions at a road junction using a PEMS. SAE
Technical Paper 2010. https://doi.org/10.4271/2010-01-1072. Paper No.:2010-
01-1072.
[173] Varella RA, Faria MV, Mendoza-Villafuerte P, Baptista PC, Sousa L, Duarte GO.
Assessing the influence of boundary conditions, driving behavior and data
analysis methods on real driving CO2 and NOx emissions. Sci Total Environ 2019;
658:879–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.053.
[174] Unal A, Frey HC, Rouphail NM. Quantification of highway vehicle emissions hot
spots based upon on-board measurements. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 2004;54:
130–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.2004.10470888.
[175] Unal A, Rouphail NM, Frey HC. Effect of arterial signalization and level of service
on measured vehicle emissions. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2003;1842(1):
47–56. https://doi.org/10.3141/1842-06.
[176] Zhang Y, Chen X, Zhang X, Song G, Hao Y, Yu L. Assessing effect of traffic signal
control strategies on vehicle emissions. J Transport Sys Eng Inform Technol 2009;
9(1):150–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1570-6672(08)60050-1.
[177] Chen C, Huang C, Jing Q, Wang H, Pan H, Li L, et al. On-road emission
characteristics of heavy-duty diesel vehicles in Shanghai. Atmos Environ 2007;41:
5334–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.02.037.
[178] Grigoratos T, Fontaras G, Giechaskiel B, Zacharof N. Real-world emissions
performance of heavy-duty Euro VI diesel vehicles. Atmos Environ 2019;201:
348–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.12.042.
[179] Lenaers G, Van Poppel M. Mobile emission measurements for assessing low
emitting vehicles exemplified on a CRT-equipped bus. Int J Energy a Clean
Environ (IJECE) 2005;6:55–69. https://doi.org/10.1615/InterJEnerCleanEnv.v6.
i1.50.
[180] Lenaers G, Van Poppel M. On-board emission and odour measurements on Euro 2
buses retrofitted with different combinations of PM traps and SCR. SAE Technical
Paper 2007. https://doi.org/10.4271/2007-24-0109. Paper No.:2007-24-0109.
[181] Bishop JDK, Molden N, Boies AM. Using portable emissions measurement systems
(PEMS) to derive more accurate estimates of fuel use and nitrogen oxides
28
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
emissions from modern Euro 6 passenger cars under real-world driving
conditions. Appl Energy 2019;242:942–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2019.03.047.
[182] O’Driscoll R, ApSimon HM, Oxley T, Molden N, Stettler MEJ, Thiyagarajah A.
A portable emissions measurement system (PEMS) study of NOx and primary NO2
emissions from Euro 6 diesel passenger cars and comparison with COPERT
emission factors. Atmos Environ 2019;145:81–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2016.09.021.
[183] Lee S, Fulper C, McDonald J, Olechiw M. Real-world emission modeling and
validations using PEMS and GPS vehicle data. SAE Technical Paper 2019, Paper
No.:2019-01-0757, DOI:10.4271/2019-01-0757.
[184] Wu Y, Zhang S, Hao J, Liu H, Wu X, Hu J, Stevanovic S. On-road vehicle emissions
and their control in China: a review and outlook. Sci Total Environ 2017;574:
332–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.040.
[185] Kittelson D, Johnson J, Watts W, Wei Q, Drayton M, Paulsen D, et al. Diesel
aerosol sampling in the atmosphere. SAE Technical Paper 2000, Paper No.:2000-
01-2212, DOI:10.4271/2000-01-2212.
[186] Canagaratna MR, Jayne JT, Ghertner DA, Herndon S, Shi Q, Jimenez JL, et al.
Chase studies of particulate emissions from in-use New York City vehicles.
Aerosol Sci Technol 2004;38:555–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02786820490465504.
[187] Herndon SC, Jayne JT, Zahniser MS, Worsnop DR, Knighton B, Alwine E, et al.
Characterization of urban pollutant emission fluxes and ambient concentration
distributions using a mobile laboratory with rapid response instrumentation.
Faraday Discuss 2005;130:327–39. https://doi.org/10.1039/b500411j.
[188] Shorter JH, Herndon S, Zahniser MS, Nelson DD, Wormhoudt J, Demerjian KL,
et al. Real-time measurements of nitrogen oxide emissions from in-use New York
City transit buses using a chase vehicle. Environ Sci Technol 2005;39. https://doi.
org/10.1021/es048295u. 7991-00.
[189] Zavala M, Herndon SC, Wood EC, Jayne JT, Nelson DD, Trimborn AM, et al.
Comparison of emissions from on-road sources using a mobile laboratory under
various driving and operational sampling modes. Atmos Chem Phys 2009;9:1–14.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-9-1-2009.
[190] Lau CF, Rakowska A, Townsend T, Brimblecombe P, Chan TL, Yam YS, et al.
Evaluation of diesel fleet emissions and control policies from plume chasing
measurements of on-road vehicles. Atmos Environ 2015;122:171–82. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.09.048.
[191] Canagaratna MR, Jayne JT, Ghertner DA, Herndon S, Shi Q, Jimenez JL, et al.
Chase studies of particulate emissions from in-use New York City vehicles.
Aerosol Sci Technol 2004;38(6):555–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/
02786820490465504.
[192] Zavala M, Herndon SC, Slott RS, Dunlea EJ, Marr LC, Shorter JH, et al.
Characterization of on-road vehicle emissions in the Mexico City Metropolitan
Area using a mobile laboratory in chase and fleet average measurement modes
during the MCMA-2003 field campaign. Atmos Chem Phys 2006;6:5129–42.
https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-6-5129-2006.
[193] Morawska L, Ristovski Z, Johnson G, Jayaratne E, Mengersen K. Novel method for
on-road emission factor measurements using a plume capture trailer. Environ Sci
Technol 2007;41:574–9. https://doi.org/10.1021/es060179z.
[194] Vogt R, Scheer V, Casati R, Benter T. On-road measurement of particle emission in
the exhaust plume of a diesel passenger car. Environ Sci Technol 2003;337(18):
4070–6. https://doi.org/10.1021/es0300315.
[195] Kittelson D, Watts W, Johnson J. Nanoparticle emissions on Minnesota highways.
Atmos Environ 2006;38:9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.09.037.
[196] Lee SH, Kwak JH, Lee SY, Lee JH. On-road chasing and laboratory measurements
of exhaust particle emissions of diesel vehicles equipped with after-treatment
technologies (DPF, Urea-SCR). Int J Automot Technol 2015;16(4):551–9. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12239− 015− 0056− 8.
[197] Järvinen A, Timonen H, Karjalainen P, Bloss M, Simonen P, Saarikoski S, et al.
Particle emissions of Euro VI, EEV and retrofitted EEV city buses in real traffic.
Environ Pollut 2019;250:708–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envpol.2019.04.033.
[198] Wild RJ, Dubé WP, Aikin KC, Eilerman SJ, Neuman JA, Peischl J, et al. On-road
measurements of vehicle NO2/NOx emission ratios in Denver, Colorado, USA.
Atmos Environ 2017;148:182–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2016.10.039.
[199] Wen Y, Wang H, Larson T, Kelp M, Zhang S, Wu Y, et al. On-highway vehicle
emission factors, and spatial patterns, based on mobile monitoring and absolute
principal component score. Sci Total Environ 2019;676:242–51. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.185.
[200] Tan Y, Lipsky EM, Saleh R, Robinson AL, Presto AA. Characterizing the spatial
variation of air pollutants and the contributions of high emitting vehicles in
Pittsburgh, PA. Environ Sci Technol 2014;48(24):14186–94. https://doi.org/
10.1021/es5034074.
[201] Apte JS, Messier KP, Gani S, Brauer M, Kirchstetter TW, Lunden MM, et al. High-
resolution air pollution mapping with Google street view cars: exploiting big data.
Environ Sci Technol 2017;51(12). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00891.
6999–08.
[202] Wang H, Wu Y, Zhang KM, Zhang S, Baldauf RW, Snow R, et al. Evaluating mobile
monitoring of on-road emission factors by comparing concurrent PEMS
measurements. Sci Total Environ 2020;736:139507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2020.139507.
[203] El-Fadel M, Hashisho Z. Vehicular emissions in roadway tunnels: a critical review.
Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 2001;31(2):125–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/
20016491089190.
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
[204] Zhou R, Wang S, Shi C, Wang W, Zhao H, Liu R, et al. Study on the traffic air
pollution inside and outside a road tunnel in Shanghai, China. PloS One 2014;9
(11):e112195. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0112195.
[205] Deng C, Jin Y, Zhang M, Liu X, Yu Z. Emission characteristics of VOCs from on-
road vehicles in an urban tunnel in eastern China and predictions for 2017–2026.
Aerosol Air Qual Res 2018;18:3025–34. https://doi.org/10.4209/
aaqr.2018.07.0248.
[206] Mancilla Y, Araizaga AE, Mendoza A. A tunnel study to estimate emission factors
from mobile sources in Monterrey, Mexico. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 2012;62
(12):1431–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2012.717902.
[207] Hung-Lung C, Yao-Sheng H. Particulate matter emissions from on-road vehicles in
a freeway tunnel study. Atmos Environ 2009;43:4014–22. 1016/j.
atmosenv.2009.05.015.
[208] Nogueira T, Souza K, Fornaro A, Andrade MF, Carvalho LRF. On-road emissions of
carbonyls from vehicles powered by biofuel blends in traffic tunnels in the
Metropolitan Area of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Atmos Environ 2015;108:88–97. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.02.064.
[209] McGaughey GR, Desai NR, Allen DT, Seila RL, Lonneman WA, Fraser MP, et al.
Analysis of motor vehicle emissions in a houston tunnel during the Texas air
quality study 2000. Atmos Environ 2004;38(20):3363–72. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.atmosenv.2004.03.006.
[210] Kristensson A, Johansson C, Westerholm R, Swietlicki E, Gidhagen L,
Wideqvist U, et al. Real-world emission factors of gases and particles measured in
a road tunnel in Stockholm, Sweden. Atmos Environ 2004;38:657–73. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.10.030.
[211] Ning Z, Polidori A, Schauer JJ, Sioutas C. Emission factors of PM species based on
freeway measurements and comparison with tunnel and dynamometer studies.
Atmos Environ 2008;42(13). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.12.039.
3099-14.
[212] Dong Z, Jiang N, Duan S, Zhang L, Li S, Zhang R. Size distributions and size-
segregated chemical profiles of particulate matter in a traffic tunnel of East-
Central China. Atmos Pollut Res 2019;10(6):1873–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apr.2019.08.001.
[213] Li X, Dallmann TR, May AA, Stanier CO, Grieshop AP, Lipsky EM, et al. Size
distribution of vehicle emitted primary particles measured in a traffic tunnel.
Atmos Environ 2018;191:9–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
atmosenv.2018.07.052.
[214] Yang Q, Shen H, Liang Z. Analysis of particulate matter and carbon monoxide
emission rates from vehicles in a Shanghai tunnel. Sustain Cities Soc 2020;56:
102104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102104.
[215] Brimblecombe P, Townsend T, Lau CF, Rakowska A, Chan TL, Mocnik G, et al.
Through-tunnel estimates of vehicle fleet emission factors. Atmos Environ 2015;
123:180–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.10.086.
[216] Colberg CA, Tona B, Stahel WA, Meier M, Staehelin J. Comparison of a road traffic
emission model (HBEFA) with emissions derived from measurements in the
Gubrist road tunnel, Switzerland. Atmos Environ 2005;39:4703–14. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.04.020.
[217] Ropkins K, Beebe J, Li H, Daham B, Tate J, Bell M, Andrews G. Real-world vehicle
exhaust emissions monitoring: review and critical discussion. Crit Rev Environ Sci
Technol 2009;39(2):79–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643380701413377.
[218] Chirico R, Prevot ASH, DeCarlo PF, Heringa MF, Richter R, Weingartner E, et al.
Aerosol and trace gas vehicle emission factors measured in a tunnel using an
Aerosol Mass Spectrometer and other on-line instrumentation. Atmos Environ
2011;45:62182–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.01.069.
[219] Geller M, Sardar SB, Phuleria H, Fine PM, Sioutas C. Measurements of particle
number and mass concentrations and size distributions in a tunnel environment.
Environ Sci Technol 2005;39:8653–63. https://doi.org/10.1021/es050360s.
[220] Smit R, Kingston P, Wainwright DH, Tooker R. A tunnel study to validate motor
vehicle emission prediction software in Australia. Atmos Environ 2017;151:
188–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2016.12.014.
[221] Rogak SN, Pott U, Dann T, Wang D. Gaseous emissions from vehicles in a traffic
tunnel in Vancouver, British Columbia. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 1998;48:
604–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10473289.1998.10463713.
[222] Zhang Q, Wu L, Fang X, Liu M, Zhang J, Shao M, et al. Emission factors of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) based on the detailed vehicle classification in a tunnel
study. Sci Total Environ 2018;624:878–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2017.12.171.
[223] Ait-Helal W, Beeldens A, Boonen E, Borbon A, Boreave A, Cazaunau M, et al. On-
road measurements of NMVOCs and NOx: determination of light-duty vehicles
emission factors from tunnel studies in Brussels city center. Atmos Environ 2014;
122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.09.066. 799-07.
[224] Dallmann TR, DeMartini SJ, Kirchstetter TW, Herndon SC, Onasch TB, Wood EC,
et al. On-Road Measurement of gas and particle phase pollutant emission factors
for individual heavy-duty diesel trucks. Environ Sci Technol 2012;46:8511–8.
https://doi.org/10.1021/es301936c.
[225] Jamriska M, Morawska L, Thomas S, He C. Diesel bus emissions measured in a
tunnel study. Environ Sci Technol 2004;38:6701–9. https://doi.org/10.1021/
es030662z.
[226] Gaga EO, Akif A, Akyol N, Üzmez ÖÖ, Kara M, Chow JC, et al. Determination of
real-world emission factors of trace metals, EC, OC, BTEX, and semivolatile
organic compounds (PAHs, PCBs and PCNs) in a rural tunnel in Bilecik, Turkey.
Sci Total Environ 2018;643:1285–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2018.06.227.
[227] Fang X, Wu L, Zhang Q, Zhang J, Wang A, Zhang Y, Mao H. Characteristics,
emissions and source identifications of particle polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
29
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
from traffic emissions using tunnel measurement. Transp Res D Transp Environ
2019;67:674–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.02.021.
[228] Hausberger S, Rodler J, Sturm P, Rexeis M. Emission factors for heavy-duty
vehicles and validation by tunnel measurements. Atmos Environ 2003;37:
5237–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2003.05.002.
[229] Singh RB, Sloan JJ. A high-resolution NOx emission factor model for North
American motor vehicles. Atmos Environ 2006;40(27):5214–23. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.04.012.
[230] Ban-Weiss G, McLaughlin J, Harley R, Lunden M, Kirchstetter T, Kean A, et al.
Long-term changes in emissions of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter from
on-road gasoline and diesel vehicles. Atmos Environ 2008;42:220–32. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.09.049.
[231] Kean A, Littlejohn D, Ban-Weiss G, Harley R, Kirchstetter T, Lunden M. Trends in
on-road vehicle emissions of ammonia. Atmos Environ 2009;43:1565–70. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.085.
[232] Tunnel studies offer new vision for real-world emissions from heavy-duty diesel
vehicles. Diesel Technology Forum 2019. https://www.dieselforum.org/policyi
nsider/tunnel-studies-offer-new-vision-for-real-world-emissions-from-heavy-dut
y-diesel-vehicles/. [Accessed 15 October 2019].
[233] Chang S, Lin T, Lee C. On-road emission factors from light-duty vehicles measured
in Hsuehshan Tunnel (12.9 km), the longest tunnel in Asia. Environ Monit Assess
2009;153:187–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0348-9.
[234] Grieshop A, Lipsky E, Pekney N, Takahama S, Robinson A. Fine particle emission
factors from vehicles in a highway tunnel: effects of fleet composition and season.
Atmos Environ 40:287-98, DOI:10.1016/j.atmosenv.2006.03.064.
[235] Nagendra SMS, Khare M. Review - line source emission modelling. Atmos Environ
2002;36:2083–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(02)00177-2.
[236] Owen B, Edmunds HA, Carruthers DJ, Singles RJ. Prediction of total oxides of
nitrogen and nitrogen dioxide concentrations in a large urban area using a new
generation urban scale dispersion model with integral chemistry model. Atmos
Environ 2000;34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(99)00332-5. 397-06.
[237] Esteves-Booth A, Muneer T, Kubie J, Kirby H. A review of vehicular emission
models and driving cycles. Proc Inst Mech Eng C J Mech Eng Sci 2002;216(8):
777–97. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544060260171429.
[238] Boulter PG, McCrae IS, Barlow TJ. A review of instantaneous emission models for
road vehicles. Transport Research Laboratory; 2007. Published Project Report
PPR 267, https://docs.niwa.co.nz/library/public/PPR267.pdf/. [Accessed 20
September 2019].
[239] Faris WF, Rakha HA, Kafafy RI, Idres M, Elmoselhy S. Vehicle fuel consumption
and emission modelling: an in-depth literature review. Int J Veh Syst Model Test
2011;6(3/4):318–95. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVSMT.2011.044232.
[240] Nejadkoorki F, Nicholsonb K, Lakea I, Daviesa T. An approach for modelling CO2
emissions from road traffic in urban areas. Sci Total Environ 2008;406:269–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.07.055.
[241] Smit R, Dia H, Morawska L. Road traffic emission and fuel consumption
modelling: trends, new developments and future challenges. In: Demidov S,
Bonnet J, editors. Traffic related air pollution. Nova Science Publishers, Inc.;
2009. p. 29–68.
[242] Jiang YQ, Ma PJ, Zhou SG. Macroscopic modeling approach to estimate traffic-
related emissions in urban areas. Transp Res D Transp Environ 2018;60:41–55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2015.10.022.
[243] EPA. Environmental protection agency (EPA), User’s guide to MOBILE6.1 and
MOBILE6.2: mobile Source Emission Factor Model MOBILE, Mobile source
emission factor model. EPA420-R-02-028. Ann Arbor, MI 48105, https://nepis.
epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P1001DSD.PDF?Dockey=P1001DSD.PDF/. [Accessed
16 November 2019].
[244] CARB. EMFAC2007/Version 2.30, User’s guide: calculating emission inventories
for vehicles in California. Sacramento, CA, USA: California Air Resources Board;
2007. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/msei/onroad/downloads/docs/user_guide_emfac
2007.pdf/. [Accessed 16 November 2019].
[245] Ntziachristos L, Samaras Z. Copert III: computer programme to calculate
emissions from road transport: methodology and emission factors. European
Environment Agency; 2016. Technical Report No. 49. Copenhagen, Version 2.1.
https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/Technical_report_No_49/. [Accessed 16
November 2019].
[246] Misra A, Roorda MJ, MacLean HL. An integrated modelling approach to estimate
urban traffic emissions. Atmos Environ 2013;73:81–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.atmosenv.2013.03.013.
[247] Scora G, Barth M. Comprehensive modal emissions model (CMEM), version 3.01.
User’s Guide University of California, Riverside Center for Environmental
Research and Technology; 2006. https://www.cert.ucr.edu/sites/g/files/rcwe
cm1251/files/2019-07/CMEM_User_Guide_v3.01d.pdf/. [Accessed 16 November
2019].
[248] Ahn K, Rakha H, Trani A, Aerde MV. Estimating vehicle fuel consumption and
emissions based on instantaneous speed and acceleration levels. J Transport Eng
2002;128(2):182–90. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X. 128, 182.
[249] Smit R, Smokers R, Rabe E. A new modelling approach for road traffic emissions:
versit+. Transp Res D Transp Environ 2007;12:414–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.trd.2007.05.001.
[250] Vallamsundar S, Lin J. MOVES versus MOBILE comparison of greenhouse gas and
criterion pollutant emissions. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2011;2233:
27–35. https://doi.org/10.3141/2233-04.
[251] Wang H, McGlinchy I. Review of vehicle emission modelling and the issues for
New Zealand. In: Paper presented at 32nd australasian transport research forum,
auckland, New Zealand; 2009. 2009, https://www.atrf.info/papers/2009/2009_
Wang_McGlinchy.pdf/. [Accessed 16 November 2019].
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
[252] Jiang YQ, Wong SC, Ho HW, Zhang P, Liu RX, Sumalee A. A dynamic traffic
assignment model for a continuum transportation system. Transp Res Part B
Methodol 2011;45:343–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2010.07.003.
[253] Szeto WY, Wong SC. Dynamic traffic assignment: model classifications and recent
advances in travel choice principles. Cent Eur J Eng 2012;2:1–18. https://doi.
org/10.2478/s13531-011-0057-y.
[254] Gopalakrishnan K, Mudgal A, Hallmark S. Neuro-fuzzy approach to predictive
modeling of emissions from biodiesel powered transit buses. Transport 2011;26:
344–52. https://doi.org/10.3846/16484142.2011.634080.
[255] Jaikumar R, Nagendra SMS, Sivanandan R. Modeling of real time exhaust
emissions of passenger cars under heterogeneous traffic conditions. Atmos Pollut
Res 2017;8:80–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2016.07.011.
[256] Enang W, Bannister C. Modelling and control of hybrid electric vehicles (A
comprehensive review). Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;74:1210–39. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.075.
[257] Yu Q, Li T, Li H. Improving urban bus emission and fuel consumption modeling by
incorporating passenger load factor for real world driving. Appl Energy 2016;161:
101–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.09.096.
[258] Kotusevski G, Hawick KA. A review of traffic simulation software. Technical
report CSTN-095. Auckland, New Zealand. 2009. . [Accessed 16 November 2019].
[259] Saidallah M, Fergougui AE, Elalaoui AE. A comparative study of urban road traffic
simulators. MATEC Web of Conferences 81:05002 ICTTE 2016. DOI:10.1051/
matecconf/20168105002.
[260] Pell A, Meingast A, Schauer O. Trends in real-time traffic simulation. World
conference on transport research - WCTR 2016, Shanghai, China. Transp Res Proc
2017;25C:1477–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.175.
[261] Westermann A, Azambre B. Impact of the zeolite structure and acidity on the
adsorption of unburnt hydrocarbons relevant to cold start conditions. J Phys
Chem C 2016;120(45):25903–14. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b08880.
[262] Zheng Y, Kovarik L, Engelhard MH, Wang Y, Wang Y, Gao F, et al. Low
temperature Pd/zeolite passive NOx adsorbers: structure, performance, and
adsorption Chemistry. J Phys Chem C 2017;121(29):15793–803. https://doi.org/
10.1021/acs.jpcc.7b04312.
[263] Theis J, Lambert C. The effects of CO, C2H4, and H2O on the NOx storage
performance of low temperature NOx adsorbers for diesel applications. SAE Int J
Engines 2017;10(4):1627–37. https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-01-0942.
[264] Jones S, Ji Y, Crocker M. Ceria-based catalysts for low temperature NOx storage
and release. Catal Lett 2016;146:909–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10562-016-
1704-y.
[265] Theis J, Lambert CK. An assessment of low temperature NOx adsorbers for cold
start NOx control on diesel engines. Catal Today 2015;258:367–77. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cattod.2015.01.031.
[266] Soleimani M, Campean F, Neagu D. Reliability challenges for automotive after-
treatment systems: a state-of-the-art perspective. Proc Manufacturing 2018;16:
75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.10.174.
[267] Fierz M, Burtscher H, Steigmeier P, Kasper M. Field measurement of particle size
and number concentration with the diffusion size classifier (Disc). SAE Technical
Paper 2008. https://doi.org/10.4271/2008-01-1179. Paper No.:2008-01-1179.
[268] Majewski WA, Jääskeläinen H. Engine emission control. www.dieselnet.
com/tech/engine_emission-control.php#ats./. [Accessed 15 November 2019].
[269] Saliba G, Saleh R, Zhao Y, Presto AA, Lambe AT, Frodin B, et al. Comparison of
gasoline direct-injection (GDI) and port fuel injection (PFI) vehicle emissions:
emission certification standards, cold-start, secondary organic aerosol formation
potential, and potential climate impacts. Environ Sci Technol 2017;51(11):
6542–52. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est6b06509.
[270] Kern B, Spiess S, Richter J. Comprehensive gasoline exhaust gas after-treatment,
an effective measure to minimize the contribution of modern direct injection
engines to fine dust and soot emissions? SAE Technical Paper 2014. https://doi.
org/10.4271/2014-01-1513. Paper No.:2014-01-1513.
[271] Bosteels D. Real-driving emissions of a GPF-equipped production car. IQPC 3rd
International Conference RDE Berlin; 2015. http://www.aecc.eu/wp-content/up
loads/2016/08/151027-IQPC-RDE-AECC-RDE-of-a-GPF-equipped-production-ca
r_final.pdf/. [Accessed 5 December 2019].
[272] Chan T, Meloche, Kubsh, Brezny R. Black carbon emissions in gasoline exhaust
and a reduction alternative with a gasoline particulate filter. Environ Sci Technol
2014;48(10):6027–34. https://doi.org/10.1021/es501791b.
[273] Hazlett MJ, Epling WS. Spatially resolving CO and C3H6 oxidation reactions in a
Pt/Al2O3 model oxidation catalyst. Catal Today 2016;267:157–66. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cattod.2015.11.033.
[274] Etheridge JE, Watling TC, Izzard AJ, Paterson MAJ. The effect of Pt:Pd ratio on
light-duty diesel oxidation catalyst performance: an experimental and modeling
study. SAE Int J Engines 2015;8(3):1283–99. https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-
1053.
[275] Kobatake Y, Momma K, Elangovan SP, Itabashi K, Okubo T, Ogura M. Super
hydrocarbon reformer trap for the complete oxidation of toluene using iron-
exchanged β-Zeolite with a low Silicon/Aluminum ratio. ChemCatChem 2016;8:
2516–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/cctc.201600550.
[276] Lee J, Theis JR, Kyriakidou EA. Vehicle emissions trapping materials: successes,
challenges, and the path forward. Appl Catal B Environ 2019;243:397–414.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2018.10.069.
[277] Worldwide emission standards and related regulations. Passenger cars/light and
medium duty vehicles. In: Continental - the future in motion; 2019. https://www.
continental-automotive.com/getattachment/8f2dedad-b510-4672-a005-315
6f77d1f85/EMISSIONBOOKLET_2019.pdf/. [Accessed 17 December 2019].
[278] Beusse R, Bishop J, Brown M, Cofer D, Howard D, Johnson-Davis T, et al. EPA’s
oversight of the vehicle inspection and maintenance program needs
30
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
improvement. Evaluation Report No. 2007-P-00001, https://www.epa.gov/sites/
production/files/2015-11/documents/20061005-2007-p-00001.pdf/. [Accessed
15 December 2019].
[279] New York state enhanced motor vehicle inspection/maintenance (I/M) program.
NYVIP2. 2018 Annual I/M report. Albany NY, USA: Division of Air Resources,
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; 2019. https://www.
dec.ny.gov/docs/air_pdf/eim2018report.pdf. [Accessed 15 December 2019].
[280] Organ B, Huang, Zhou JL, Surawski NC, Yam YS, Mok WC, Hong G. A remote
sensing emissions monitoring programme reduces emissions of gasoline and LPG
vehicles. Environ Res 2019;177:108614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envres.2019.108614.
[281] Kholod N, Evans M. Reducing black carbon emissions from diesel vehicles in
Russia: an assessment and policy recommendations. Environ Sci Pol 2016;56:1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.10.017.
[282] Eisinger DS, Wathern P. Policy evolution and clean air: the case of US motor
vehicle inspection and maintenance. Transp Res D Transp Environ 2008;13:
359–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2008.05.001.
[283] Vong CM, Wong PK, Wong KI, Ma Z. Inspection and control of vehicle emissions
through internet of things and traffic lights. International Conference on
Connected Vehicles and Expo (ICCVE) 2013:863–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/
ICCVE.2013.57.
[284] Wong PK, Vong CM, Wong KI, Ma ZQ. Development of a wireless inspection and
notification system with minimum monitoring hardware for real-time vehicle
engine health inspection. Transport Res C Emerg Technol 2015;58:29–45.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2015.07.001.
[285] Zannis TC, Hountalas DT, Papagiannakis RG, Levendis YA. Effect of fuel chemical
structure and properties on diesel engine performance and pollutant emissions:
review of the results of four European research programs. SAE Int J Fuels Lubr
2008;1(1):384–419. https://doi.org/10.4271/2008-01-0838.
[286] Johnson T. Vehicular emissions in review. SAE Int J Engines 2016;9(2):1258–75.
https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-0919.
[287] EU. Directive 2009/30/EC of the European parliament and of the council. Official
Journal of the European Union 2009:L140/88–140/113. 3000/17252555.L_
2009.140.eng.
[288] Lex access to European Union law. EUR, www.eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/
EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32009L0030. [accessed 15 December 2019].
[289] Walsh MP. The impact of fuel parameters on vehicle emissions. In: 5th China/asia
clean fuels international conference; 2004. Beijing, China, https://walshcarlines.
com/pdf/Sinopec%202004.pdf. [Accessed 20 December 2019].
[290] Hublin M, Gadd PG, Hall DE, Schindler KP. European programmes on emissions,
light-duty diesel study. SAE Technical Paper 1996. https://doi.org/10.4271/
961073. Paper No.:961073.
[291] Williams R, Hamje H, Zemroch PJ, Clark R, Samaras Z, Dimaratos A, et al. Effect
of fuel properties on emissions from Euro 4 and Euro 5 diesel passenger cars.
Transp Res Procedia 2016;14:3149–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trpro.2016.05.255.
[292] Kousoulidou M, Ntziachristos L, Fontaras G, Martini G, Dilara P, Samaras Z.
Impact of biodiesel application at various blending ratios on passenger cars of
different fueling technologies. Fuel 2012;98:88–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2012.03.038.
[293] Nakakita K, Ban H, Takasu S, Hotta Y, Inagaki K, Weissman W, et al. Effect of
hydrocarbon molecular structure in diesel fuel on in-cylinder soot formation and
exhaust emissions. SAE Technical Paper 2003. https://doi.org/10.4271/2003-01-
1914. Paper No.:2003-01-1914.
[294] Nishiumi R, Yasuda A, Tsukasaki Y, Tanaka T. Effects of cetane number and
distillation characteristics of paraffinic diesel fuels on PM emission from a DI
diesel engine. SAE Technical Paper 2004. 10.4271/2004-01-2960, 2004-01-2960.
[295] Zannis TC, Hountalas DT, Papagiannakis RG. Experimental study of diesel fuel
effects on direct injection (DI) diesel engine performance and pollutant emissions.
Energy Fuels 2007;21(5):2642–54. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef070149x.
[296] EPA. The effect of cetane number increase due to additives on NOx emissions
from heavy-duty highway engines. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/P1000
24I.PDF?Dockey=P100024I.PDF/. [Accessed 15 December 2019].
[297] Cataluna R, Da Silva R. Effect of cetane number on specific fuel consumption and
particulate matter and unburned hydrocarbon emissions from diesel engines.
J Combust 2012:6. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/738940.
[298] McCormick RL, Alvarez JR, Graboski MS, Tyson K, Vertin K. Fuel additive and
blending approaches to reducing NOx emissions from biodiesel. SAE Technical
Paper 2002. https://doi.org/10.4271/2002-01-1658. Paper No.:2002-01-1658.
[299] Schönborn A, Ladommatos N, Williams J, Allan R, Rogerson J. The influence of
molecular structure of fatty acid monoalkyl esters on diesel combustion. Combust
Flame 2009;156(7):1396–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
combustflame.2009.03.011.
[300] Agarwal AK, Gupta JG, Dhar A. Potential and challenges for large-scale
application of biodiesel in automotive sector. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2017;61:
113–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2017.03.002.
[301] Rajaeifar MA, Tabatabaei M, Abdi R, Latifi AM, Saberi F, Askari M, et al.
Attributional and consequential environmental assessment of using waste cooking
oil- and poultry fat-based biodiesel blends in urban buses: a real-world operation
condition study. Biofuel Res J 2017;4(3):638–53. https://doi.org/10.18331/
BRJ2017.4.3.3.
[302] Lilik GK, Boehman AL. Advanced diesel combustion of a high cetane number fuel
with low hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions. Energy Fuels 2011;25(4):
1444–56. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef101653h.
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
[303] Ladommatos N, Parsi M, Knowles A. The effect of fuel cetane improver on diesel
pollutant emissions. Fuel 1996;75(1):8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-2361
(94)00223-1.
[304] Clairotte M, Adam TW, Zardini AA, Manfredi U, Martini G, Krasenbrink A, et al.
Effects of low temperature on the cold start gaseous emissions from light-duty
vehicles fuelled by ethanol-blended gasoline. Appl Energy 2013;102:44–54.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.08.010.
[305] Rodriguez-Anton LM, Gutierrez-Martin F, Martinez-Arevalo C. Experimental
determination of some physical properties of gasoline, ethanol and ETBE ternary
blends. Fuel 2015;156:81–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.04.040.
[306] Najafi G, Ghobadian B, Tavakoli T, Buttsworth DR, Yusaf TF, Faizollahnejad M.
Performance and exhaust emissions of a gasoline engine with ethanol blended
gasoline fuels using artificial neural network. Appl Energy 2009;86:630–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.09.017.
[307] Park SH, Lee CS. Applicability of dimethyl ether (DME) in a compression ignition
engine as an alternative fuel. Energy Convers Manag 2017;86:848–63. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.06.051.
[308] Magnusson R, Nilsson C. The influence of oxygenated fuels on emissions of
aldehydes and ketones from a two-stroke spark ignition engine. Fuel 2011;90(3):
1145–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2010.10.026.
[309] Zhai H, Frey HC, Rouphail NM, Gonçalves GA, Farias TL. Comparison of flexible
fuel vehicle and life-cycle fuel consumption and emissions of selected pollutants
and greenhouse gases for ethanol 85 versus gasoline. J Air Waste Manag Assoc
2009;59:912–24. https://doi.org/10.3155/1047-3289.59.8.912.
[310] Jung HH, Shelby MH, Newman CE, Stein RA. Effect of ethanol on part load
thermal efficiency and CO2 emissions of SI engines. SAE Int J Engines 2013;6:
456–69. https://doi.org/10.4271/2013-01-1634.
[311] McDonald BC, Goldstein AH, Harley RA. Long-term trends in California mobile
source emissions and ambient concentrations of black carbon and organic aerosol.
Environ Sci Technol 2015;49:5178–88. https://doi.org/10.1021/es505912b.
[312] Wyman CE. Handbook on bioethanol: production and utilization. first ed.
Washington DC: Taylor & Francis; 1996.
[313] Yuan W, Frey HC, Wei T, Rastogi N, VanderGriend S, Miller D, Mattison L.
Comparison of real-world vehicle fuel use and tailpipe emissions for gasoline-
ethanol fuel blends. Fuel 2019;249:352–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2019.03.115.
[314] Poulopoulos S, Philippopoulos C. Influence of MTBE addition into gasoline on
automotive exhaust emissions. Atmos Environ 2000;34:4781–6. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S1352-2310(00)00257-0.
[315] Lyu M, Zhang C, Bao X, Song J, Liu Z. Effects of the substitution rate of natural gas
on the combustion and emission characteristics in a dual-fuel engine under full
load. Adv Mech Eng 2017;9(12). https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814017747158.
168781401774715.
[316] Nadaleti WC, Przybyla G, Vieira B, Leandro D, Gadotti G, Quadro M, et al.
Efficiency and pollutant emissions of an SI engine using biogas-hydrogen fuel
blends: BIO60, BIO95, H20BIO60 and H20BIO95. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2018;
43:7190–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.02.133.
[317] Moreno F, Munoz M, Arroyo J, Magen O, Monne C, Suelves I. Efficiency and
emissions in a vehicle spark ignition engine fueled with hydrogen and methane
blends. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2012;37(15):11495–503. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.04.012.
[318] Bielaczyc P, Woodburn J, Szczotka A. An assessment of regulated emissions and
CO2 emissions from a European light-duty CNG-fueled vehicle in the context of
Euro 6 emissions regulations. Appl Energy 2014;117:134–41. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.12.003.
[319] Bordelanne O, Montero M, Bravin F, Prieur-Vernat A, Oliveti-Selmi O, Pierre H,
et al. Biomethane CNG hybrid: a reduction by more than 80% of the greenhouse
gases emissions compared to gasoline. J Nat Gas Sci Tech 2011;3:617–24. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2011.07.007.
[320] Subramanian KA, Mathad VC, Vijay VK, Subbarao PMV. Comparative evaluation
of emission and fuel economy of an automotive spark ignition vehicle fuelled with
methane enriched biogas and CNG using chassis dynamometer. Appl Energy
2013;105:17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.12.011.
[321] Lim C, Kim D, Song C, Kim J, Han J, Cha JS. Performance and emission
characteristics of a vehicle fueled with enriched biogas and natural gases. Appl
Energy 2015;139:17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.10.084.
[322] Mustafi NN, Raine RR, Verhelst S. Combustion and emissions characteristics of a
dual fuel engine operated on alternative gaseous fuels. Fuel 2013;109:669–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.03.007.
[323] Yang J, Roth P, Zhu H, Durbin TD, Karavalakis G. Impacts of gasoline aromatic
and ethanol levels on the emissions from GDI vehicles: Part 1. Influence on
regulated and gaseous toxic pollutants. Fuel 2019;252:812–20. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.fuel.2019.04.143.
[324] Fatouraie M, Frommherz M, Mosburger M, Chapman E, Li S, McCormick R, et al.
Investigation of the impact of fuel properties on particulate number emission of a
modern gasoline direct injection engine. SAE Technical Paper 2018. https://doi.
org/10.4271/2018-01-0358. Paper No.:2018-01-0358.
[325] Myung CL, Choi K, Cho J, Kim K, Baek S, Lim Y, et al. Evaluation of regulated,
particulate, and BTEX emissions inventories from a gasoline direct injection
31
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
passenger car with various ethanol blended fuels under urban and rural driving
cycles in Korea. Fuel 2020;262:116406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2019.116406.
[326] Abrar I, Bhaskarwar AN. Microemulsion fuels for compression ignition engines: a
review on engine performance and emission characteristics. Fuel 2019;257:
115944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.115944.
[327] Shim E, Park H, Bae C. Comparisons of advanced combustion technologies (HCCI,
PCCI, and dual-fuel PCCI) on engine performance and emission characteristics in
a heavy-duty diesel engine. Fuel 2020;262:116436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fuel.2019.116436.
[328] Agarwal AK, Singh AP, Maurya RK. Evolution, challenges and path forward for
low temperature combustion engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2017;61:1–56.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2017.02.001.
[329] Ansari E, Shahbakhti M, Naber J. Optimization of performance and operational
cost for a dual mode diesel-natural gas RCCI and diesel combustion engine. Appl
Energy 2018;231:549–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.09.040.
[330] Rose K, Ariztegui J, Cracknell R, Dubois T. Exploring a gasoline compression
ignition (GCI) engine concept. SAE Technical Paper 2013. https://doi.org/
10.4271/2013-01-0911. Paper No.:2013-01-0911.
[331] Cracknell R, Ariztegui J, Dubois T, Hamje H. Modelling a gasoline compression
ignition (GCI) engine concept. SAE Technical Paper 2014. https://doi.org/
10.4271/2014-01-130. Paper No.:2014-01-1305.
[332] Kalghatgi G. Development of fuel/engine systems—the way forward to
sustainable transport. Engineering 2019;5:510–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
eng.2019.01.009.
[333] Johnson TV. Review of vehicular emissions trends. SAE Int J Engines 2015;8(3):
1152–67. https://doi.org/10.4271/2015-01-0993.
[334] Huo Y, Yan F, Feng D. A hybrid electric vehicle energy optimization strategy by
using fueling control in diesel engines. Proc Inst Mech Eng - Part D J Automob Eng
2019;233:517–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954407017747372.
[335] Yang Z, Ge Y, Thomas D, Wang X, He H. Real driving particle number (PN)
emissions from China-6 compliant PFI and GDI hybrid electrical vehicles. Atmos
Environ 2019;199:70–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.11.037.
[336] Graver BM, Frey HC, Choi HW. In-use measurement of activity, energy use, and
emissions of a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. Environ Sci Technol 2011;45(20):
9044–51. https://doi.org/10.1021/es201165d.
[337] Sioshansi R, Denholm P. Emissions impacts and benefits of plug-in hybrid electric
vehicles and vehicle-to-grid services. Environ Sci Technol 2009;43(4):1199–204.
https://doi.org/10.1021/es802324j.
[338] Benajes J, García A, Monsalve-Serrano J, Martínez-Boggio S. Emissions reduction
from passenger cars with RCCI plug-in hybrid electric vehicle technology. Appl
Therm Eng 2020;164:114430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
applthermaleng.2019.11443.
[339] Wu X, Zhang S, Wu Y, Li Z, Ke W, Fu L, et al. On–road measurement of gaseous
emissions and fuel consumption for two hybrid electric vehicles in Macao. Atmos
Pollut Res 2015;6(5):858–66. https://doi.org/10.5094/APR.2015.095.
[340] Huang Y, Surawski NC, Organ B, Zhou J, Chan EFC. Fuel consumption and
emissions performance under real driving: comparison between hybrid and
conventional vehicles. Sci Total Environ 2019;659:275–82. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.349.
[341] O’Driscoll R, Stettler MEJ, Molden N, Oxley T, ApSimon HM. Real-world CO2 and
NOx emissions from 149 Euro 5 and 6 diesel, gasoline and hybrid passenger cars.
Sci Total Environ 2018;621:282–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2017.11.271.
[342] Nocera S, Cavallaro F, Irranca Galati O. Options for reducing external costs from
freight transport along the Brenner corridor. Eur Transp Res Rev 2018;10:53.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-018-0323-7.
[343] Bigazzi AY, Rouleau M. Can traffic management strategies improve urban air
quality? A review of the evidence. J Transp Health 2017;7B:111–24. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jth.2017.08.001.
[344] Beevers SD, Carslaw DC, Dajnak D, Stewart GB, Williams ML, Fussell JC, et al.
Traffic management strategies for emissions reduction: recent experience in
London. Energy Emiss Control Technol 2016;4:27–39. https://doi.org/10.2147/
EECT.S69858.
[345] Bigazzi AY, Mohamed A. Motivation and implementation of traffic management
strategies to reduce motor vehicle emissions in Canadian cities. Can J Civ Eng
2018;45(4):241–7. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2017-0451.
[346] Chen X, Yuan Z. Environmentally friendly traffic control strategy - a case study in
Xi’an city. J Clean Prod 2019;249:119397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2019.119397.
[347] Policy guidelines for reducing vehicle emissions in Asia. In: Transport planning
and traffic management for better air quality. Manila, Philippines: Asian
Development Bank; 2003. https://www.adb.org/publications/policy-guidelines
-reducing-vehicle-emissions-asia-transport-planning-and-traffic-management.
[Accessed 5 January 2019].
[348] Pourhoseingholi MA, Baghestani AR, Vahedi M. How to control confounding
effects by statistical analysis. Spring Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench 2012;5(2):
79–83. PMID: 24834204, PMCID: PMC4017459.
A.K. Agarwal and N.N. Mustafi
[349] Duarte GO, Gonçalves GA, Farias TL. Analysis of fuel consumption and pollutant
emissions of regulated and alternative driving cycles based on real-world
measurements. Transp Res D Transp Environ 2016;44:43–54. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.trd.2016.02.009.
[350] Zhang S, Wu Y, Liu H, Huang R, Un P, Zhou Y, et al. Real-world fuel consumption
and CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions by driving conditions for light-duty
passenger vehicles in China. Energy 2014;69:247–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2014.02.103.
[351] Rajaeifar MA, Tabatabaei M, Aghbashlo M, Nizami AS, Heidrich O. Emissions
from urban bus fleets running on biodiesel blends under realworld operating
32
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 137 (2021) 110624
conditions: implications for designing future case studies. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev 2019;111:276–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.004.
[352] Zhang B, E J, Gong J, Yuan W, Zuo W, Li Y, et al. Multidisciplinary design
optimization of the diesel particulate filter in the composite regeneration process.
Appl Energy 2016;181:14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.08.051.
[353] Reitz RD, Duraisamy G. Review of high efficiency and clean reactivity controlled
compression ignition (RCCI) combustion in internal combustion engines. Prog
Energy Combust Sci 2015;46:12–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pecs.2014.05.003.