2012 SAE Government and Industry Meeting January 26, 2012 EPA & NHTSA

Transcription

1 2012 SAE Government and Industry Meeting January 26, 2012 EPA & NHTSA

2 Agenda Background on time line Proposed Standards Projected Impacts Key Provisions Next steps 2

3 Time Line Date April 1, 2010 May 2010 September 2010 November 2010 July 2011 November 2011 Milestone National Program Final Rule Issued Presidential Memo directs EPA and NHTSA to work on extending National Program Joint Technical Assessment Report (TAR) issued with CARB, and a Joint Notice of Intent for standards Supplemental NOI issued, summarizing public comments on TAR and Joint NOI Supplemental NOI issued, detailing key program elements and stringency Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued, pages of proposed program detail and supporting technical analysis, plus pages NHTSA Draft Environmental Impact Statement and supporting analysis February 13, 2012 Comments due on proposal 3

4 Proposed Greenhouse Gas Standards Annual Improvement Rates Passenger Cars 5% 5% Light Trucks 3.5% 5% 2025 Projected Fleet-wide performance of 163 g/mi CO2, equivalent to 54.5 mpg if all technology used to meet the CO2 standards are fuel economy improving technology 2025 Passenger car target = 144 g/mi CO Light truck target = 203 g/mi CO2 GHG standards are performance-based, do not dictate technology GHG and CAFE standards closely coordinated 4

5 Proposed CAFE Standards Annual Improvement Rates Passenger Cars 4.1% 4.5% Light Truck 2.9% 4.7% 2025 Projected fleet-wide average requirement = 49.6 mpg 2025 Passenger car average requirement = 56.0 mpg 2025 Light truck average requirement = 40.3 mpg CAFE standards are performance-based, do not dictate technology CAFE and GHG standards closely coordinated 5

6 2025 Footprint Attribute Targets Footprint curves assign a specific CO2 or MPG target for each vehicle based on its footprint (roughly the area between the tires) Each manufacturer has a unique car fleet and truck fleet standard, derived from the footprint curves, based on the production-weighted distribution of vehicles produced Vehicle Type Example Models Example Model Footprint (sq. ft.) 2025 CO 2 Emissions Target (g/mi) 2025 Fuel Economy Target (mpg) Example Passenger Cars Compact car Honda Fit Midsize car Ford Fusion Fullsize car Chrysler Example Light-duty Trucks Small SUV 4WD Ford Escape Midsize crossover Nissan Murano Minivan Toyota Sienna Large pickup truck Chevy Silverado

7 Footprint-based Fleet Average Standards EPA and NHTSA s standards are defined by footprint curves, which assign a specific CO2 or MPG target for each possible vehicle footprint (roughly the area between the tires) see the Appendix Passenger cars and light trucks have separate footprint curves Standards for each manufacturer are derived from footprint curves, based on the production-weighted distribution of vehicles produced Each manufacturer has a unique car fleet average standard and a unique light truck fleet average standard Fleet average standards mean that individual vehicles do not have specific requirements the whole fleet must comply, on average but each vehicle produced contributes to a firm s fleet average obligations A firm with relatively high production fraction of smaller vehicles will have a different standards than a firms with a relatively high production fraction of larger vehicles 7

8 Standards do not equal real-world values For more than 20 years, CAFE standards have been based on 1975 test cycles Over time the real-world performance and CAFE stds. have diverged Today, we estimate that real-world fuel economy is ~20% below the GHG/CAFE compliance test procedure values Thus, a projected fleet-wide compliance level of 54.5 mpg does not mean the average vehicle in-use will achieve 54.5 mpg Average real-world fuel economy of ~40 mpg for the 2025 fleet is expected based on these standards Based on projected use of air conditioning refrigerant and leakage improvements, which do not improve fuel economy, and applying the 20% adjustment. 8

9 Savings and Reductions Fuel Savings 4 billion barrels over life of vehicles GHG reductions 2 billion metric tons over life of vehicles 9

10 Monetized Impacts of the Proposal For the lifetime of the vehicles Fuel savings of $347 to $444 billion Costs $138 to $140 billion Total Benefits $449 to $561 billion Net Benefits of $311 to $421 billion Note: all ranges of $ values based on use of a 3% and 7% discount rate 10

11 Consumer Impacts Proposed standards maintain consumer choice and vehicle utility 2025 average vehicle cost increase of roughly $2, vehicle lifetime fuel savings of $5,200 to $6,600 Net lifetime savings of $3,000 to $4,400 Payback Period Cash buyers on average will see payback in <4 years Typical 5-year loan financed vehicle purchasers will see an average monthly cash flow savings of $12, or about $140 per year, during the loan period Note: all ranges of $ values based on use of a 3% and 7% discount rate 11

12 Wide-Range of Technologies Available A wide range of technologies can be used to reduce GHG/improve fuel economy, e.g., Improvements in vehicle aerodynamics, reduced rolling resistance tires, improved electric accessories, air conditioning systems, mass reduction Advanced gasoline and diesel engine technologies Transmissions with 8 speeds or more and dual-clutch technology Hybrids, plug-in hybrid electrics, and all electric vehicles EPA and NHTSA project that most manufacturers could comply in 2025 by producing an overall fleet with: 82%-89 advanced gasoline and diesel vehicles 7% - 15% hybrids 3% plug-in hybrid electric vehicles and all electric vehicles NOTE: the standards are performance standards, not technology mandates. Manufacturers can choose any technologies to meet the standards. The agencies simply project possible paths toward compliance. Attend this afternoon s Light-duty Session Part 2 which focuses on technology for additional presentations and discussion 2:30 4:30pm today, this same room (Room 143A) 12

13 MY2011/2012 vehicles which meet or exceed proposed GHG targets Mercedes Smart fortwo EV Lexus CT 200h Honda CR-Z Nissan Leaf Honda Insight Mercedes Smart fortwo Chevrolet Volt Toyota Highlander Hybrid Hyundia Elantra Toyota Prius Lexus RX 450h Honda Civic Hybrid Honda Civic CNG Hyundai Sonata Hybrid Chevrolet Silverado Hybrid (2WD) 2017 Ford Fusion Hybrid Chevrolet Silverado Hybrid (4WD) Ford Fiesta SFE Lincoln MKZ Hybrid Nissan Altima Hybrid Fiat 500, manual Toyota Camry Hybrid Cadillac Escalade Hybrid (2WD) Lexus HS 250h Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid (2WD) 2019 Ford Excape Hybrid Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid (4WD) Toyota Tacoma (2WD), manual Volkswagen Passat, manual Toyota Sienna 2018 Ford Fiesta Chevrolet Cruze Eco, manual Toyota Tacoma (2WD), auto Buick LaCrosse Ford Focus SFE Hyundia Accent Kia Forte Eco Honda Civic HF Infiniti M35h Mini Cooper, manual Honda Odyssey 2WD Honda Civic Chevrolet Cruze Ford Ranger 2WD, manual Ford Focus Buick Regal Blue = EV/PHEV Brown = HEV Green - diesel Black = gasoline No change in vehicles assumed, accept improved air conditioning systems 13

14 MY2011/2012 Vehicles within 5% of proposed 2017 GHG targets Audi A3 Mazda 2, manual Audi A6 Mercedes-Benz ML450 Hybrid Ford F Ecoboost (2WD) Mini Cooper Countryman, manual Ford F L (2WD) Mini Cooper, auto Ford Transit Connect (FWD) Nissan Frontier (2WD), manual Honda Fit Nissan Quest, manual Hyundai Entourage Nissan Versa Hyundai Sonata Nisssan Sentra Jetta Sportwagen Toyota Corrola, manual Kia Forte Toyota Venza Kia Optima Toyota Yaris Kia Rio Volkswagen Golf Kia Sedona Volkswagen Jetta Kia Sorento (4WD) Volkswagen Jetta Kia Sportage (4WD) Volkswagen Passat, auto Brown = HEV Green = diesel Black = gasoline No change in vehicles assumed, accept improved air conditioning systems 14

15 Several Key Elements of the Proposal Mid-term Evaluation Air Conditioning Credits Off-cycle Credits Incentive for Hybridization of Full-size Pick-ups Compressed Natural Gas and Flex Fuel Vehicle Provisions Multiplier for Advanced Technology Vehicles 15

16 Mid Term Evaluation Final unless changed by rulemaking Final Conditional + + Joint Technical Assessment Report 16

17 Air Conditioning Credits Continuation of program included in For the first time proposal includes A/C efficiency improvements credits. A/C system not utilized during compliance testing But, real reductions in CO2 & fuel consumption possible with system improvements A/C systems today also use a refrigerant with high global warming potential. 17

18 Off-cycle Technology Credits Continuation of program included in For the first time proposal includes off-cycle improvements for compliance. Proposed streamline application and approval process Proposed list of a subset of technologies with defined credit values Ability to apply for more credits or other technologies based on sufficient data 18

19 Full-size Pick-ups Technology Incentives Incentivize advanced technologies in full-size pickups Provide a per-vehicle credit for mild and strong hybrid fullsize pick-up trucks produced at minimum penetration rates Hybrid Type mild strong Credits per Vehicle & Model Years Available 10 g/mile ( ) ( gal/mi) 20 g/mile ( ) ( gal/mile) Minimum Technology Penetration To Be Eligible for Credits 30% of full-size pick-up sales in 2017, increases to 80% by % of full-size pick-up sales Proposal also includes a performance-based incentive credit for pickup trucks exceeding their target by 15 to 20% 19

20 Compressed Natural Gas and Flex Fuel Vehicle Provisions CNG vehicles Propose methodology for treating dual fuel vehicles Propose methodology beginning in 2020 for dual fuel vehicles flex fuel vehicles Continue MY FFV emissions based on actual fuel usage Beginning in 2020, based on actual fuel usage; incentive multiplier will continue. 20

21 Advanced Technology Multiplier Include an additional incentive multiplier for each advanced technology vehicle sold between 2017 and Electric vehicles, plug-in electric, fuel cell vehicles Multiplier allows manufacturers to count vehicles more than once in CO 2 fleet average calculation. Multiplier would phase-down over time. Would not be used in the CAFE program. 21

22 Public Participation and Final Rule Public comment period for Joint NPRM ends February 13, 2012 Public comment period for NHTSA Draft Environmental Impact Statement ends January 31, 2012 We held three public hearings in January Detroit (17 th ), Philadelphia (19 th ), San Francisco (24 th ) Following the close of the comment period, the agencies will consider all comments and data provided when developing the final rule, which we are targeting for mid-summer of this year 22

23 APPENDIX: CAFE and CO2 Proposed Footprint Standard Curves 23

24 Proposed CAFE Target Curves for Passenger Cars 24

25 Fuel Economy Target (mpg) Proposed CAFE Target Curves for Light Trucks Footprint (sf)

26 Proposed CO2 Target Curves for Passenger Car 26

27 27 Proposed CO2 Target Curves for Light Trucks