<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=PHNlYXJjaD48cGFyYW1zPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJkYXRlaW4iIHZhbHVlPSJhbGwiIC8+PHBhcmFtIG5hbWU9InN1YmplY3Rsb2dpYyIgdmFsdWU9Im9yIiAvPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJ0ZXJtc2xvZ2ljIiB2YWx1ZT0ib3IiIC8+PHBhcmFtIG5hbWU9ImxvY2F0aW9uIiB2YWx1ZT0iMCIgLz48L3BhcmFtcz48ZmlsdGVycz48ZmlsdGVyIGZpZWxkPSJpbmRleHRlcm1zIiB2YWx1ZT0iJnF1b3Q7T3h5Z2VuYXRlZCBmdWVscyZxdW90OyIgb3JpZ2luYWxfdmFsdWU9IiZxdW90O094eWdlbmF0ZWQgZnVlbHMmcXVvdDsiIC8+PC9maWx0ZXJzPjxyYW5nZXMgLz48c29ydHM+PHNvcnQgZmllbGQ9InB1Ymxpc2hlZCIgb3JkZXI9ImRlc2MiIC8+PC9zb3J0cz48cGVyc2lzdHM+PHBlcnNpc3QgbmFtZT0icmFuZ2V0eXBlIiB2YWx1ZT0icHVibGlzaGVkZGF0ZSIgLz48L3BlcnNpc3RzPjwvc2VhcmNoPg==" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN IMPLEMENTED TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES AND MEASURED POLLUTANT LEVELS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/576090</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This digest summarizes partial findings from Phase I of NCHRP Project 8-33, "Quantifying Air Quality and Other Benefits and Costs of Transportation Control Measures".  The objective of the project is to develop an improved analytical framework for evaluating transportation control measures (TCMs).  The objective of the task summarized in this digest was to examine the relationships between implemented TCMs and measured air pollutant concentrations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/576090</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MOTOR FUELS: ISSUES RELATED TO REFORMULATED GASOLINE, OXYGENATED FUELS, AND BIOFUELS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/477987</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The General Accounting Office (GAO) was requested to summarize (1) the results of federal and other studies on the cost effectiveness of using reformulated gasoline (RFG) compared to other measures to control automotive emissions and compare the price estimates used in the studies for RFG with more recent actual prices; (2) the results of studies estimating the potential for oxygenates to reduce the use of petroleum; and (3) the ongoing federal research into biofuels, including any related past or projected cost-reduction goals, and any increased demand estimates based on such research goals.  GAO was also requested to summarize the results of studies that estimate the potential for RFG to reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional gasoline.  Briefly, GAO found the following: Studies by others suggest that RFG may be cost effective compared to some automotive emission control measures but less cost effective than other measures.  The price estimates for RFG used in the studies varied but were generally consistent with the prices actually experienced to date.  About 305,000 barrels per day of the petroleum used to produce gasoline will be potentially displaced by oxygenates in the year 2000 and about 311,000 barrels per day in 2010, according to the Department of Energy (DOE), which amounts to about 3.7% of the estimated gasoline consumption in 2000 and 3.6% in 2010.  DOE and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are the primary federal agencies with ongoing research into biofuels.  Their data indicate that research has reduced the cost of producing ethanol from both cellulosic biomass and from corn.  DOE believes that the demand for ethanol made from cellulosic biomass for use as an oxygenate and as an alternative fuel could increase significantly.  A 1995 study by DOE's Argonne National Laboratory indicates that RFG's potential to reduce greenhouse gases is small.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/477987</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ALTERNATIVE MOTOR FUELS: A NONTECHNICAL GUIDE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/465361</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Growing concerns by regulators and the public over our nation's air quality and the availability of traditional energy supplies has led to a series of alternative motor fuel laws.  This has resulted in staggering growth of non-petroleum fuel sources and despite recent government efforts to trim back environmental laws, alternative fuels are not a passing fancy of environmentalists or regulators.  They are required by law and will be phased in to replace a small but significant percentage of petroleum motor fuels this century.  This nontechnical text serves as a reference guide on alternative motor fuels for industry veterans and teaching tool for newcomers to the industry.  It provides:  accurate and descriptive information on basic fuel characteristics; information about economic issues such as availability and pricing strategies; practical details on storage and distribution concerns and safety considerations; a review of the recent history of alternative fuels development; and appendices providing details on various laws impacting the alternative fuel vehicles market and other clean fuel compliance issues.  Chapter titles are as follows:  (1) Introduction; (2) History of Alternative Fuels and Oxygenates; (3) Clean Gasolines:  Reformulated and Oxygenated Fuels; (4) Clean Diesels:  Low Sulfur and Soydiesel; (5) Fuel Methanol; (6) Ethanol; (7) Compressed and Liquefied Natural Gas; (8) Liquefied Petroleum Gas; (9) Electricity; (10) Hydrogen; and (11) Fleet Considerations.  Appendices are (I) Legislation Impacting Alternative Fuels; (II) Comparison of EPACT and CAA; (III) Alternative Fuel/Vehicle Contacts; (IV) Properties of Fuels; and (V) State Legislative Efforts.  A Glossary and an Index are provided.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/465361</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TOWARDS A COMMERCIAL FUTURE: ETHANOL &amp; METHANOL AS ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION FUELS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/448239</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study, initiated in February 1988 and completed in November of the same year, arose from a decision by the Canadian Energy Research Institute Board of Directors to assess the potential of ethanol and methanol as alternative fuel sources in Canada.  The study objective was to review, on the basis of available information, recent developments in the Canadian gasoline markets and to examine the likely developments in sourcing, pricing and competition for these alcohol fuels, in relation to each other and to gasoline in the regional markets.  The study is organized as follows.  Chapter 1 provides an introduction. Chapter 2 discusses the advantages and disadvantages of six oxygenates which have been considered as fuel additives for octane enhancement in Canada as well as their use to date. Following this is a discussion regarding the oxygenates of choice for this study and the standards they may have to abide by in order to be competitive alternative fuels for Canada.  In Chapter 3, the value of ethanol to the Canadian transportation system as an octane enhancer is developed.  The chapter concludes with a suggestion as to how the long-run prospects for ethanol use in Canada may ultimately be determined.  Chapter 4 discusses the dilemma facing Canada's methanol producers and considers the benefits of substituting methanol for diesel fuels with the aim of providing both an alternative fuel source as well as a cleaner environment.  Chapter 5 discusses the implications of using ethanol and methanol as alternative fuel sources for the stakeholders involved and suggests the necessary pre-steps which will be required in order to maintain harmony between all the players affected by this industry.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/448239</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MTBE MOVEMENTS BETWEEN TEXAS GULF COAST PLANTS TO BE ENHANCED</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/370609</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company (Teppco), Houston, has begun construction of its "shuttle" pipeline, a 10-mile, 6 and 8-in. line to move methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) between producers and refiners along the Houston Ship Channel.  The line will flow from the western edge of Shell's refinery eastward to storage facilities at Teppco's Baytown terminal.  The shuttle pipeline anticipates the U.S. requirement for oxygenated gasolines that takes effect Nov. 1, 1992.  Approximately 70% of the available U.S. merchant capacity for MTBE is located along the shuttle's path.  The system offers improved logistics for Houston-area refiners because more than 40% of the Gulf Coast MTBE capacity will be linked into the shuttle system.  Further details concerning the shuttle pipeline are provided in this article.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 07 Aug 1993 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/370609</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TESTS SHOW LIMITS ON OXYGEN CONTENT TO BE UNWARRANTED</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/371519</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Results from recent testing by the Oxygenated Fuels Association (OFA) indicate that oxygen content ceilings on gasoline for the purpose of controlling NOx emissions appear to be unwarranted. OFA's test results on high-oxygen fuel showed decreased emissions of hydrocarbons, CO, and NOx, when compared to both industry average gasoline and the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) MTBE-blended reformulated gasoline.  OFA concludes that these data support the EPA's findings that no state-level oxygen controls are necessary for an oxygenated gasoline program.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 1993 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/371519</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AIR POLLUTION: OXYGENATED FUELS HELP REDUCE CARBON MONOXIDE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/357051</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report discusses the extent to which oxygenated fuels have reduced carbon monoxide (CO) levels in six cities -- Albuquerque, New Mexico; Denver, Colorado; Las Vegas, Nevada; Phoenix, Arizona; Reno, Nevada; and Tucson, Arizona. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 require the sale of oxygenated fuels, starting in 1992, in the 41 cities identified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as exceeding national air quality standards.  These six cities already require all gasoline-powered vehicles to use oxygenated fuels during the winter months, when CO levels are the highest and pose the greatest health threat.  The report also discusses other measures the cities have taken to meet national CO standards.  Officials in the six cities reported that the use of oxygenated fuels has reduced CO emissions.  Estimated reductions range from 10% in Tucson to 20% in Albuquerque.  Also, some officials credit the use of oxygenated fuels with helping reduce the number of days in which their cities exceeded national CO standards.  However, officials in all six cities believe that, by itself, the use of oxygenated fuels will not ensure compliance with national CO standards.  Other methods are being used, such as the mandatory testing of vehicle emissions and trip-reduction programs.  According to the officials, because each year more vehicles are being driven more miles, it is important that the cities implement strategies specifically designed to prevent future air pollution problems.  The EPA should be able to use information on the estimated reductions achieved by these six cities to evaluate the reasonableness of estimated improvements in air quality from attainment measures planned by other cities that have not met national CO standards.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 1991 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/357051</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AUTOMOBILE CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/300193</link>
      <description><![CDATA[An examination was made of all the programs currently in place in the state of Colorado that purport to control mobile source carbon monoxide (CO) emissions.  These include Inspection and Maintenance, Oxygenated Fuels, and a Better Air Campaign featuring voluntary no-drive days.  This article discusses why these programs don't work as well as was hoped, or as well as their proponents claim.  Although several of the currently proposed Clean Air Act amendments fulfill the need to "do something" politically, they may not achieve the desired CO reduction goals either.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 1989 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/300193</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FUNDAMENTAL VOLATILITY/DRIVEABILITY CHARACTERISTICS OF OXYGENATED GASOLINES AT HIGH UNDERBONNET TEMPERATURES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/209324</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Much interest is currently being shown in the use of high octane organic oxygenated compounds as gasoline components, particularly with increasing pressure to lower lead levels. Such usage focuses attention on sensitive areas of vehicle performance like for example, hot weather vehicle driveability/fuel volatility.  To compare the hot fuel handling characteristics of oxygenated fuels with motor gasoline, a series of tests has been carried out on a chassis dynamometer using a variety of European cars and more than 70 different fuels.  The fuel compounds assessed included Methanol, Ethanol, Tertiary Butyl Alcohol (TBA) and Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) blended individually and in combination at up to 25 percent volume concentration with motor gasoline.  Initial analyses of the dynamometer data showed, under severe operating conditions (eg at and above 35 deg C ambient air temperature), certain oxygenate types to disadvantage and indicated that existing gasoline volatility criteria were inadequate to predict the driveability performance of oxygenated fuels.  However, further laboratory tests to study the fundamental relationship between temperature and fuel vapour pressure characteristics, together with supplementary road driveability trials, have led to the belief that excessive vehicle fuel system temperatures are largely responsible for the unexpected/undesirable behaviour of some oxygenate supplements.  The authors conclude that vehicle fuel system temperatures must not be allowed to rise excessively otherwise there will be a deterioration in the driveability performance of oxygenated fuels and new volatility specification criteria will be required. These could include a determined vapour/liquid ratio measurement or a vapour pressure control at much higher temperature levels than is currently specified for Reid vapour pressure.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 1984 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/209324</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ROAD TRIALS TO ASSESS THE HOT WEATHER DRIVEABILITY CHARACTERISTICS OF GASOLINES CONTAINING OXYGENATES IN EUROPEAN CARS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/209325</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Road trials have recently been carried out in Italy with the aim of identifying the hot weather driveability characteristics of a wide range of fuels and cars.  The oxygenate types assessed included methanol and 50/50 blends of methanol and tertiary butyl alcohol (TBA) in blend with gasoline at concentration levels of up to 15 percent volume and methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) at concentrations of up to 20 percent volume, at different levels of volatility.  Whilst oxygenate concentrations had little effect on driveability performance, there were differences in performance between oxygenate types.  For example, in some cars gasolines containing methanol/TBA were shown to advantage over all other fuels tested, even gasoline.  On the other hand, fuels with methanol gave inferior performance in some cars.  On an overall basis, however, fuels containing methanol, methanol/TBA or MTBE were considered to perform equally as well as gasoline although the rating characteristics displayed by the methanol blends in some cars could, if widespread, impose difficulties in setting volatility specifications.  The authors conclude that methanol alone or methanol/TBA in blend with gasoline at concentration levels of up to 15 percent volume, or MTBE up to 20 percent volume concentration should give acceptable hot weather driveability performance if fuels are manufactured to existing gasoline specifications.  Of perhaps greater interest is that use of methanol/TBA may even offer benefits over non oxygenated gasoline in some cars in the form of improved performance.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 1984 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/209325</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>