BENEFITS OF RECENT IMPROVEMENTS IN VEHICLE FUEL ECONOMY

Similar documents
FUEL-ECONOMY DISTRIBUTIONS OF PURCHASED NEW VEHICLES IN THE U.S.: MODEL YEARS 2008 AND 2014

HAS MOTORIZATION IN THE U.S. PEAKED? PART 5: UPDATE THROUGH 2012

ON-ROAD FUEL ECONOMY OF VEHICLES

HAS MOTORIZATION IN THE U.S. PEAKED? PART 9: VEHICLE OWNERSHIP AND DISTANCE DRIVEN, 1984 TO 2015

TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS IN THE CONTEXT

ENERGY INTENSITIES OF FLYING AND DRIVING

NEW-VEHICLE MARKET SHARES OF CARS VERSUS LIGHT TRUCKS IN THE U.S.: RECENT TRENDS AND FUTURE OUTLOOK

HAS MOTORIZATION IN THE U.S. PEAKED? PART 2: USE OF LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES

RELATIVE COSTS OF DRIVING ELECTRIC AND GASOLINE VEHICLES

HAS MOTORIZATION IN THE U.S. PEAKED? PART 10: VEHICLE OWNERSHIP AND DISTANCE DRIVEN, 1984 TO 2016

IS THE U.S. ON THE PATH TO THE LOWEST MOTOR VEHICLE FATALITIES IN DECADES?

University of Michigan Eco-Driving Index (EDI) Latest data: October 2017

ASSUMED VERSUS ACTUAL WEIGHTS OF VEHICLE PASSENGERS

MOTORISTS' PREFERENCES FOR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF VEHICLE AUTOMATION: 2016

Executive Summary. Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 through EPA420-S and Air Quality July 2006

MOTORISTS' PREFERENCES FOR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF VEHICLE AUTOMATION

Eco-driving: Strategic, Tactical, and Operational Decisions of the Driver that Influence Vehicle Fuel Economy

Used Vehicle Supply: Future Outlook and the Impact on Used Vehicle Prices

Fueling Savings: Higher Fuel Economy Standards Result In Big Savings for Consumers

U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle GHG and CAFE Standards

The Impact of Attribute-Based Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards: Preliminary Findings

May ATR Monthly Report

ROAD SAFETY WITH SELF-DRIVING VEHICLES: GENERAL LIMITATIONS AND ROAD SHARING

Additional Transit Bus Life Cycle Cost Scenarios Based on Current and Future Fuel Prices

Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 Through Appendixes

August ATR Monthly Report

FINAL SECOND-PHASE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS STANDARDS FOR HEAVY-DUTY ENGINES AND VEHICLES IN CANADA

Air Quality Impacts of Advance Transit s Fixed Route Bus Service

Electric vehicles a one-size-fits-all solution for emission reduction from transportation?

Michigan/Grand River Avenue Transportation Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM #18 PROJECTED CARBON DIOXIDE (CO 2 ) EMISSIONS

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

1 Faculty advisor: Roland Geyer

3.17 Energy Resources

Impacts of Weakening the Existing EPA Phase 2 GHG Standards. April 2018

LOW-BEAM HEADLAMP ILLUMINATION AT VERY HIGH ANGLES

UMTRI An Examination of the Michigan 2010 Motor Vehicle Traffic Crash Fatality Increase

CONSUMER PREFERENCES AND MOTIVATIONS

7. Author(s) Shan Bao, Michael J. Flannagan, James R. Sayer, Mitsuhiro Uchida 9. Performing Organization Name and Address

State of the Industry: U.S. Classes 3-8 Used Trucks

Predicted availability of safety features on registered vehicles a 2015 update

Electric Vehicle Cost-Benefit Analyses

Operating Refineries in a High Cost Environment. Options for RFS Compliance. March 20, Baker & O Brien, Inc. All rights reserved.

National Center for Statistics and Analysis Research and Development

CONSUMER PREFERENCES REGARDING VEHICLE-RELATED SAFETY RECALLS

TRAFFIC VOLUME TRENDS July 2002

Criteria. As background, the US Environmental Protection Agency s Green Vehicle Guide states that:

International Experience in Improving Fuel Efficiency and Reducing Greenhouse Gases

The Facts on. WHATReally Affects FUEL ECONOMY? Number. in a series of 6

Figure 1 Unleaded Gasoline Prices

Automotive Fuel Economy Program. Annual Update Calendar Year National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. DOT HS September 2002

September 21, Introduction. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ), National Highway Traffic Safety

Ph: October 27, 2017

EPA s Own Data Show Small Refiner Exemptions Cut 2016 and 2017 RFS Obligations by at Least 1.6 Billion Gallons

Electric Vehicle Cost-Benefit Analyses

ALG July/August 2011 Edition Report

217 IEEJ217 Almost all electric vehicles sold in China are currently domestic-made vehicles from local car manufacturers. The breakdown of electric ve

Car Economics Activity

Fuel Economy: How Will Consumers Respond?

Where are the Increases in Motorcycle Rider Fatalities?

2015 CARS GAIN MPGs, CAFE GOALS IN REACH IF GAINS CONTINUE. However, New Data Shows Some Companies Are Backsliding

TRAFFIC VOLUME TRENDS

U.S. Heavy-Duty Vehicle GHG/Fuel Efficiency Standards and Recommendations for the Next Phase

KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CENTER

DOT HS September NHTSA Technical Report

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CO 2 Emissions: A Campus Comparison

Impacts of Tighter CAFE and GHG Regula<ons on Automo<ve Profits. Walter McManus Economist Automo2ve Analysis Group

Update: Estimated GHG Increase from Obama Administration Inaction on the 2014 RFS

EPA s Own Data Show Small Refiner Exemptions Cut 2016 and 2017 RFS Obligations by at Least 1.6 Billion Gallons

State s Progress on 1.5 Million Zero Emission Vehicles by 2025

BENEFITS OF HEADLAMP LEVELING AND CLEANING FOR CURRENT U.S. LOW BEAMS

SWUTC/13/ Title and Subtitle Transportation Revenue Impacts from a Changing Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet

Electric Companies and the EV Revolution. NCSL Legislative Summit Energy Policy Summit Monday, August 8, 2016 Chicago, IL

TMCC Green Bond Program. December 2017

FHWA/IN/JTRP-2000/23. Final Report. Sedat Gulen John Nagle John Weaver Victor Gallivan

Benefits of greener trucks and buses

CALIFORNIA MOTOR VEHICLE STOCK, TRAVEL AND FUEL FORECAST

PREFACE 2015 CALSTART

Consumer benefits of increased efficiency in lightduty vehicles in the U.S.

INSERO QUARTERLY, Q4 2014

Development of Turning Templates for Various Design Vehicles

U.S. Ethanol Production, Imports and Stocks

Opportunities for Reducing Transportation s Petroleum Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

ENERGY SLIDESHOW. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas

Aging of the light vehicle fleet May 2011

REPORT NUMBER: 120-MGA

SAFETY COMPLIANCE TESTING FOR FMVSS NO. 214S SIDE IMPACT PROTECTION (STATIC)

SAFETY COMPLIANCE TESTING FOR FMVSS 124 ACCELERATOR CONTROL SYSTEMS

Energy Outlook. U.S. Energy Information Administration. For EnerCom Dallas February 22, 2018 Dallas, TX

U.S. Fuel Economy and Fuels Regulations and Outlook

Vehicle Safety Risk Assessment Project Overview and Initial Results James Hurnall, Angus Draheim, Wayne Dale Queensland Transport

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Clean Car Roll-back. Estimated costs for American families if U.S. climate pollution and fuel economy standards are relaxed.

Eskom Electric Vehicle Research Project

Energy Technical Memorandum

Comparison of California Low Carbon Fuel Standard with Bush s 20 in 10 Alternative Fuel Standard

Outlook for Franchised New Car Dealers

Light-Duty Automotive Technology, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 Through Report

Transcription:

UMTRI-2014-28 OCTOBER 2014 BENEFITS OF RECENT IMPROVEMENTS IN VEHICLE FUEL ECONOMY MICHAEL SIVAK BRANDON SCHOETTLE

BENEFITS OF RECENT IMPROVEMENTS IN VEHICLE FUEL ECONOMY Michael Sivak Brandon Schoettle The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2150 U.S.A. Report No. UMTRI-2014-28 October 2014

1. Report No. UMTRI-2014-28 4. Title and Subtitle Benefits of Recent Improvements in Vehicle Fuel Economy 7. Author(s) Michael Sivak and Brandon Schoettle 9. Performing Organization Name and Address The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute 2901 Baxter Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2150 U.S.A. 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address The University of Michigan Sustainable Worldwide Transportation http://www.umich.edu/~umtriswt 15. Supplementary Notes Technical Report Documentation Page 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipientʼs Catalog No. 5. Report Date October 2014 6. Performing Organization Code 383818 8. Performing Organization Report No. UMTRI-2014-28 10. Work Unit no. (TRAIS) 11. Contract or Grant No. 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 16. Abstract For the past several years, we have calculated (on a monthly basis) the average, salesweighted fuel economy of all light-duty vehicles (cars, pickup trucks, vans, and SUVs) sold in the U.S. The results indicate that, from October 2007 to September 2014, the average fuel economy has improved from 20.1 mpg to 25.3 mpg. This brief note quantifies the consequences of this improvement on overall fuel consumption and vehicle emissions. Because of their improved fuel economy, the vehicles sold since October 2007 saved a cumulative total of about 15.1 billion gallons of fuel equivalent to the current total consumption of all vehicles in the U.S. for about 33 days. This reduction in the amount of fuel translates to a reduction of about 297 billion pounds of carbon-dioxide emissions. In terms of the current savings, for the most recent month September 2014 the savings amount to 614 million gallons of fuel, or about 12 billion pounds of carbon dioxide. These savings are equivalent to about 6% of both the average monthly fuel consumption and carbondioxide emissions from all light-duty vehicles on the road. 17. Key Words vehicle fuel economy, vehicle emissions, fuel consumption, recent trends 19. Security Classification (of this report) None 20. Security Classification (of this page) None 21. No. of Pages 7 18. Distribution Statement Unlimited 22. Price i

Content Background...1 Analysis...1 References...5 ii

Background Two years ago, we published an analysis of the benefits of the recent improvements in vehicle fuel economy on overall fuel consumption and emissions (Sivak and Schoettle, 2012a). In this brief note, we provide an update through September 2014. However, before we get into the details of the new analysis, we will first take a brief historical view concerning where we have been. This detour will place the magnitude of the recent changes in the context of the progress achieved since the 1920s. In 1923, the actual, on-road fuel economy of the entire U.S. fleet (including cars, trucks, buses, and motorcycles) was 14.0 mpg. Fuel economy then declined to 11.9 mpg in 1973, before it started to climb relatively rapidly, reaching 16.9 mpg in 1991. The changes thereafter have been small, with overall fuel economy in 2007 at 17.2 mpg (Sivak and Schoettle, 2012b). The data for only cars show the same trends as the data for all vehicles: a decline in fuel economy until 1973, a relatively sharp improvement from 1973 through 1991, and only a minor improvement between 1991 and 2007 (Sivak and Schoettle, 2012b). Analysis The present analysis examines recent additions to the U.S. fleet. For the past several years, we have calculated (on a monthly basis) the average, sales-weighted fuel economy of all purchased light-duty vehicles (cars, pickup trucks, vans, and SUVs). Our data (Sivak and Schoettle, 2012b) start with October 2007 (the conventional beginning month of model year 2008 vehicle sales), and currently the latest entry is for September 2014. (These data are based on the EPA window sticker ratings; they are not the actual, on-road values.) Our data indicate that the average, sales-weighted fuel economy of all new lightduty vehicles has improved from 20.1 mpg in October 2007 to 25.3 mpg in September 1

2014, for a gain of 26%. 1 While this improvement is rather modest in absolute terms, it is substantial in comparison with the above-discussed changes for the entire fleet between 1923 and 2007. During the seven years covered by our monitoring, we have collected data on 93 million new light-duty vehicles. Using the vehicle-survival rates in David, Diegel, and Boundy (2014), we estimate that 89 million of these 93 million vehicles were still in use in September 2014, representing about 38% of the 234 million light-duty vehicles on the road (FHWA, 2014 2 ). That led us to pose the following question: How much fuel have we saved by driving these new vehicles with improved fuel economy, as opposed to driving vehicles that would have experienced no improvements in fuel economy, retaining the lower fuel economy of the vehicles sold in the first month of our monitoring (October 2007)? We will answer this question from two related perspectives. The first perspective involves the cumulative amount of fuel saved. Assuming that each of these vehicles was driven 11,398 miles every year (a recent estimate of the average annual distance driven in the U.S.; Sivak, 2014), we find that the new vehicles saved about 15.1 billion gallons of fuel. That is equivalent to the current consumption of fuel by all vehicles in the U.S. for about 33 days (FHWA, 2014 2 ). Figure 1 shows the cumulative fuel consumption for new vehicles since October 2007 with and without the recent fuel-economy gains. The difference between the two curves represents the fuel-economy savings. 1 These values are sales-weighted arithmetic means of window-sticker values. The following analyses of fuel consumption are based on sales-weighted harmonic means. 2 The FHWA data are for 2012 the latest year available. 2

Cumulative fuel consumption (billions of gallons) 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Oct-07 Jan-08 without fuel-economy gains with fuel-economy gains Apr-08 Jul-08 Oct-08 Jan-09 Apr-09 Jul-09 Oct-09 Jan-10 Apr-10 Jul-10 Oct-10 Jan-11 Month-Year Michael Sivak and Brandon Schoettle University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute Apr-11 Jul-11 Oct-11 Jan-12 Apr-12 Jul-12 Oct-12 Jan-13 Apr-13 Jul-13 Oct-13 Jan-14 Apr-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 } 15.1 billion gallons Figure 1. Cumulative fuel consumption for new vehicles since October 2007 with and without the recent fuel-economy gains. The difference between the two curves represents the fuel-economy savings. Another way to assess the benefits of the improved fuel economy is to examine the current savings in the use of fuel. For the most recent month September 2014 the savings amount to 614 million gallons of fuel. The reductions in the amount of fuel consumed are important in themselves. However, they also represent reductions in emissions. For example, combustion of one gallon of gasoline creates about 19.64 pounds of carbon-dioxide emissions (22.38 pounds for diesel) (EIA, 2014). Consequently, the cumulative 15.1 billion gallons of fuel saved since late 2007 represent a cumulative reduction of about 297 billion pounds of carbon dioxide (using the gasoline conversion). Analogously, the 614 million gallons of fuel saved during the month of September 2014 represent a reduction of about 12 billion 3

pounds of carbon dioxide or about 6% of both the average monthly fuel consumption and carbon-dioxide emissions from all light-duty vehicles in the fleet (FHWA, 2014 3 ). The improvements in vehicle fuel economy over the past seven years are noteworthy, especially in relation to the improvements during the preceding eight decades. As a consequence, we have seen sizeable savings in fuel consumed and emissions produced. The most recent fuel economy (CAFE) standards, issued in 2012 (NHTSA, 2012), will continue to accelerate this progress. 3 The FHWA data are for 2012 the latest year available. 4

References David, S.C., Diegel, S.W., and Boundy, R.G. (2014). Transportation energy data book: Edition 33. Available at: http://cta.ornl.gov/data. EIA [Energy Information Administration]. 2014. Fuel emission coefficients; Table 2: Carbon dioxide emission factors for transportation fuels. Available at: http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/1605/coefficients.html#tbl2. FHWA [Federal Highway Administration]. 2014. Highway statistics 2012; Annual vehicle distance traveled in miles and related data 2012. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/statistics/2012/vm1.cfm. NHTSA [National Highway Traffic Safety Administration]. 2012. 2017 and later model year light-duty vehicle greenhouse gas emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards. Available at: http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/cafe/2017-25_cafe_final_rule.pdf. Sivak, M. and Schoettle, B. (2012a). Benefits of recent improvements in vehicle fuel economy on overall fuel consumption and emissions (Technical Report No. UMTRI-2012-27). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. Sivak, M. and Schoettle, B. (2012b). Eco-driving: Strategic, tactical, and operational decisions of the driver that influence vehicle fuel economy. Transport Policy, 22, 66-69. Sivak, M. and Schoettle, B. (2014). Average sales-weighted fuel economy of purchased new vehicles [updated monthly]. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute. Available at: http://www.umich.edu/~umtriswt/edi_sales-weighted-mpg.html. 5