Overview of International HDV Efficiency Standards

Transcription

1 Overview of International HDV Efficiency Standards Rachel Muncrief June 11, 2013 Next 10 Automotive Virtual Summit: Fuel Efficient Truck USA 2013

2 Geographic Scope: Top Vehicle Markets Top eleven major global vehicle markets Most have auto efficiency standards Some working on truck standards Source: Ward s Automotive Slide 2

3 HDV global regulatory landscape Country/ Region Japan United States China European Union Canada S. Korea# Mexico California Regulation Type Fuel economy GHG/Fuel efficiency Fuel consumption CO 2 test procedure GHG Fuel efficiency# Fuel efficiency End-user purchase reqts Standard proposal Test procedure finalized Final rule Industry standard proposal Technical studies Technical studies# Requirements for new tractors, trailers (2011+) Industry National standard standard implemented adopted Standard proposal Phase 1 regulation implemented starting MY 2015 Regulation implemented starting MY 2014 # (mandatory DOT program starts MY 2016) Phase 2# Impact assessment/ Test procedure finalized Final rule Impact Test assessm procedure ent# finalized# National Standard implemented starting MY 2015 Phase 2 implementation Reporting requirements followed by Policy implementation? Regulation implemented starting MY 2014 Phase 2 Policy implementation (second half of 2015)# Proposal Regulation implemented starting MY 2016 Additional reqs. for existing tractors and trailers (<MY 2010) Additional reqts. for existing trailers and reefers (<MY 2010) Phase 2 implementation Items in blue are ICCT expectations (not public announcements) 3

4 Global HDV Potential CO 2 Reduction Early heavy-duty standards (Japan, US, China, etc) slow the emissions rise Far greater potential exists to increase truck efficiency over the long-term Heavy duty vehicle GHG emissions (Gt CO2e/year) 7.0 Japan, Canada, EU Adopted US HDV 6.0 China Phase I HDV China Phase II HDV 5.0 Vehicle Potential (3.5% APR) Global HDV Emissions Based on ICCT Roadmap project Slide 4

5 Regional Considerations for Technology EUROPE Diesel price - ~ /liter ($6-8+ / gal.) drives technology & efficient operation Speed limit - 88kph/55 mph speed limit Euro-wide Aero - Cab over engine Tires - Supersingles / LRR widely used Idle - European trucks rarely idle even at truck stops. US Diesel price - ~0.8 /liter (~ $3.9/gal) Speed High speed, significant amount of highway operation Length/weight restrictions vary by state. CHINA Diesel price - ~1 /liter ($4.9/ gal) Speed Trucks typically travel at lower speeds (43 mph compared to 65 mph in US) Weight Operate at significantly higher gross weight (108K lbs+ compared to 80K lbs in US). Less advanced engine technology JAPAN Diesel price - ~1.2 /liter (~$6.1/ gal) Small country Grade is important Shorter distance for intercity driving Slide 5

6 Key Policy Drivers Despite clear link between fuel efficiency and operational cost savings, there remains significant market barriers to efficiency technology uptake and penetration Uncertain return on investment/payback time Split incentives (e.g. trailers) Lack of credible information Other priorities (e.g. driver retention) Technology availability/reliability Lack of up front capital Conclusion: Policies are necessary to drive efficiency technologies into the HDV fleet Slide 6

7 Japan: top runner HDV fuel economy standard November 2005: Japan introduced world s first fuel economy standard for HDVs Vehicles included Commercial vehicles with gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) > 3.5 metric tons Buses with carrying capacity > 11 people Metric: fuel economy = km/liter Targets disaggregated by vehicle type, class, and weight Most efficient vehicle ( top runner ) in MY 2002 set as baseline Hybrid vehicles were excluded when determining the top runner Manufacturers must meet targets starting in MY 2015 Efficiency technologies incorporated into vehicles must be displayed prominently in catalogs starting in 2006 Slide 7

8 Japan: Efficiency targets Both the 2015 average target and relative improvement assume a constant 2002 vehicle sales mix Compliance through simulation modeling with standard inputsà improvements primarily from engines Vehicle Type! Vehicle Class! Truck# Bus# Fuel economy (km/l)! 2002 baseline!! 2015 target!! Improvement (%)! Tractor# 2.67# 2.93# 9.7# Other truck # 6.56# 7.36# 12.2# Total# 6.32# 7.09# 12.2# Urban# 4.51# 5.01# 11.1# Other bus# 6.19# 6.98# 12.8# Total# 5.62# 6.3# 12.1# Slide 8

9 Japan: Test Procedure Driving mode (Urban/ Interurban driving mode) Engine dynamometer test Conversion Program Determine gearshift positions Calculate engine speed and torque Vehicle specifications Engine and transmission specs Standard values used for Cd, Crr, vehicle weight Fuel efficiency map Engine Operating Mode Simulation to determine fuel consumption Slide 9

10 China: Industry vs National Standard Industry Standard (Stage 1) Proposed in 2011 and adopted in Dec 31, 2011 New models must meet standard starting July 1, 2012; existing models July 1, 2014 Standard is set at the 90 th percentile of the baseline Goal: Phasing out most inefficient and chance to collect further data Based on 300+ vehicles tested National Standard (Stage 2) Proposed September 2012 New models must meet standards starting from July 1, 2014; existing models by July 1, 2015 Tightens Industry standard ~10-15%, almost 50% of vehicles tested did not meet limits. (based on further testing) Slide 10

11 Proposed National Standard 60# Fuel consumption limit (liter/100km)! 50# 40# 30# 20# 10# Dump truck! City bus! Coach! Truck! Tractor! r! 0# 0# 10# 20# 30# 40# 50# Gross Vehicle Weight (ton)! Slide 11

12 China: Test Procedure Base vehicle Test vehicle on chassis dynamometer Medium and heavy-duty commercial vehicles Resistance/drag measured or standard input Variant vehicle Simulate using modeling software Engine map and vehicle data Run C-WTVC driving cycle Measurement and Calculation of Fuel Consumption Slide 12

13 EU: HDV GHG Labeling Euro VI regulation requires establishing labeling methodology and public information on vehicle performance Potential for standard or other policy to be established once labeling program is in place European Commission leading in-depth studies that will be the foundation of a future HDV labeling program Development and testing of a certification procedure for CO 2 emissions, fuel consumption of HDVs Worked with industry and academia to develop VECTO VECTO simulation applied to whole vehicle CO 2 emissions Tractor/trailer, regional delivery, Intercity buses Current work validation and proof of concept Preparation of legislation to measure, certify and report HDV CO 2 emissions Internal draft under review Slide 13

14 EU: Test Procedure Component testing Engine Fuel consumption map from engine dynamometer testing Aerodynamic Drag Tires Constant speed on road test Rolling resistance coefficients from tire labels VECTO Simulation Model (mission based test cycles) Transmission/Gear Box Auxiliaries Transmission ratios, transmission losses from OEM specific maps and default values Auxiliary power demand from generic efficiency maps Fuel consumption, CO 2 emissions Slide 14

15 Metrics, Reference, and Target Level Feature Japan U.S. China EU Metric/ Units Reference Fuel Efficiency Level (Tractor-Trailer) Kilometers per liter Average for 2002 tractor-trailer with GVW > 20 tons was 1.8 km/l (Daisho 2007) Grams CO 2 per payload tonmile and gallons per 1,000 payload ton-miles (short tons) Average for Class 8 sleeper cab high roof tractor-trailer in 2010 was 9.3 gal/1000 ton-miles (short tons) (2.4 km/l) (EPA and NHTSA 2011a) Liters per 100 kilometers 1.2, 1.6, and 2.4 km/l for a 49 ton GCW tractortrailer tested on City, Rural, and Motorway segments (CATARC 2010a) NA Average of 3.27 km/l for all longhaul trucks in 2010 (TU Graz 2011) Target Fuel Efficiency (Tractor-Trailer) 2.01 km/l by 2015 (Daisho 2007) for GVW>20 tons 7.3 gal/1,000 tonmiles (3.06 km/l) by 2014 (short tons) for Class 8 w/ sleeper cab and high roof 42 l/100 km (2.38 km/l) by 2014 for tons GCW (AQSIQ 2012) 3.86 km/l found to be cost-effective for long-haul (AEA 2011) Slide 15 Source: ACEEE work sponsored by ICCT

16 Segmentation 50 Complex segmentation across regions Segmentation by vehicle type, vehicle weight, vehicle use 45 Gross Vehicle Weight (metric tons) ) 2) 3) 4) 0 1) Further divided into four subsegments by maximum payload, 2) Further divided into six subsegments by roof height and cab type, 3) Further divided into three subsegments by roof height, 4) Each EU segment further Slide 16 divided into two to seven subsegments by axle, chassis, and body configuration and weight Source: ACEEE work sponsored by ICCT

17 Test Procedure Comparison Feature U.S./ Canada Japan China EU* Test Cycles and Weighting Transient 5%, 55-mph cruise 9% and 65-mph cruise 86% for sleeper cab tractor trucks. Transient 90% Highway (with grade) 10% for heavy tractor trucks Test Payload 19 short tons (17.2 tons) 20 tons (half payload) Test Method Aerodynamic drag (C d ) Simulation using standard engine and transmission; standard trailer depending on roof height Manufacturer testing to determine C d (coastdown preferred) Simulation using engine fuel consumption map and transmissions specs; standard trailer Standard value Tractor trucks: Road (rural) 10% Highway 90% Full payload (maximum allowed) Chassis test required for baseline. Simulation or chassis for improved model Manufacturer testing to determine C d (coastdown preferred) or standard value Mission-based cycles (may include road grade, altitude, stops) Average payload Simulation based on actual vehicle values Manufacturer testing to determine C d (constant speed test preferred) Rolling Resistance (C rr ) OEM or tire manufacturer testing to determine C rr for steer and drive tire Standard value Manufacturer testing to determine C rr, or default values used Standard values from tire labels * Technical studies only to date Slide 17 Source: ACEEE work sponsored by ICCT

18 Efficiency Improvements Captured Japan U.S. and Canada* China EU # Engine Yes Through separate engine standards Yes Yes Transmission Somewhat Optional; by demonstration outside of standard protocol Yes Yes Hybridization Unclear By demonstration outside of standard protocol Yes Yes Aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance No Yes Yes** Yes Trailer No No No No * Potentially Mexico as well ** Option to use default values # Refers to ongoing government research and testing protocols; No standards in place 18 Source: ACEEE work sponsored by ICCT

19 Summary Policies are necessary to close gap on technology potential Major markets are working on HDV efficiency standards or reporting requirements Very little international alignment on standards to date Further information on the web: (a joint effort of ICCT and DieselNet) Slide 19