emobility in Europe: Status and outlook 1. Fachtagung "e-mobil in niederösterreich" S. Pölten, March 4, 2015

Transcription

1 emobility in Europe: Status and outlook 1. Fachtagung "e-mobil in niederösterreich" S. Pölten, March 4, 2015

2 Contents A. Drivers for Powertrain Electrification 3 B. Status emobility (emobility Index Q3/14) 9 C. Trends This document shall be treated as confidential. It has been compiled for the exclusive, internal use by our client and is not complete without the underlying detail analyses and the oral presentation. It may not be passed on and/or may not be made available to third parties without prior written consent from Roland Berger Strategy Consultants. RBSC does not assume any responsibility for the completeness and accuracy of the statements made in this document. Roland Berger Strategy Consultants 2

3 A. Drivers for powertrain electrification 3

4 A Drivers for Powertrain Electrification emobility is driven by customer "Pull" and regulatory "Push" Importance of xevs and 2025 Driven by Customer pull Regulatory push high Need for xevs low ~ ~2025 Source: Roland Berger 4

5 A Drivers for Powertrain Electrification Europe will drive the global powertrain electrification Long term cost competitiveness of xevs generates additional market pull Regional powertrain trends (illustrative) Importance Flexible powertrain architectures 48V Next gen. Li-Ion batteries 94 g/km (58 mpg) PHEV platforms 75 g/km (73 mpg) Cost competitive next xev Importance xev city driving 17 km/l (40 mpg) Cost competitive xev 20 km/l (48 mpg) Cost innovation xev 2025 standards not yet defined Importance 41 mpg 54 mpg Cost competitive xev Importance 13 th 5-Year-Plan Page 5 Source: Roland Berger High efficient ICE xev Customer pull Technology innovation Milestones framework 5

6 A Drivers for Powertrain Electrification Regulatory requirements push improvements in most regions In Europe, NA and Japan, there is also a strong customer pull Assessment CO 2 emission/fuel consumption regulation and customer pull Corporate CO 2 emission target [g/km] Fuel efficiency targets [km/l] 15.1 km/l 20.3 km/l CAFE 2) [mpg or g/mi] Additional ZEV regulation CARB 286 g/mi 213 g/mi 163 g/mi Potential 4) corporate CO 2 emission targets [g/km] Additional potential fleet xev target share % 94 1) 75 5) % % % t.d.b > Customer pull Customer will only buy cars with most efficient/lowest CO 2 emission technology (medium term) Customer do not consider CO 2 emissions/consumption in purchase decision (medium term) 1) Average weight depended CO 2 emission target 2) EPA & NHTSA estimates of g/mi for passenger cars and light trucks combined, driving cycle compensated 3) End customer pull for low CO 2 emission/low fuel consumption powertrain and/or alternative powertrains 4) No decision made yet 5) g/km under discussion Source: FAW; EPA, EU; Inovar; Roland Berger 6

7 A Drivers for Powertrain Electrification We expect costs of typical PHEV cells to be in a range of USD/kWh in Impact of material improvements on cell prices 1) Typical 96 Wh PHEV cell [USD/cell] ~250 USD/kWh % -22% USD/kWh Gen 2a: NCM , Anode 100% Graphite GEN 2b: Ni NCM , Anode 100%Graphite/HC GEN 3a: Ni NCM Anode Graphite % Silicon GEN 3b: HE-NCM, high voltage spinel silicon anode GEN 2A cell cost 2015 New materials, scale effects GEN 2B Increased energy density GEN 3a 1) Cost for Auto. customers 2) Based on a high-density mixture of NCM 111 and LiNiO2 Source: Roland Berger LiB Market Model Q1/14 7

8 Raw Materials A Drivers for Powertrain Electrification Costs of TESLA's cell manufactured in the announced "Gigafactory" could be already at 120$/kWh, but higher integration costs TESLA Gigafactory process flow (until cell) and estimated costs per kwh [$] Other materials (Al, Cu, steel,..): 25-32$ Depreciation & interest (5 bn$, 7yrs, 10-15%): 35-42$ Raw Steel/ Aluminum Precursor: 12-15$ Cathode Manufacturing Aluminum Foil Cathode Electrode Can & Cap 35 GWh per year (cells) Polymers etc.: 5-7$ Precursor: 3-5$ Separator Manufacturing Anode Manufacturing Copper Foil Separator Anode Electrode Winding Cell Assemby Electrolyte Manufacturing Costs to OEM: 120$..130$ Employees (total: ~6500, there-of assumed for pack: 500, 70-90k$ p.a.): 12-15$ Energy: kwh (0,03$): ~4$ LiPF6 etc.: 8-10$ EBT of operators (8-10%): 10$ Source: TESLA, Roland Berger LiB market modell Q1/2014; Roland Berger 8

9 B. Status emobility (emobility Index Q3/14) 9

10 Avg. sale price [EUR] B Status emobility Technology levels are relatively stable and few new models are being launched (except in China) Value for money of market-ready BEVs and PHEVs EV value for money Country Low China Good France Japan Moderate Korea USA Poor High Germany Avg. technology level [points] Note: Italian OEMs have no mass-produced EV/PHEV models > Stable model policy with tried-and-tested vehicle models > Very good value for money > Increased technical revisions of existing models (esp. battery) > High-priced vehicles very important > Continuing trend toward electrification (PHEVs) in upper segments > Increasing number of expensive vehicle models > Great volatility in model range > Slight improvement on technological level, esp. due to joint ventures > Renault Twizy continues to lose importance in model mix > Renault Zoe Z.E. is dominant model > Kia Soul and Kia Ray still the only Korean EV models Source: fka; Roland Berger 10

11 B Status emobility R&D subsidies are declining strongly in most automotive nations State R&D funding for e-mobility [EUR m], [% of GDP] Country [EUR m] [% of GDP] 1) 7, , ) Subsidies expressed as a share of current GDP (2013??) Source: fka; Roland Berger 11

12 B Status emobility The US leads the way in vehicle production Almost all markets have seen increased volume numbers Projected production of EVs and PHEVs through 2017 Country Domestic production of EVs/PHEVs ['000 units] Top 3 models in each country Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, Nissan Leaf EV, Toyota Prius PHEV Nissan Leaf, Tesla Model S, Chevrolet Volt PHEV BMW i3, VW Passat PHEV, Porsche Panamera PHEV BYD Qin, Kandi KD, Chery QQEV Renault ZOE Z.E., smart fortwo ED, Renault Kangoo Z.E. Kia Soul EV, Kia Ray EV, Chevrolet Spark EV Note: No significant EV/PHEV production is expected in Italy Source: fka; Roland Berger 12

13 B Status emobility in LiB, Japan remains in pole position and China moves into third place Samsung has made strong gains with European OEMs Cell manufacturers and production, by country, through 2017 Projected global market share, ) Domestic cell production, [MWh] Total: USD 4.4 bn 2) 26% > Leading cell producer > Panasonic is the leader in consumer cells 18% 17% 22% > Primarily LG Chem and Samsung > SK Innovation counted as part of Korean footprint > Primarily BYD and other "local for local" players > Still primarily A123 and Japanese manufacturers with local production (AESC) 1% 6% 5% > Primarily LiTec > No significant cell production > No significant cell production 1) 2017 market value in USD calculated as follows: USD 490/kWh for PHEVs and USD 350/kWh for EVs 2) Including Primearth's market share Source: Roland Berger LiB market model as of Q

14 B Status emobility China has doubled its sales of EVs compared to the last period Sales figures and market share of EVs/PHEVs, Q to Q Country Sales of EVs/PHEVs [units] EV/PHEV share of total sales [%] 119, , , , , , Source: fka; Roland Berger 14

15 C. Trends

16 C Trends EU27 BACKUP Until 2021, OEMs need to reduce their CO 2 emissions by 25-30% major driver for electrification 1) 2) % % % % % % 95 3) % % % % % % 88 1) Incl. Mini, Rolls-Royce 2) Incl. Smart 3) Incl. Alfa Romeo, Lancia Source: Roland Berger 16

17 C Trends EU27 In Europe, xev will remain niche until Stronger electrification will be required to meet 75 g targets in 2025 Summary push/pull factors xevs and xev share [%] EU Today (2013) Mid-term () Long-term (2025) Push factors 130 g CO 2 emission regulation for entire fleet g CO 2 emission regulation in 2021 requires some xevs for compliance reasons 75 g CO 2 emission regulation 2) requires significant xev share for compliance Pull factors TCO disadvantage Very few first adopters Lack of subsidies and other benefits TCO disadvantage Lack of significant subsidies or benefits TCO advantage, but dependent on infrastructure development Subsidies and benefits will become possible to accelerate xevs EV+PHEV share 1) xev <1% xev 9% 31% xev xev share driving factor 99% Other 94% Other Other 69% Page 17 Page 17 1) Based on sales, incl. EVs, PHEVs, PECVs and full hybrids, not considering "smart" hybrids 2) 68-78g range in discussion Source: Roland Berger 17

18 C Trends EU27 All OEMs in Europe focus on ICE optimization and road load reduction to comply with 95 g target, but minor xev is also required Mid-term emission reduction level of selected OEMs Volume OEMs CO 2 emission reduction [g/km] ICE 7 7 RL 1 2 Fleet CO 2 emission 3 2 Gap for xev 1) target Premium OEMs CO 2 emission reduction [g/km] ICE 8 9 RL 2 2 Fleet CO 2 emission Gap for xev 1) target Assumptions Assessment is based on potential CO 2 emission reduction in each car model of an OEM ICE optimization is most cost efficient lever for CO 2 emission reduction, followed by road load reduction, xev least efficient cost benefit ratio Assumed changes in fleet structure Limited shift towards smaller vehicle segments No change in average vehicle power No active shift in fuel shares in a model line Credits for low CO 2 emitting vehicles are not considered Potential of ICE almost 100% leveraged by Further reduction must come from xevs 1) Full hybrids; PHEVs/REEVs; EVs ICE = Engine and other powertrain improvement, RL = Road load reduction (weight reduction, tires, aero), Fleet Change in vehicle segment shares Source: Roland Berger 18

19 C Trends EU27 In the long-term, PHEVs and EVs used for short-range trips will become TCO competitive in Europe as battery costs decline TCO comparison 2025 EU1) Example C-segment car USD/100 mi Gasoline 26.8 Diesel 27.0 Gasoline micro hybrid 26.7 Diesel micro hybrid 26.6 PHEV 30% e-drive 80% e-drive EV 210 mi (340 km) range 90 mi (150 km) range 23.3 Comments With decreasing battery costs, PHEVs and EVs are expected to become TCO competitive by 2025 Availability of infrastructure and vehicle usage behavior are potential limiting factors to larger penetration of PHEVs/EVs Strong market pull expected if infrastructure becomes available and customers adapt vehicle usage behavior to PHEV/EV capabilities (short-range usage of EVs and long-range usage of PHEVs) Page 19 1) Only considering powertrain and fuel/consumption costs; Assumptions: 150,000 km/10 years lifetime, 15,000 km mileage p.a. (11,000 km short and 20 x 200 km long, consumption acc. to today's NEDC, fuel cost 1.7 EUR/l, energy cost 0.25 EUR/kWh Source: Roland Berger 19

20 C Trends EU27 Additionally, as small diesel engines lose in cost-benefit ratio compared to small gasoline hybrids, Diesel will get under pressure Example CO2 emission and cost EU B-segment vehicle (~90 hp) CO 2 [g/km] ( fuel consumption) Base EU5 EU6/Efficiency V hybrid ,400 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,800 Gasoline Diesel Base EU5 LNT, EGR EU6 Efficiency 2015 Efficiency 2021 Cost EU6 Efficiency ,900 2,000 2,100 2,200 2,300 2,400 2,500 Cost [EUR] Comments Increasing penetration of plugin gasoline hybrids expected, once TCO advantage exists and infrastructure is available Gasoline hybrids are more cost competitive as mileage driven by ICE is not sufficient to payback higher cost of diesel engine Gasoline hybrids offer similar driving experience as diesel engines (instant torque) Diesel volumes under pressure in long-term Page 20 Source: Roland Berger 20

21 C Trends EU27 As a result, the xev share in all major markets is expected to grow significantly after, whereas CNG remains niche Propulsion share and ) [% of sales] 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 2% 2% 6% 4% 2% 3% 2% 9% 31% 10% 24% 22% 42% 6% 7% 4% 32% 8% 1% 2% 1% 20% 20% 25% 0% 39% 100% 5% 27% 89% 5% 64% 1) 90% 1% 75% 78% 0% 58% 93% 2% 67% e 2025e 2025e 2025e 2025e EV HEV/PHEV/REEV CNG Diesel/gas engines 1) Optimistic scenario: globally strict CO 2 emissions/fuel consumption regulation; high energy cost; high cost reduction HV batteries; high investments in recharging infrastructure Source: Roland Berger simulation 21

22 Contact and further information: Dr. Wolfgang Bernhart Senior Partner Telefon: +49 (160)