« Chrysler and Nissan Expand Product Alliance | Main | Mitsubishi to Show i MiEV at Beijing Show »
SAE Panel: Global Auto Industry Entering Period of Prolonged and Fundamental Change
15 April 2008
A panel comprising leaders from government, academia and the auto industry at the SAE 2008 World Congress yesterday said that the auto industry, while a growth industry globally, is being forced by the challenges of energy availability and climate change into a period of fundamental transformation that will likely endure for decades.
Although the broad strokes of the powertrain and energy pathways that will emerge as dominant from this change can be identified (i.e., move away from oil and toward electrification), the details are still very uncertain. That very uncertainty and the need for engineering creativity is a major opportunity, said Margot T. Oge, Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ) at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), who gave a keynote address opening the panel on powertrain diversity.
This is a challenging and dynamic time for the auto industry. Clearly, the political, economic and regulatory landscape in which you operate in the US and globally has changed dramatically over the past year. The reality is that the pace of change will not be letting up anytime soon.
—Margot Oge
Oge said that climate change and energy insecurity were driving the change in the transportation sector.
The best scientists have determined that we, globally, by 2050 must reduce greenhouse gases by 50-80% of the 2000 levels. I asked [OTAQ] staff to determine what that means for personal vehicles, if the personal vehicle sector of industry was to do its fair share for 2050 reduction. The analysis that we undertook was a more modest reduction [than the 50-80%]—20% by 2050 from 2000 levels.
It would mean 75 mpg and greenhouse gas equivalent vehicles. That means that sometime in the 2030s, we need to begin introducing vehicles meeting that kind of fuel efficiency performance.
We need a united and coordinated strategy between government, industry and consumers. It requires a technology revolution, and presents an enormous opportunity. I believe that the transportation sector can reclaim the mantle of the country’s economic growth engine over the next decade if the right investments are made. It’s up to you to make the investments and grow the revolution.
—Margot Oge
Oge said that the EPA is developing a package of regulatory proposals to handle greenhouse gases from vehicles and from transportation fuel.
Our analysis shows that even with conservative assumptions—i.e., assuming no changes in power or weight, no changes in the makeup of the fleet of car vs SUVs—the industry should be able to achieve reductions equivalent to 35 mpg by 2018.
—Margot Oge
While the heart of the annual World Congress event produced by SAE International is the hundreds of technical papers presented by engineers, the event also showcases high-level issue affecting the global automotive industry in three executive-level business theatres. Oge’s panel, with John B. Heywood, Sun Jae Prof of Mechanical Engineering, MIT; Yuji Kawaguchi, Executive Chief Engineer, Honda R&D Co., Ltd.; J. Gary Smyth, Dir, R&D Powertrain Systems Research, General Motors Corp.; and Olaf Weber, VP, Engine Technology, BorgWarner Inc. speaking on powertrain diversity, was part of the “AVL Technology Leadership Theater”.
Kawaguchi, Smyth and Weber all emphasized the limiting factors of greenhouse gas emissions and the balance between the supply and demand of petroleum in their future powertrain work. Kawaguchi said that while Honda sees the fuel cell as the ultimate power train, the company also sees no single solution to the problems. Smyth, while hitting on the same points of petroleum dependency and greenhouse gases, consistently returned to the urgency required.
Oil consumption is not sustainable right now, plus, we’re compounding the problem with growth. We [the auto industry] are the major contributor, we are the problem, we have to solve this problem. What we’ve been doing over the last 15 years is not what we’re going to be doing over the next 15. I want to stress the urgency with which we have to execute this.
—J. Gary Smyth
Heywood noted that while vehicle technologies continue to get better all the time, the application of those improvements needs to change—i.e., not just flow into increased power and size as has happened over the past years.
It is likely that vehicle types will diversify, broadening our concepts of the recent past. Size and weight may well change. There will be diversity in where we apply these powertrains.
—John Heywood
While plug-in hybrids certainly reduce petroleum consumption, they don’t do much for greenhouse gas emissions unless there are clean ways of generating electricity, Heywood noted.
What I sense we have not done is sort out the long-term vision to brining electricity into the transportation arena and bringing in hydrogen. What is our vision for clean green electricity and clean green hydrogen? It is not developed yet.
Current challenges require doing many things simultaneously. We need to understand where we are going...and I don’t think we adequately do yet.
—John Heywood
April 15, 2008 in Climate Change, Fuel Efficiency, Market Background, Sustainability | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22062/28117846
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference SAE Panel: Global Auto Industry Entering Period of Prolonged and Fundamental Change:
Comments
So is Ms. Oge - who works for the EPA - referring to MPG as measured by her own agency for the purpose of showroom stickers as of 2008 or, to MPG as computed for CAFE and the gas guzzler tax? The former includes the aggressive US06 drive cycle, the latter is the pre-2008 formula that underestimates current real-world driving behavior and also includes the E85 loophole.
Stating a number without clarifying the metric it applies to merely causes confusion. Especially if that number is supposed to be achieved two years ahead of the new CAFE mandate that Congress has set.
Posted by: Rafael Seidl | Apr 15, 2008 6:29:12 AM
The auto industry is totally dependent on the oil industry. Anyone in business will tell you this is not healthy for the auto industry. We can get 75 mpg now. People do not do things unless they have to. If there is less oil available, then they have to.
Posted by: sjc | Apr 15, 2008 7:41:58 AM
One practical solution that is easy to do and cheap too to help fuel economy and reduce pollution and that none or the auto makers or truck maker do at all is hydrogen insertion. This process add 200$-400$ to the cost of the vehicule. Only few small compagnies do it with positive results but it can be scale up to higher percentage of hydrogen if they find a way to reprogram the engine management unit for diesel or gasoline.
http://www.hypowerfuel.com/home.html
Posted by: a.b | Apr 15, 2008 7:56:38 AM
sjc:
(people do not do things unless they have to).
Did you mean buying vehicles with lower fuel consumption even if the initial cost is more?
Most of us do need a push in the back to change our ways. Resistance to change is an acquired human behavior.
Most of us will move to more efficient vehicles when we cannot afford to either buy or use larger gas guzzlers. This can be done thru different ways:
1) deep and prolonged economic depression. People with a lot less $$ will buy much smaller lower cost cars which are cheaper to operate.
2) much higher price for fossil and agrofuel.
3) much higher registration fees for larger vehicles.
4) much high food prices provoked by higher oil price and by diverting food stocks for the production of agrofuels. When a higher percentage of the disposable earnings have to be used to buy food, there is less for gas guzzlers. This phenomena has already spread to most countries since mid-2007 and will get a lot deeper in 2008 and 2009.
5) New legislations, taxing oversized vehicles and actively promoting smaller more efficient smaller vehicles with substantial subsidies, up to $10K when you scrap a gas guzzler and replace it with a highly efficient, very low fuel consumption unit.
6) Do like London, England and ban monsters from down town areas or set up a high enough proportional daily access fee for all vehicles producing CO2 above 120 gm/Km etc
No one change may be enough to convince all the current oversized vehicle owners to modify their behavior, but half a dozen changes may do it.
Politicians, leaders, manufacturers and buyers have a part to play.
Posted by: Harvey D | Apr 15, 2008 8:39:24 AM
75 MPG greenhouse gas equvilant by 2050 certianly feasable. With PHEV's increasingly running on renewable electricity and cellulosic ethanol/biodiesl/hydrogen etc, combined with a light frame (likely carbon fiber/thermoplastics), 75 MPG doesn't seem quite so daunting. The prius already gets just under 50 mpg, and the prius doesn't even use lighweight materials.
Huge advancements can also be made in the accessories of vehicles. Low RR tires, more efficent heating and cooling systems, etc also have a lot of room to improve, even if it's a relatively small part of the issue and is usually ignored.
Posted by: Dan A | Apr 15, 2008 9:52:43 AM
I do not think it will take an economic depression to cause change. I think we will face higher gasoline prices and maybe some shortages in the coming years. This may be enough to get people to change. By people I meant in the auto industry as well. If sales fall for less efficient vehicles, then they might change. If everything is doing well, then why change?
GM and Ford were selling lot of trucks and SUVs from 1995-2005 but now they are changing.
The problem with reacting and not projecting is you are always behind the curve. Decision makers delay decisions and then urge everyone in the company to scramble when change is required. With good management, they can see this coming and plan. It takes a while to design and engineer a good car, it does not happen overnight.
The U.S. automakers could see this coming after the election in 2000. If they thought that more low cost oil was coming, they misread the situation entirely. That is not a sustainable rational position and the Japanese have known this for decades. Efficiency is its own reward. Some in the U.S. may think that you only need to consider efficiency when you are forced to. This is reactive behavior and does not reflect much thought at all.
Posted by: sjc | Apr 15, 2008 10:55:45 AM
Car companies noticed they have a problem. There is not quite enough oil for running an expanded car fleet, and people are getting interested in alternatives.
Really the problem is much worse. The reintroduction of fossil fuel combustion products into our biosphere is beginning a global extinction.
After an extinction event, Nature takes 10 million years for biological richness to redevelop.
~ 440 million years ago, 85 % of marine animal species were wiped out in earth's first known mass extinction.
~ 367 million years ago, 70 percent of marine invertebrates went extinct.
~ 245 million years ago, 95 percent of animals went extinct.
~ 208 million years ago, another mass extinction,
~ 65 million years ago, three quarters of all species including the dinosaurs were eliminated.
Today we are CAUSING a mass extinction that is faster and far worse than any of these past extinction events. Many species keep us alive. They purify water, fix nitrogen, recycle nutrients and waste, absorb carbon dioxide, pollinate crops, and carry out photosynthesis, which produces the oxygen we breathe. We cannot survive without other species. It's little things that make our world habitat one we can live in, things like soil microbes.
There is only one available sustainable future.
~ make the switch to electric cars (not hydrogen cars)
~ make the switch to renewable & non-polluting electricity production.
~ make the switch to controlled/reduced population size.
~ make the switch to preserve natural habitat, forests, and wildlife.
~ make the switch to cleaning up the environment, not polluting it.
The future is either one of richness for all, or death for all. The choice is ours. Nature is quite content to start over a 7th time.
Posted by: John Taylor | Apr 16, 2008 7:33:29 AM
The premise, that the vehicles will be the same size and weight, if i read the thing correctly, is foolish.
Vehicles will scale down in both metrics, with a sizeable number of town cars, probable all electric, that will substantially take the averages down.
I do agree with all those who KNOW that we won't do it for the planet, we'll do it because energy costs are way high, and other costs will also be reducing our budgets.
Thus, high energy prices are the best thing to happen to us, and the planet, in a long time.
Re. changes and challenges in the auto industry, yes. A tremendously exciting time for an industry used to moving very conservatively, very carefully, very slowly. We'll see how the big auto companies, home grown and foreign, handle it, and whether some newbies will arrive at the table ready to take a big piece of the cake.
Posted by: | Apr 18, 2008 8:33:57 PM
John, those were good thoughts, but it isn't going to happen:
~ make the switch to electric cars (not hydrogen cars)
** No, Not for at least 25 years. Fossil fuel prices will be held down just enough to throttle alternative energy- Europe has tolerated high prices for decades.
~ make the switch to controlled/reduced population size.
**No, Not going to happen, Because a major world religion continues to ban the only form of birth control which allows pleasure of intimacy at peoples' choosing.
But returning to the topic:
Global Auto Industry Entering Period of Prolonged and Fundamental Change: It is happening now; Better fuel economy, lower emissions and 100% recycling of material. That's all Manufacturers need to do for the next 25 years.
Posted by: tonychill | Apr 18, 2008 9:55:13 PM
I got 80 MPG years ago and loved it. You can too. A Honda Nighthawk 250CC motorcycle will average 80MPG.
The auto industry not only can but does build high MPG cars. Those are the small cars people had walked past when they came in to buy the big SUV they hoped would impress their friends.
Half the new cars sold in Europe burn diesel fuel. Diesels get 40% better MPG than gasoline and the new technology diesels are clean as gasoline engines. It is time to stop blaming the auto industry. We hold the blame.
Posted by: Larry | Apr 19, 2008 8:29:14 AM
Larry:
- A large SUV to impress their friends - may be (I hope) a going away fad as it happened to cigars and cigarettes smoking 20 years ago.
I agree with you that it will not be easy to deprogram 200-250 million car buyers and convince the majority that a 3-ton monster will not transport them from A to Z any faster than a light weight 1 to 1 1/2 ton PHEV or BEV.
Vehicles, of all sizes, can be designed to be more aerodynamic, lighter, quieter and use less energy per miles/Km without reducing speed capability, accelleration, comfort and driving pleasure.
Posted by: Harvey D | Apr 19, 2008 8:59:26 AM
