Leapfrogging Opportunities for Vehicles and Fuels

Alan C. Lloyd, Ph.D. President, The ICCT A&WMA International Conference: Leapfrogging Opportunities for Air Quality Improvement Xi’an, Shaanxi Province, China May 12, 2010

Topics To Be Covered Background on ICCT

Air pollution challenges – past and future

Climate change

Need for advanced technologies

Role of transportation

Passenger vehicles

Fuels of the future

Co-benefits of controlling conventional pollutants and greenhouse gas

Concluding remarks

Slide 2

Slide 3

International Council on Clean Transportation Goal of the ICCT is to dramatically reduce

conventional pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions from all transportation sources in order to improve air quality and human health, and mitigate climate change.

Promotes best practices and comprehensive solutions to:

– Improve vehicle emissions and efficiency

– Increase fuel quality and sustainability of alternative fuels

– Reduce pollution from the in-use fleet, and

– Curtail emissions from international goods movement.

The Council is made up of leading regulators and experts from around the world.

www.theicct.org

Air Pollution: Past, Present and Future

Major success in reducing air pollution in developed world

Continued challenges – To attain health based ambient air quality standards

(AAQS) Rapid growth in developing world pose substantial

air quality challenges in mega-cities Additional issues associated with long range

transport and rising background levels of pollutants, e.g., ozone

Slide 4

Climate Change Poses Additional Challenges and Need for New Approaches

Recognition that we have one atmosphere

Emissions greenhouse gases and different chemical species have global implications

Critical to have international cooperation and multi-pollutant strategies

This will entail sharing best practices internationally and to use lessons learned as we develop global strategies

Slide 5

Global Risk, Global Action

“When I began looking at the subject of climate change, what I find first thing to hit me was the magnitude of the risks and the potentially devastating effects on the lives of people across the world. We were gambling the planet.”

-Sir Nicholas Stern Blueprint for a Safer Planet, 2009

Slide 6

Why Advanced Technology Development? Conventional air and

other pollution

Potential for needed dramatic GHG reductions

Economic development

Energy security/independence issues

Slide 7

Global ExposureWHO GMAPS

Slide 8

Health Impacts of Climate Change 140,000 excess deaths due to global warming in 2004

70,000 excess deaths recorded in Europe in the heat wave of summer 2003

1.2 million deaths every year is caused by urban air pollution – High temperatures also raise levels of ozone and other pollutants

50 percent likely decrease in production of staple foods due to rising temperatures and changing rainfall pattern in some African countries

2.2 million people die of communicable diseases like diarrhea annually – This number will increase with increase in migration caused by climate

change

– More than half the world’s population live within 60km of the sea and may have to migrate

Slide 9Source: World Health Organization

Passenger Vehicles Trend towards major hybridization

ICCT, US EPA, CARB cooperating on additional technical studies for future standards (Post 2016)

— Lightweighting

— Simulation modeling of advanced engines and hybrids

— Costs

ICCT studying policies to accelerate electrification of vehicles

Also need lower carbon fuels, reduced driving

GM’s HCCI

Slide 10

Automobiles in the U.S. Transportation in the U.S.

– About 68% of U.S. petroleum use– About 30-80% of urban air pollution (CO, NOx, HC, PM)– About 25% of energy use– About 25% and greenhouse gas emissions (e.g., CO2)– Greater growth than other major economic sectors

Light duty vehicle use in the U.S.– About 85% of passenger vehicle miles traveled– About 75% of road transport energy and GHG– About 60% of all transport energy and GHG

Increasing vehicle efficiency and CO2 emissions are paramount to climate change mitigation (and air quality and energy) goals.

Ethanol2% Other

0%

96%

Natural gas2%

Petroleum

Slide 11Source: CARB 2010

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation

– World: ~20% GHGs– U.S.: ~26-33% GHGs– CA: ~35-40% GHGs

– GHG Emissions: • Carbon dioxide (CO2)• Nitrous oxide (N2O)• Methane (CH4)• Hydrofluorcarbons (HFC)• Black carbon (BC)

In California, transportation is a particularly large GHG contributor

Source: California Air Resources Board

Recycling/Waste, 1%Res & Com, 9%

High GWP, 3%

Agriculture, 6%

Industrial, 19%

Electricity (Imports), 12%

Electricity (In State), 11%

Transportation, 38%

California greenhouse gas emissions

Climate Change and Transportation

Slide 12Source: CARB 2010

Vehicle GHG emissions

Carbon dioxide (CO2)

CO2

HFC

A/C compressorEngine Transmission

Nitrous Oxide

Black carbon

Methane

Slide 13Source: CARB 2010

Global Demand for CarsCOUNTRY POPULATION (Millions) CARS per 1000 people

Italy 58.2 595

Germany 82.7 565

Canada 32.9 561

Australia 20.6 507

France 60.9 496

Sweden 9.1 462

USA 303.9 461

UK 60.0 457

Japan 128.3 441

Norway 4.7 439

S. Korea 48.1 240

China 1,331.4 18

Kenya / Philippines 36.0 / 85.9 9

India 1,335.6 8

Slide 14

Source: The Economist 2009

Hybrid Technology: Sales Trend Hybrid electric-gasoline vehicles (HEV) sales

in the U.S.:– Honda Insight launched in 1999– Toyota Prius is highest seller– U.S. is half of current world hybrid sales– 1.6 million total US sales through 2009

o 2.8% of 2009 U.S. saleso 5.3% of 2009 California sales

Toyota PriusHonda Civic

Saturn Vue

Ford Escape

Chevrolet Tahoe

Lexus 400hSources: hybridcars.com, greencarcongress.com

Ford Fusion

Toyota CamryHonda Insight Nissan Altima

Slide 15Source: CARB 2010

Hybrid Technology: GHG Reduction

Hybrid vehicle models commercialized in U.S.– Span vehicles: compacts, sedans, crossovers, large SUVs, pickups– Average 33% CO2/mi reduction, 50% mpg increase vs. similar non-hybrids– Hybrids also put an upward pressures on vehicle mass (~9%)

Slide 16

Source: CARB 2010

Hybrid Technology: Forecasts Hybrids sales today and in the future

– Early in technology growth period: ~3% of U.S., ~5% Calif. sales– However, the technology leader (Toyota) sells 11% hybrids– Sales share over the next decade is unknown

Forecasts from JD Power, Booz Allen, JP Morgan, US EIA, National Research Council, Morgan Stanley, Kiplinger

Slide 17Source: CARB 2010

*Many technologies can be combined, but percents are not strictly additive; Estimations are based on NAS 2002 CAFE; US EPA/NHTSA, 2009; NESCCAF, 2004. # From US EPA, 2009

Emerging GHG-Reduction Technologies

Vehicle system

TechnologyApproximate GHG-per-mile

reduction *

Percent U.S. adoption

(MY2008)#

Variable valve timing 2-8% 53%Cylinder deactivation 3-6% 6%

Engine Turbocharging 2-5% 2%Gasoline direct injection (stoich. and lean) 10-15% 4%Compression ignition diesel 15-40% 0.1%Digital valve actuation 5-10% 0%Homogeneous charge compression ignition 15-20% 0%5 speed 2-4% 32%

Transmission 6+ speed 3-5% 21%

Continuously variable 4-6% 8%

Automated manual, dual clutch 4-8% 1%Lightweighting 10-20% –Aerodynamics 5-8% –

Overall Tire rolling resistance 2-8% –vehicle Efficiency auxiliaries (steering, alternator, A/C) 2-10% –

Stop-start mild hybrid 5-7% 0.2%Hybrid electric system 20-50% 2.2%

Slide 18Source: CARB 2010

Mid-term engine concepts– Digital/camless valve actuation– Homogenous charge compression ignition (HCCI)– Boosted EGR (e.g., HEDGE)– Cam-switching– 2/4-stroke switching– Atkinson

Efficiency Technology

SturmandVA

GM’s HCCI

SwRI’s HEDGE Lotus OMNIVORERicardo 2/4SIGHT

Slide 19Source: CARB 2010

Mass-Reduction: GHG Potential

Vehicle mass-reduction or “lightweighting” – Mass reduces the overall load of the vehicle that must be powered and

accelerated during driving– If mass of vehicle is reduced, vehicle engine size and power can be reduced

while maintaining the same performance

o “Performance” ≅ [0-10 mph, 0-60 mph, 30-50 mph, hp/wt]– For constant performance vehicle

o 10% mass reduction ~6% CO2/midecreaseo 20% mass-reduction ~12% CO2/midecrease

– The effect differs: o Greater emission reduction effect in city/stop-and-go drivingo Less emission reduction effect in highway/high-speed driving

Reference: Ricardo, 2008. “Impact of Vehicle Weight Reduction on Fuel Economy for Various Architectures.” Prepared for Aluminum Association. Project FB769. Slide 20

Mass-Reduction: Automaker Plans

Company and fleetwide light-duty vehicle mass reductions are expected in 2015-2020 timeframe

Major reductions are planned over the next decade

Announcement or Assessment

Mass reductionper-vehicle

(lb)

Mass reductionper-vehicle

(%)

EPA estimatesfor U.S. fleet

Small cars – average 2016 62 2.3%

Large cars – average 2016 154 4.4%

Small trucks – average 2016 119 3.5%

Large trucks – average 2016 215 4.5%

Companyplans

Mazda – average by 2016 ~440 13%

Ford – across vehicle platforms by 2020 250 - 750 ~14%

Nissan – average by 2015 ~550 15%

Toyota – small to mid-size vehicles, 2015 ~700 10-30%

Reference: US EPA/NHTSA, 2008. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for MY2012-2016 GHG and Fuel economy standards. September

Slide 21Source: CARB 2010

Mass-Reduction: Europe “Super Light Car”

Major €20M study by auto industry (2005-2009) – Consortium of automobile manufacturing companies – With European Commission (€10.5M) funding

Objectives– Affordable mass-reduced vehicle of the future; improved production/assembly;

improved design modeling reliability

Results: developed mass-reduced vehicle– 180 kg (350 lb) reduction from the vehicle body– ~30-35% body-in-white, vehicle mass reduction

Conclusions: – “Automotive light weight solutions are necessary more than ever to reduce CO2 emissions”

– “All the car manufacturers are working on advanced multi-material concepts that better exploit materials lightening potential combining steel, aluminum, magnesium, plastics and composites”

Reference: Volkswagen Group, 2008. “Super Light Car: Sustainable Production Technologies for CO2 Emission Reduced Lightweight Car Concepts.” Transport Research Arena Europe. April. Slide 22

Mass-Reduction Research: Lotus Study Major draft findings: Developed concepts for two mass-reduced

vehicles and assessed the bill-of-materials and direct costs— Low development:

o ~ 20% vehicle mass reduction o At near-zero net vehicle costo Using conventional manufacturing techniques

— High development:o ~ 33% vehicle mass reduction o At modestly increased net vehicle costo Modifications in manufacturing techniques

— Increased use of high-strength steel, aluminum, magnesium, plastics/composites

— Suggests continuation of historical material trendso Plus greater system optimization

Reference: Lotus Engineering, 2010. An Assessment of Mass Reduction Opportunities for a 2017-2020 Model Year Vehicle Program. April.

Slide 23

Passenger Vehicles

Slide 24

Longer-Term: Further Electrification

Going from left to right, generally we see…. Increased electrical complexity: battery size, motor size, controls More frequent electric motor assist and electric-only propulsion Increased capacity for regenerative power during breaking Increased accessory electrification (air condit., power steering,…) Increasing use of grid electricity (or H2), low life-cycle emissions

Gasoline combustion engine Hybrid electric-gasoline vehicle (HEV)

Mild Moderate Full Plug-in (PHEV) Battery Electric Vehicle

Tesla

Toyota Prius GM Volt

Honda Civic

Saturn Vue

Ford EscapePrius PHEV

Chevrolet Silverado

Chevrolet Malibu

Greater drivetrain electrification

Nissan Leaf

Slide 25Source: CARB 2010

Longer-Term: Advanced Electric Drivetrains• Two major competing technologies

– Battery electric vehicle (BEVs)• Grid electricity offers GHG benefits

– 0 - 25% with U.S. electricity mix or ~50% coal– 50 - 60% with California grid mix of ~10-15% coal

• Challenges: cost, range, mass• Plug-in hybrids offer a bridge

– Lower cost, no range concerns– A plug-in hybrid with a 40-mile range could offer 20-60% of

“all-electric” range

– Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (HFCVs)

• Fuel cells are 2-3 times more efficient than conventional gasoline vehicles

• Hydrogen benefits depend on primary energy sources:– 20 - 50% derived from natural gas – 50%+ derived from renewable sources

• Challenges: cost, mass, infrastructure

Tesla (2009)

Smart EVGM Volt EREV

Saturn Vue PHEV

Nissan Leaf EV

Prius PHEV

Honda FCX Clarity

Compressed hydrogen storage

Hyundai FCEV

Toyota FCV

Fuel cell stack

GM: test FCVs

Mercedes F-Cell

Slide 26Source: CARB 2010

Fuels of the Future While fossil fuels will be around for some time, we

need to develop alternatives for many reasons: o Environmental impacts of exploration, transport and use of oil

o Increasingly expensive to retrieve

o Global competition for supplies will eventually drive up costs

o Will need major investments to eliminate or sequester carbon to reduce impact on climate

o Need diversity in fuel sources

Slide 27

Giant Oil Spill Threatens Gulf Coast

Slide 28Used with permission from the TPM websites, a service of TPM Media LLC.

April 22, 2010: The Deepwater Horizon oil rig stationed in the Gulf of Mexico, 40 miles southeast of the mouth of the Mississippi River, sinks after exploding and catching fire two days earlier. London-based BP PLC owns the rig, which is now leaking an estimated 5,000 barrels of oil per day. The resulting oil slick threatens to upset habitats in a number of states on the U.S. Gulf Coast, including Lousiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. Here, rescue ships attempt to put out the fire that resulted from the explosion. Newscom/Zuma

Cleaner Options for Future Fuels Increased use of natural gas

Second and third generation biofuels (without impact on food supplies and adverse indirect land use)– Examples – cellulosic material to ethanol, algae to

biogasoline

Electricity & hydrogen from renewable and a variety of sources

Nuclear energy (?)

Slide 30

Source: Honda Fuel Cell Vehicle Activities presentation by Stephen Ellis, Manager FCV Marketing

Slide 31

SHS ConceptOriginal H2

StationNext Generation

H2 StationElectrolyzer

ElectrolyzerCompressor

StorageCoiled Hose

Fast Fill Slow Fill

Specifications• 0.5 kg per 8 hours• Overnight fill• Replaces average daily commute• Annual H2 production equivalent to

~10,000 miles/year• 25% improvement in efficiency• Fuel meets SAE (J2719) and ISO

(14687) specs

Sharing Knowledge and Experience in Emissions Controls – A Chance to Leapfrog

As vehicles last longer, their on road emissions beyond the initial warranty period, need to be addressed

No point in pushing for new fleet leapfrogging if older vehicle pollute more than offset gains

The more sophisticated and complex the aftertreatment, the more the concern for older vehicles being gross emitters

Not only LDV but also HDV equipped with SCR and filters, more emphasis on retrofits

Slide 33

Slide 34

Challenges: Development Potential barriers to new propulsion systems

– Higher vehicle first cost • Learning & economies of scale not realized

– Fueling• Storage, infrastructure, range issues• May be higher or lower (electricity) cost

– Safety, reliability, durability concerns– Customer lack of awareness & risk aversion – Manufacturers risk aversion– Sunk capital costs in current technology

Courtesy AC Transit

Daimler Fuel Cell Vehicle

Challenges: Commercialization Production build-up issues in addition to potential

development barriers:– Development lead times and availability across

product platforms– Capital investment required– Supply of critical systems/components– Capacity utilization

Competition from continuing improvements from conventional technologies

Co-Benefits of Addressing Conventional Pollutants and GHGs at Same Time

Black carbon is a component of fine particulate matter (PM2.5) generated from combustion sources

PM2.5 is a serious health hazard

BC is also has a significant impact on climate change

Policies should be developed to address both issues simultaneously for more cost effective implementation

Slide 37

Black carbon

Black carbon is a solid particle emitted during incomplete combustion

Climate impacts, health impacts

On and off-road opportunities for reductions

Source: Flickr

Slide 38

Black Carbon

IPCC shows black carbon has already contributed significantly to climate warming

ICCT graphical representation of Figure 2.22 contained in Forster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywood, J. Lean, D.C. Lowe, G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R. Van Dorland, 2007: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Slide 39

Concluding Comments Environmental and climate change challenges provide opportunities for

leapfrogging to the latest, state-of-the art technologies

Ability to apply leapfrog technologies will vary locally, regionally and nationally

– Cost will be a major factor in developing and developed nations

Experience with cell phone shows how leapfrogging technologies can have dramatic impacts, somewhat independent of economic conditions

Lessons learned and best practices solutions need to be shared between developed and developing world

Leapfrogging can happen in developing world with lessons for developed world, e.g. electrification

Aggressive policies are needed to encourage the RD& D of advanced technologies

Slide 40

Concluding Comments Technology is only part of solution, mobility is a key Must encourage mass transit and personal transportation (walking and

cycling, provided good air quality) Use of information technology to reduce travel, improve telecommuting

and efficiency, should be fully explored While examples of dramatic leapfrogging exist in telecommunication,

doing so in the transportation sector will be much more challenging and will take longer

The developing world may be easier to deploy certain advanced technologies than the developed world

Advanced technology deployment should consider mobility and include mass transit, clean vehicles and fuels and preservation of non-motorized transport such as cycling and walking

Slide 41

AcknowledgementI would like to Thank: ICCT Funders from:

– Energy Foundation – ClimateWorks– Hewlett Foundation

Staff at the ICCT for help in preparing this presentation

Slide 42