Overseas Freight Adopts Clean Energy’s RNG for $1/Gallon

1

Clean Energy Fuels Corp. has announced it will supply Redeem renewable natural gas (RNG) to intermodal trucking company Overseas Freight as part of an emissions-reduction initiative in the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles.

In preparation for upcoming regulations outlined in the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP), Overseas Freight obtained Prop 1B funding for five Kenworth T-680 trucks outfitted with the new Cummins-Westport near-zero ISX12N natural gas engine. The ISX12N is certified by California Air Resources Board to reduce smog-forming NOx emissions by 90% compared to the current engine standard, according to Clean Energy.

Overseas Freight has contracted for RNG fuel through the Clean Energy Redeem $1 Deal, which guarantees a fixed fuel price of $1/gallon for one year. Further, says Clean Energy, Redeem – organically sourced from dairy and landfill waste – allows customers to achieve a reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions by at least 70% versus diesel.

“We’re pleased to be part of an effort to help improve air quality in the L.A. and Long Beach ports and support CAAP in fostering more sustainable freight movement,” comments Joseph Wang, president and CEO of Overseas Freight. “Clean Energy has been a good partner for years, and we are excited to use Redeem at a price far below diesel.”

1
Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

avatar
1 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
1 Comment authors
Prof Robert Antonucci, physics dept Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Prof Robert Antonucci, physics dept
Guest
Prof Robert Antonucci, physics dept

I thought that Redeem was a net BENEFIT for climate because it produces CO2, but prevents the greater effects of the methane it saves from going into the atmosphere. So why do they say they only save 70% of the CO2 over diesel?

It can’t be because they’re neglecting the benefits of preventing the methane release because in that case the savings would be much less than 70%.

Maybe I’m being too literal-minded and not considering that harvesting the CH4 produces GHGs.