The Evolution of Conventional Vehicles’ Efficiency for Meeting Carbon Neutrality Ambition

D. Komnos, Jamil Nur, A. Tansini, M. Ktistakis, Jaime Suarez, J. Krause, G. Fontaras
{"title":"The Evolution of Conventional Vehicles’ Efficiency for Meeting Carbon Neutrality Ambition","authors":"D. Komnos, Jamil Nur, A. Tansini, M. Ktistakis, Jaime Suarez, J. Krause, G. Fontaras","doi":"10.4271/2024-37-0034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2023, the European Union set more ambitious targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from passenger cars: the new fleet-wide average targets became 93.6 g/km for 2025, 49.5 g/km in 2030, going to 0 in 2035. One year away from the 2025 target, this study evaluates what contribution to CO2 reduction was achieved from new conventional vehicles and how to interpret forecasts for future efficiency gains. The European Commission’s vehicle efficiency cost-curves suggest that optimal technology adoption can guarantee up to 50% CO2 reduction by 2025 for conventional vehicles. Official registration data between 2013 and 2022, however, reveal only an average 14% increase in fuel efficiency in standard combustion vehicles, although reaching almost 23% for standard hybrids. The smallest gap between certified emissions and best-case scenarios is of 14 g/km, suggesting that some manufacturers’ declared values are approaching the optimum. Yet, the majority of vehicles do not appear to fully exploit the potential of the technological boundary. In 2022, gasoline vehicles’ mass, engine size and power alone explained 67% of CO2 variation, an increase of almost 20% from 2014. For diesels, wheelbase – a proxy for vehicle size – increased in explanatory power from 5% to 18%, to the detriment of engine size, which lost 6% variance points. Vehicle mass, power, capacity and size explain well the gap between current CO2 emissions and optimal targets and may add or subtract efficiency from other energy-saving technologies. These patterns should be read in combination with the evolution of the different vehicle segments’ market shares, which saw a 40% increase in Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs), and a sharp decrease in diesel registrations. Finally, this paper offers a statistical analysis first attempt at disentangling over time changes in vehicle characteristics from actual improvements in vehicle efficiency.","PeriodicalId":510086,"journal":{"name":"SAE Technical Paper Series","volume":"130 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SAE Technical Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4271/2024-37-0034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 2023, the European Union set more ambitious targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from passenger cars: the new fleet-wide average targets became 93.6 g/km for 2025, 49.5 g/km in 2030, going to 0 in 2035. One year away from the 2025 target, this study evaluates what contribution to CO2 reduction was achieved from new conventional vehicles and how to interpret forecasts for future efficiency gains. The European Commission’s vehicle efficiency cost-curves suggest that optimal technology adoption can guarantee up to 50% CO2 reduction by 2025 for conventional vehicles. Official registration data between 2013 and 2022, however, reveal only an average 14% increase in fuel efficiency in standard combustion vehicles, although reaching almost 23% for standard hybrids. The smallest gap between certified emissions and best-case scenarios is of 14 g/km, suggesting that some manufacturers’ declared values are approaching the optimum. Yet, the majority of vehicles do not appear to fully exploit the potential of the technological boundary. In 2022, gasoline vehicles’ mass, engine size and power alone explained 67% of CO2 variation, an increase of almost 20% from 2014. For diesels, wheelbase – a proxy for vehicle size – increased in explanatory power from 5% to 18%, to the detriment of engine size, which lost 6% variance points. Vehicle mass, power, capacity and size explain well the gap between current CO2 emissions and optimal targets and may add or subtract efficiency from other energy-saving technologies. These patterns should be read in combination with the evolution of the different vehicle segments’ market shares, which saw a 40% increase in Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs), and a sharp decrease in diesel registrations. Finally, this paper offers a statistical analysis first attempt at disentangling over time changes in vehicle characteristics from actual improvements in vehicle efficiency.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为实现碳中和目标,传统汽车效率的演变
2023 年,欧盟为减少乘用车的温室气体排放制定了更加雄心勃勃的目标:新的全车队平均目标为:2025 年 93.6 克/公里,2030 年 49.5 克/公里,2035 年为零。距离 2025 年的目标还有一年时间,本研究评估了新型传统汽车对二氧化碳减排的贡献,以及如何解释对未来效率提高的预测。欧盟委员会的车辆效率成本曲线表明,采用最佳技术可确保传统车辆到 2025 年减少 50% 的二氧化碳排放量。然而,2013 年至 2022 年的官方登记数据显示,标准内燃汽车的燃油效率平均仅提高了 14%,而标准混合动力汽车的燃油效率则提高了近 23%。认证排放量与最佳情况之间的最小差距为 14 克/公里,这表明一些制造商的申报值已接近最佳值。然而,大多数车辆似乎并没有充分利用技术边界的潜力。2022 年,仅汽油车的质量、发动机尺寸和功率就能解释 67% 的二氧化碳变化,比 2014 年增加了近 20%。对于柴油车而言,轴距(车辆尺寸的代表)的解释力从 5% 提高到 18%,而发动机尺寸的解释力下降了 6%。车辆质量、功率、排量和尺寸很好地解释了当前二氧化碳排放量与最佳目标之间的差距,并可能增加或减少其他节能技术的效率。这些模式应与不同汽车细分市场份额的演变相结合来解读,运动型多功能车(SUV)的市场份额增长了 40%,而柴油车的注册量则急剧下降。最后,本文通过统计分析,首次尝试将车辆特性随时间的变化与车辆效率的实际提高区分开来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Thermal coupled structural analysis of a brake disc Development of Brake Shoe with Carbon Footprint Reduction Emergency Braking System: Verification of system behavior on commercial vehicles equipped with drum braking system Assets Maintenance Strategy Based on Operational Data Analysis Microstructural Analysis and Tribological Performance of Composite Iron Sulfides in Automotive Brake Pads
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1