Technologies and Approaches to Reducing the Fuel Consumption of Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles (2010) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 Costs and Benefits of Integrating Fuel Consumption Reduction Technologies into Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles
6 Costs and Benefits of Integrating Fuel Consumption Reduction Technologies into Medium- and Heavy-Duty Vehicles
Pages 131-158
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 131... ...
technology may be better than what would be achieved by The percent fuel consumption reduction (% FCR)
|
From page 132... ...
Some technologies are broad enough to be applied to electrification all classes: tires and wheels, weight reduction, transmission Overnight idle X reduction and driveline, engine efficiency, and hybridization. Others Idle reduction X X X X are more specific to the class of vehicle, such as replacing Engine efficiency X X X X X X gasoline engines with diesel engines (dieselization)
|
From page 133... ...
• Improvement in diesel engine thermal efficiency • Improvement in gasoline engine thermal efficiency Tractor Trailer • Aerodynamics, especially on tractor-trailer applica tions T his category of vehicles includes Class 8 tractors • Reduced rolling resistance equipped with so-called fifth wheels for hitching to one • Weight reduction or more trailers. The baseline vehicle for fuel consump tion estimates is an older-generation aerodynamic tractor (drag coefficient, Cd = 0.63 to 0.64)
|
From page 134... ...
The use of hybrid power Rolling Resistance. Widespread implementation of wide- trains in Class 8 tractor trailers has been assigned a low priorbase single tires with low rolling resistance is expected to ity in the long-haul market, by manufacturers, due to the typibe feasible in 2015 to 2020 for both tractors and trailers.
|
From page 135... ...
(lb) Aerodynamics Improved SmartWay tractor + three aerodynamic trailers 11.5 12,000 1,043 750 Engine Advanced 11-15L diesel with bottoming cycle 20 23,000 1,150 800 Tire Improved WBS on tractor + three trailers 11 3,600 327 −400 Transmission and driveline AMT, reduced driveline friction 7 5,800 829 80 Hybrid Mild parallel hybrid with idle reduction 10 25,000 2,500 400 Management and coaching 60 mph speed limit; predictive cruise control with telematics; driver training 6 1,700 283 -- Idle reduction Included with hybrid system -- -- -- -- Total added weight Added components −1 -- -- +2,030 Weight reduction Material substitution -- 2,500 lb.
|
From page 136... ...
. While in October 2009 this differential was only 5 percent,4 it may and added weight are justified by the potential fuel savings of around 6 percent for tractors that do not include sleeper shrink when product demand rises with an improving econoperation and 10 percent for sleepers.
|
From page 137... ...
. tires can give a fuel consumption reduction of 2 to 4 percent Selection of a diesel or gasoline engine from the develop- at a cost of $450 per rear axle (TIAX, 2009)
|
From page 138... ...
This early penetration will be helped by EPA grants6 development costs and incur the greatest price increases and of $50 million for deploying hybrids, which provide federal with lack of success would impose the greatest loss of fuel tax credits for incremental costs as follows: 20 percent tax consumption reduction opportunity for this sector. The EPA credit for 30 to 40 percent fuel reduction, 30 percent tax hybrid grant program described previously is an example credit for 40 to 50 percent fuel reduction, and 40 percent tax of such an incentive.
|
From page 139... ...
(lb) Aerodynamics Aero cab, skirts, round corners 6 3,250 542 300 Engine Advanced 6-9L Engine 14 13,000 929 400 Tire Improved low rolling resistance duals 3 300 100 -- Transmission and driveline 8-speed automatic transmission, reduced driveline friction, aggressive shift logic 4 1,800 450 -- Hybrid Parallel hybrid 30 20,000 667 400 Management and coaching -- -- -- -- -- Idle reduction -- -- -- -- -- Total added weight Added components −4.4 -- -- +1,100 Weight reduction Material substitution -- 1,000 lb 4 4,770 1,193 −1,000 Total 2015-2020 package 47.1 43,120 915 +100 NOTE: For each vehicle class, the fuel consumption benefit of the combined technology packages is calculated as follows: [% FCR package = 100 [1 – (1 – {% FCRtech1/100 })
|
From page 140... ...
If a diesel engine were used instead of a transmission with reduced driveline friction that incorporates spark ignition engine, fuel consumption could be reduced a shift logic aimed at minimizing fuel consumption could about 19 to 24 percent over the base engine at a cost of appotentially reduce fuel consumption by approximately 7 proximately $8,000 to $9,000. percent with an incremental cost on the order of $1,000 As one of the tasks in the committee's contract with TIAX, (TIAX, 2009)
|
From page 141... ...
Aerodynamics -- 3 100 33 -- Engine 5-8 L turbocharged downsized s-GDI 23 4,000 174 -- gasoline engine Tire Improved low rolling resistance 2 10 5 -- Transmission and driveline 8-speed automatic transmission, reduced 7.50 1,000 133 -- driveline friction, aggressive shift logic Hybrid Parallel hybrid 18 9,000 500 300 Management and coaching -- -- -- -- -- Idle reduction -- -- -- -- -- Total added weight Added components –0.75 -- -- +300 Weight reduction 3% -- ~300 lb 0.75 600 800 –300 Total 2015-2020 package 44.5 14,710 331 0 NOTE: For each vehicle class, the fuel consumption benefit of the combined technology packages is calculated as follows: [% FCR package = 100 [1 – (1 – {% FCRtech1 /100 }) (1 – {% FCR tech2/100})
|
From page 142... ...
Aerodynamics -- -- -- -- -- Engine Advanced 11-15 L engine 14 14,800 1,057 500 Tire Improved low-rolling-resistance duals 2.50 300 120 -- Transmission and driveline Reduced driveline friction 4 2,700 675 -- Hybrid Parallel hydraulic hybrid 25 30,000 1,200 1,000 Management and coaching -- -- -- -- -- Idle reduction -- -- -- -- -- Total added weight Added components −3 -- -- +1,500 Weight reduction Material substitution -- 500 lb 1 3,000 3,000 −500 Total 2015-2020 package 38.4 50,800 1,323 +1,000 NOTE: For each vehicle class, the fuel consumption benefit of the combined technology packages is calculated as follows: [% FCR package = 100 [1 – (1 – {% FCRtech1 /100 }) (1 – {% FCRtech2/100})
|
From page 143... ...
There is only a Transit Bus Summary single axle on a motor coach that uses dual tires (and hence The most effective fuel consumption reduction technolo- can take advantage of a WBS)
|
From page 144... ...
terize transmission and driveline opportunities in the motor • Because the motor coach spends more time at high coach segment: speed, the efficiency benefit of using an eight-speed transmission is estimated to be lower. • Motor coaches generally use technologies similar to those used by tractor trailers to improve driveline ef- The transmission assumed for 2015 to 2020 is an eight ficiency but adopt technologies similar to the transit speed AT along with reduced driveline friction and aggres bus to enhance transmission efficiency.
|
From page 145... ...
Aero -- 8 4,500 563 300 Engine Adv. 11-15 L engine with bottoming cycle 20 23,000 1,150 800 Tire Improved low-rolling-resistance duals + wide-base 3 450 150 -- single tires Transmission and driveline 8-speed automatic transmission, reduced driveline 4.50 2,400 533 -- friction, aggressive shift logic Hybrid -- -- -- -- -- Management and coaching -- -- -- -- -- Idle reduction -- -- -- -- -- Total added weight Added components −0.75 -- -- +1,100 Weight reduction Materials substitution -- 1,500 lb 1.05 6,000 5,714 –1,500 Total 2015-2020 package 32.0 36,350 1,136 –400 NOTE: For each vehicle class, the fuel consumption benefit of the combined technology packages is calculated as follows: [% FCR package = 100 [1 – (1 – {% FCRtech1/100 })
|
From page 146... ...
percent improvement, depending on vehicle class. For five of the seven vehicle classes, the benefits range from $915 to $1,674 per percent fuel consumption reduction.
|
From page 147... ...
Aerodynamics 9,000 -- -- -- -- -- 100 Engine 14,200 10,300 10,300 12,300 10,300 14,200 3,000 Weight 6,000 1,590 1,590 -- 4,800 3,000 225 Tire 900 300 300 300 300 240 10 Transmission 5,200 200 200 200 200 300 1,100 Hybrid -- 38,000 50,000 40,000 200,000 -- -- Management 1,000 -- -- -- -- -- -- Idle reduction 8,000 -- -- -- -- -- -- Total 44,300 50,390 62,390 52,800 215,600 17,740 4,435 Cost Benefit ($/Percent Fuel Consumption Benefit) Aerodynamics 1,636 -- -- -- -- -- 33 Engine 1,352 1,144 1,144 1,171 1,144 1,352 214 Weight 8,000 795 795 -- 1,600 4,286 563 Tire 200 167 167 200 300 133 10 Transmission 1,040 133 133 133 133 150 244 Hybrid -- 1,727 1,429 2,000 6,667 -- -- Management 333 -- -- -- -- -- -- Idle reduction 1,333 -- -- -- -- -- -- All strategies 1,475 1,652 1,552 1,859 5,890 1,268 207 NOTE: For each vehicle class, the fuel consumption benefit of the combined technology packages is calculated as follows: [% FCR package = 100 [1 – (1 – {% FCRtech1/100 })
|
From page 148... ...
Since the • The fuel consumption reduction potential for the mooverall goal of energy policy is to reduce fuel consumption tor coach application, in the 2015 to 2020 time frame, at the least cost to society, the committee believes that the is 32 percent at a cost of $36,350, which results in a metric of dollars invested per gallon of fuel saved is a very cost benefit of $1,117 per percent fuel consumption good metric to consider. reduction.
|
From page 149... ...
a substantial portion of the overall cost. Policymakers will The technologies presented earlier in this chapter will need to consider fleet fuel savings (cost per gallon saved)
|
From page 150... ...
First, some vehicle owners potential fuel efficiency standard, where some or all of the may decide to accelerate their purchase schedule, obtaining a incremental vehicle cost may eventually be recouped through new vehicle before the adoption of a new standard, thereby future fuel savings, buyer responses to the cost increases as deferring the incremental cost of the standard until their next sociated with previous NOx and PM standards could provide purchase cycle. Buyers may also be concerned about the reliability of unproven technology, further increasing their 12 The 2004 heavy-duty engine standards actually began to penetrate incentive for early purchases.
|
From page 151... ...
The likely given continued improvements in diesel engine dura- modal-shift response, which is part of the total response, is bility over time. On the other hand, to the extent that fuel summarized statistically by the cross-price elasticity.
|
From page 152... ...
efficient vehicles on the road -- exactly the opposite effect estimated that in 2007 the 439 urban areas in the United of what an efficiency standard is designed to achieve. This States experienced 4.2 billion vehicle-hours of delay, resultbehavior can be called "consumer class shifting." Class shift- ing in 2.8 billion gallons of wasted fuel and $87.2 billion in ing could also occur if the cost of different vehicle classes is delay and fuel costs (Schrank and Lomax, 2005)
|
From page 153... ...
ratio, which can be used to estimate congestion and Fuel Efficiency Effect on delay measurement. Technology Efficiency Effect on NOx While different formulas have been developed to estimate Aerodynamic/weight +/++++ Anticipated decrease, depending traffic speeds based on V/C ratios, an illustrative example can reduction on mode be provided through the use of the Bureau of Public Roads Variable valve actuation + Depends on design formula: Higher cylinder pressure ++ Increases proportionally Miller cycle +++ May decrease due to aftercooling Multistage turbo ++ Increases if EGR cannot be used FFS CS = Mechanical + Minimal V 4 turbocompound 1 + 0.15 C Electrical ++ Minimal turbocompound Bottoming cycle ++++ Minimal Thermoelectrics + Minimal where CS is congestion speed, FFS is free-flow speed, V Enhanced exhaust Minimal Minimal is volume of traffic, and C is traffic volume capacity.
|
From page 154... ...
The literature porting the extra weight itself increases fuel costs, partially shows that truck traffic has a direct correlation with injuries offsetting the fuel savings the technologies allow. This effect and fatalities.
|
From page 155... ...
bucket trucks. The resulting cost for box trucks is $43,120 with a CCPPR of $915 per percent fuel saved, and the cost for bucket trucks is $49,870 with a CCPPR of $1,005 per Manufacturability and Product Development percent fuel consumption reduction.
|
From page 156... ...
Consumer buying in anticipation of new the motor coach application, in the 2015 to 2020 time frame, regulations (pre-buy) and retention of older vehicles can is 32 percent at a cost of $36,350, which results in a CCPPR slow the rate of fleet turnover and the rate at which regulatory of $1,136 per percent fuel consumption reduction.
|
From page 157... ...
tion & Idle Reduction: Idle & Urban Cycle Test Results. Prepared by the NESCCAF, ICCT, Southwest Research Institute, and TIAX.
|
From page 158... ...
Prepared for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Walsh, J
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.