Completed
Written to inform The United States Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic and Safety Adnminstration (NHTSA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and greenhouse gas emission (GHG) standards, this report is a technical evaluation of costs, benefits, and implementation issues of fuel reduction technologies for next-generation light-duty vehicles. It estimates the cost, potential efficiency improvements, and barriers to commercial deployment of technologies that might be employed from 2020 to 2030. This report describes these promising technologies and makes recommendations for their inclusion on the list of technologies applicable for the 2017-2025 CAFE standards.
Featured publication
Consensus
·2015
The light-duty vehicle fleet is expected to undergo substantial technological changes over the next several decades. New powertrain designs, alternative fuels, advanced materials and significant changes to the vehicle body are being driven by increasingly stringent fuel economy and greenhouse gas em...
View details
Description
The committee formed to carry out this study will continue the work of the National Research Council for the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in the assessment of technologies and programs for improving the fuel economy of light-duty vehicles. While the committee will need to consider the development and deployment of fuel economy technologies up to 2019, it is tasked with providing updated estimates of the cost, potential efficiency improvements, and barriers to commercial deployment of technologies that might be employed from 2020 to 2030. It will reassess the technologies analyzed in NRC reports, Impact and Effectiveness of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards (2002) and Assessment Fuel Economy Technologies for Improving Light-Duty Vehicle Fuel Economy (2011). It will reflect developments since these reports were issued and investigate any new technologies that may become important by 2030. The committee will also examine and make recommendations for improvements to the CAFE program. In particular, the committee shall:
1. Broadly assess the methodologies and programs used to develop standards for passenger cars and light trucks under current and proposed CAFE programs and make recommendations for future programs, including recommendations concerning the attributes used for the standards, the structure of the program necessary with the introduction of alternative technology vehicles, and the assumptions and methods used in analysis of proposed regulatory activities.
2. Examine the potential for reducing mass by up to 20%, including: technologies such as materials substitution; downsizing of existing vehicle design, systems or components; and the use of new vehicle, structural, system or component designs or other mass substitution/weight reduction categories. The committee shall consider the implications of such weight reductions on vehicle safety.
3. Examine other vehicle technologies, including aerodynamic drag reduction, improved efficiency of accessories such as alternators and air conditioners, and conversion of engine-driven equipment to electricity (e.g. power steering, fans, and water pumps).
4. Examine electric powertrain technologies, including the capabilities of hybrids, plug-in hybrids, battery electric vehicles, and fuel cell vehicles. The committee shall include an examination of the cost, performance, range, durability (including performance degradation over time) and safety issues related to lithium ion and other possible advanced energy storage technologies that are necessary to enable plug-in and full function electric vehicles.
5. Examine advanced gasoline and diesel engine technologies that will increase fuel economy. Advanced gasoline technologies to be examined include the high Brake Mean Effective Pressure (BMEP) and Homogeneous-Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI) engines. For diesel engines, include the capabilities of emissions control systems on advanced diesel engines to meet current and possible future criteria pollutant emissions standards, impacts on fuel consumption of emissions control systems, and the fuel characteristics needed to enable low emissions diesel technologies. For all these engines, the committee shall consider their ability to meet load demands; cost; the need for after-treatment; and market acceptability of those engines.
6. Assess the assumptions, concepts, and methods used in estimating the costs of fuel economy improvements. In particular, consider the degree to which time-based cost learning for well-developed existing technologies and/or volume-based cost learning for newer technologies should apply, what the time or volume basis should be, and whether other methods of applying cost learning are practical. Also, examine the differences between Retail Price Equivalent (RPE) and Indirect Cost Multipliers (ICM), determine appropriate values for each, and recommend which method is preferable to use for estimating indirect costs of technologies.
7. Provide an analysis of how fuel economy technologies may be practically integrated into automotive manufacturing processes and how such technologies are likely to be applied in response to requirements for improving fuel economy. Include an analysis of how technology implementation is likely to impact capital equipment and engineering, research and development (ER&D) costs, and at what rate such technologies might be implemented to meet increases in fuel economy standards.
8. Examine the costs and benefits in vehicle value that could accompany the introduction of advanced vehicle technologies. Consider the total cost of operation of these vehicles by examining potential cost impacts on fuel, maintenance, insurance, registration fees, and other factors. In addition, assess the impact on consumers of factors that may change how they use their vehicles, such as reduction of driving range and loss of utility.
9. Examine test procedures and calculations used to determine fuel economy values for purposes of determining compliance with CAFE standards, identifying potential changes to make those procedures and calculations more relevant to and neutral in their treatment of technologies considered by the committee. In considering test procedures, the committee should examine the fuel saving potential for technologies such as adaptive cruise control, real-time traffic alerts, tire pressure sensors, and real-time fuel economy information. This analysis shall evaluate the possibility of incorporating the savings produced by such technologies within CAFE test procedures.
10. To the extent possible, the committee will address uncertainties and perform sensitivity analyses of its cost estimates and provide guidance to NHTSA on improving its uncertainty analyses given the relatively long time frame for these future estimates.
11. Write a final report documenting its conclusions and recommendations.
Contributors
Committee
Chair
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Note: there has been a change in committee membership with the appointment of Clemens Schmitz-Justen effective June 1, 2012.
Note: Disclosure of Conflict of Interest: Chris Baillie-May 15, 2013
In accordance with Section 15 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the "Academy shall make its best efforts to ensure that no individual appointed to serve on [a] committee has a conflict of interest that is relevant to the functions to be performed, unless such conflict is promptly and publicly disclosed and the Academy determines that the conflict is unavoidable." A conflict of interest refers to an interest, ordinarily financial, of an individual that could be directly affected by the work of the committee. As specified in the Academy's policy and procedures (http://www.nationalacademies.org/coi/index.html), an objective determination is made for each provisionally appointed committee member whether or not a conflict of interest exists given the facts of the individual's financial and other interests and the task being undertaken by the committee. A determination of a conflict of interest for an individual is not an assessment of that individual's actual behavior or character or ability to act objectively despite the conflicting interest.
We have concluded that for this committee to accomplish the tasks for which it was established its membership must include, among others, at least one person who possesses both broad industry-wide technical expertise in light-duty vehicle transmissions, and corresponding expertise in evaluating fuel economy benefits from multiple technologies.
To meet the need for this expertise and experience, Mr. Chris Baillie, an employee of GE Aircraft Engines, was appointed to the committee. Following Mr. Baillie’s appointment, he accepted a new position as Supervisor of Transmission and Driveline Design at FEV Inc., an internationally recognized powertrain and vehicle engineering company that supplies the global transportation industry (FEV). Mr. Baillie’s continued service on the committee is critical even though we have concluded that he has a conflict of interest because his new employer, FEV, has consulting relationships with vehicle manufacturers and government agencies.
As his biographical summary makes clear, Mr. Baillie’s technical and design experience covers both the technical and cost aspects of vehicle transmissions, and encompasses the full range of current and new transmission technologies, including transmissions for conventional vehicles as well as hybrid electric vehicles. Mr. Baillie also brings expertise in the estimation of fuel economy benefits from combining transmission and engine technologies. This expertise includes the modeling of fuel economy benefits using complex full system simulation models and aggregate lumped parameter models. We believe that Mr. Baillie can continue to serve effectively as a member of the committee, and that the committee can produce an objective report, taking into account the composition of the committee, the work to be performed, and the procedures to be followed in completing the work.
After an extensive search, we have been unable to find another individual who does not have a similar conflict of interest and who also has a comparable combination of specialized technical knowledge and corresponding expertise in evaluating the cost and fuel consumption aspects of transmission technologies. Therefore, we have concluded that the potential conflict described above is unavoidable.
Sponsors
Department of Transportation
Staff
John Holmes
Lead