The post Huafei Shi appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

The post Aaron Isenstadt appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

The post Carolina Rodrigues Poupinha appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

This comparison of international best practices shows there are many opportunities for encouraging MAC innovation in China. Among the recommendations for conventional vehicles: Incorporate testing of MAC systems into greenhouse gas emission standards and establish a credit management system to encourage innovation. Among the recommendations for battery electric vehicles: Develop energy-consumption limits and include the results of heating and cooling tests in electric vehicle efficiency labels.

The post Reducing emissions from mobile air conditioning: Policy opportunities for China appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

This proposal is a critical complement to fiscal incentives. It establishes a clearly defined timeline for automakers to ramp up EV production and sales and allows other supporting businesses – from automotive suppliers and battery manufacturers to charging infrastructure companies and electric utilities – to invest with confidence. And with wait times for EV purchases hovering around 6 months, consumers are clearly demanding more and faster EV production.

When it’s finalized and implemented, EPA’s regulation will put the United States on par with other leading countries and jurisdictions in terms of growing EV sales. In 2022, 7% of new U.S. light-duty vehicle sales were electric, trailing California (20%), the European Union (23%), the United Kingdom (23%) and China (28%). EPA’s proposal will help the U.S. catch up to global leaders in terms of EV targets as early as in 2027.

This graph shows historical EV sales shares (solid lines) and regulatory targets (dotted lines) for light-duty vehicles. Not shown, the 46% EV sales share EPA projects for medium-duty vehicles in 2032 is more ambitious than the 40% required for this category in California’s Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) rule, a reflection of how much the market and technology has advanced since the ACT was passed in 2020.

Figure: Historical (solid lines) and regulatory targets (dotted lines) for EVs in different jurisdictions. (Note: Data for China and the United States is from Marklines. Data for Europe is from the European Environmental Agency (EEA) and Dataforce. Data for China and Europe only includes passenger cars, while data for the United States also includes light trucks.)

These targets line up with announcements from auto manufacturers. Ford, GM, Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and others have committed to selling 100% EVs globally or in leading markets by 2035. Stellantis (which includes Chrysler) and Volkswagen have set more ambitious goals of 100% and 70%, respectively, for their European sales in 2030 compared to the 50% EV sales target they set for the U.S. That shows automakers can deliver more to the U.S. market – if we put the right policies in place.

Critically, major automakers are collectively investing over $1.2 trillion in EVs globally. EPA’s proposed rule will help bring a significant share of that investment to the United States.

EPA’s proposal and goals from automakers are realistic and possible because of technological advancements in EVs and batteries, their underlying economics, and impactful policy incentives. We already know that consumers will save money over the first ownership period of an electric passenger car, thanks to lower fueling and maintenance costs. In terms of vehicle cost – and by extension price at the dealership – we expect light-duty EV manufacturing costs to fall below those of their gasoline counterparts for cars, crossovers, SUVs, and pick-ups starting as soon as next year for electric cars with 150-mile range and for all electric passenger vehicles with ranges up to 400 miles by 2030 except for pickups (2033), even without incentives.

The IRA will boost consumer savings even more. Although the U.S. Treasury Department’s new guidance restricts the $3,750-7,500 tax credit to 14 models, compared to 91 EV models available on the market, those 14 account for most EV sales. Bloomberg New Energy Finance reported that 65% of all U.S. EV sales would qualify for at least part of the tax credit based on 2022 sales data.

Admittedly, there is significant uncertainty as to the number of EV that will be eligible for all or part of the $7,500 tax credits over the next decade. Accounting for this uncertainty, we forecast that new EV sales could reach 56-67% in the U.S. by 2032 based on consumer demand supported by EV tax credits and state adoption of supporting policies. This means that the IRA could get us most – or all – of the way to the EPA’s proposed EV sales target that matches the high end of our forecast as 67%.

Since there are more than enough minerals available for a global transition to EVs, the challenge is how to scale up investments into mining and battery production within this decade. With the IRA’s Advanced Manufacturing Production Tax Credit and the domestic content provisions in the Clean Vehicle Tax Credit, the U.S. directly incentivizes mining, recycling, and battery production on U.S. soil, and further supports establishing resilient material supply chains from friendly countries. The manufacturing subsidy of $45/kWh cuts about one third of total battery costs (global average of $151 in 2022), making battery production in the U.S. even cheaper than in China.

This support showed an immediate effect. In response to the IRA, we saw a significant uptick by more than one-third in announced plans for battery production facilities, catching up with Europe. Longer-term forecasts now indicate U.S. battery production capacity at 1 TWh by 2030, within striking distance of forecasted battery demand of 1.2 TWh taking the proposed EPA standards into account.

So why are EPA’s standards necessary if the IRA might already be enough to deliver significant EV growth?

Because the IRA is a supporting mechanism, not a roadmap. We’ve seen that unless they’re held to meaningful standards, automakers dial back on their commitments to EVs. For example, GM committed to deliver 23 EV models in 2023. That number is now down to eight.

More than that, clear targets and sustained commitments will help build out the charging infrastructure needed to support accelerated electrification. Other countries have met that challenge, and so can we. Norway hit nearly 80% EV sales in 2022 with one public charger for every 26 EVs. Significant resources are already being dedicated to charging, including the $7.5 billion allocation from the IIJA as well as several billions of dollars in power utility and private sector investment. For example, British Petroleum announced plans to invest $1 billion in EV charging in the U.S. by 2030. Automakers are investing too – GM, working with its dealers, aims to install up to 40,000 public charging stations across the U.S. and Canada. Globally, Bloomberg New Energy Finance expects $100 billion to be spent to grow charging infrastructure in the next 3 years alone.

Lastly, EPA’s proposal is what we need to get closer to meeting our climate goals. In an earlier analysis, we found that nearly 70% EV sales share would be needed by 2030 (along with improvements in gasoline vehicle efficiency) to reach the goals we set in the Paris Climate Agreement. EPA’s proposal moves us close to that.

Finalizing the regulation would address climate change, respond to EV market demand, and enhance U.S. global competitiveness while establishing the EV roadmap that automakers, suppliers, charging companies, and utilities need to make needed investments with confidence. That’s why the EPA should move ahead as quickly as it can to finalize and implement its proposal.

The post Infrastructure and supply chains won’t hold up EPA’s proposed light and medium-duty vehicle standards appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

The analysis of the new datasets presents strong evidence that real-world electric drive share is far below the utility factor label rating. Specifically, the analysis finds that real-world electric drive share may be 26%–56% lower and real-world fuel consumption may be 42%–67% higher than assumed within EPA’s labeling program for light duty vehicles.

More data collection could provide greater precision and clarity regarding the deviation of real-world electric drive share and what is assumed in EPA labeling. As PHEVs are still a small share of the existing fleet and new sales, all data sources to date may be inherently biased towards early adopters. In addition, all datasets examined suffer from some degree of self-selection bias, and potentially other confounding factors. At a minimum, the trends in the new PHEV data point to the need for closer inspection and broader investigation into PHEV usage to inform regulatory treatment.

The post Real world usage of plug-in hybrid vehicles in the United States appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

The post Real world usage of plug-in hybrid vehicles in the U.S. appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

本研究评估了2012-2021年间重型车节能减排相关政策的有效性，旨在为未来中国制定更进一步的车辆二氧化碳排放法规提供参考。从关键属性（整备质量、发动机功率等参数）、不同类别重型车的燃料消耗（折算为对应的二氧化碳排放）以及尾气中的氮氧化物排放等角度出发，本研究探讨了重型车辆在过去十年间的发展历程（图1）。本研究涉及车型主要包括城市客车、城际客车、自卸汽车、中型载货汽车、重型载货汽车和半挂牵引车。

图1. 2012-2021年间柴油重型车主要指标变化情况，由于2012年CO2结果可靠性较 差，故CO₂排放趋势线自2013年起绘制

1. 考虑将工程类专用车整体或部分纳入下一阶段的油耗标准中，以便充分覆盖高能耗车辆类别。工程类专用车销量约占2021年总体重型车市场份额的10%，现阶段该类车型尚不在油耗法规的监管范围之内，因此有必要尽快将其纳入监管体系。
2. 应制定更全面综合的污染物和温室气体排放标准以更好地指导重型车的发展。目前，中国还没有从发动机和整车层面直接监管重型车辆的温室气体排放。从当前的油耗标准转向温室气体排放标准，将涵盖如一氧化二氮、甲烷等更多的温室气体，这有利于公众了解重型车辆的实际温室气体排放情况。此外，一个全面的温室气体排放标准将为重型车行业通过技术组合实现污染物和温室气体协同减排提供长期的指导方向。中国在2021年启动了全国碳交易市场，并正在纳入更多行业。完善针对重型车的温室气体排放法规也有助于为未来道路交通行业纳入碳交易市场奠定坚实的基础。
3. 重型车的电动化转型是未来工作的重点，但在当前阶段，仍可适当鼓励清洁柴油发动机的技术发展，从而使重型车更为顺利且经济地向电动化转型。中国正采用“双积分“政策等手段推广电动乘用车进入千家万户；对于重型车，我们建议在未来的商用车积分政策中能对提升发动机燃油效率和性能做出适度的激励，以客观反应车企在该领域所做出的努力。

The post 中国重型车节能减排进程： 2012-2021年间二氧化碳与污染物排放趋势 appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

This study evaluates the effectiveness of policies in curtailing emissions from heavy-duty vehicles over the 2012-2021 period and lays a foundation for developing future regulations for direct control of CO₂. The analysis explores the development of heavy-duty vehicles from the perspective of key attributes (curb weight, engine power, and others), fuel consumption/CO₂ emissions for various HDV segments, and NO_X emissions from tailpipes. (Figure 1.) It focuses on six vehicle segments: city buses, coaches, dump trucks, medium straight trucks, heavy straight trucks, and tractor trailers.

Figure 1. Percent change in key measures of diesel HDVs, 2012-2021

The findings in this study yield several policy recommendations:

1. Utility vehicles, which accounted for about 10% of the total market share in 2021, should be fully included in the next stage of fuel consumption standards. Currently they are not.
2. A more inclusive and integrated emission control regulation for both pollutant and GHG emissions should be enacted to guide development of heavy-duty vehicles. Currently, China does not directly control GHG emissions at the engine or vehicle level. A switch from the current fuel consumption standard to regulation of GHG emissions will cover more greenhouse gases such as N₂O, CH₄, etc. In addition, a complete GHG emission standard will allow the HDV industry to balance control of pollutants and GHG emissions under various technology combinations. Applying complete GHG emission regulations on HDVs would also help lay a solid foundation for future work on carbon trading and climate protection.
3. Electrification is key to decarbonizing road transport, although clean diesel engine technologies should still be encouraged. We encourage further development of clean diesel engine technologies as a strategy for making the transition to full electrification smoother and more affordable. In addition, just as China applied a dual-credit policy to promote production of electric passenger vehicles, we recommend that the upcoming credit policy on HDVs also highlight the effort to improve engine fuel efficiency and performance.

The post The evolution of heavy-duty vehicles in China: A retrospective evaluation of CO2 and pollutant emissions from 2012 to 2021 appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

As illustrated in figure below, most architectures have a direct manufacturing cost (DMC) cost of about ₹2,000/gCO₂/km in 2025. However, P2 coaxial and P3 systems are estimated to cost less, about ₹1,500/gCO₂/km, and these can do more than most others to reduce the fleet average CO₂ emissions. For regulators, this is evidence that more cost-effective solutions are available than the P0 systems typically being used on first-generation 48V hybrid systems, and indeed, the market share of P2 and P3 systems is expected to increase as sales volumes rise and cover the cost of redesigning the power train. Results also show that systems offer the best cost-to-benefit ratio with lower electric motor power, generally from 4 kW to 16 kW. Beyond the reduced emissions, a 48V hybrid system will also help manufacturers meet the ever-increasing electrical demands from new equipment such as electric compressors, catalytic converter heating, and active chassis systems.

Figure. DMC cost of 48V hybrids with respect to total CO2 reduction potential for a gasoline vehicle in 2025 on the NEDC cycle. All systems use 15 kW motors except micro and advanced micro hybrids.

Note that there is still no penalty imposed on manufacturers in India if CO₂ emissions limits are exceeded. Based on the analysis presented here, it would be effective to establish a penalty of ₹2,500/gCO₂/km for passenger cars. This allows for the reality that some manufacturers that do not enjoy large economies of scale might have somewhat higher DMC costs, and a penalty of ₹2,500/gCO₂/km would mean that using 48V hybrid technologies in vehicles will be cheaper than paying the fine.

The post The potential of 48V hybrids in India’s light-duty vehicle market appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.