Summary
Transportation is already a major issue for energy, society and the environment and is rapidly growing in importance. The automotive industry expects a significant growth in demand in the coming years driven by the ongoing motorization of emerging countries with large populations, while OECD countries will continue to maintain very high levels of private car ownership. Technological developments, hybrid and other unconventional engines, as well as new generations of internal combustion engine (ICE), will produce a totally different scenario by 2050. The exponentially growing air-traffic driven by the emergence of low cost airlines is becoming a major concern, both in terms of energy requirement and emissions. Globalization, relocation of industries to different geographical areas, economic growth around the world - all will push upwards trade and product flows, particularly in the marine and aviation sectors. The outlook is further complicated by the rapid urbanization of some major developing countries, which is leading to unacceptable levels of congestion in big cities and is affecting the quality of life and the health of citizens.
As a major consumer of petroleum fuels, the future of the transport sector is key to the WEC objective of achieving sustainable energy for all. Arising from its major study on Global Energy Scenarios to 2050, WEC has now published the results of a specialist, technical sub-study on Transportation. Scientists, policymakers and other stakeholders have put into question the sustainability of petroleum fuels within this study's timeframe to 2050. Sustainability is measured in terms of the 3As criteria of accessibility, availability and acceptability, taking account of regional differences. Sustainability of fuels brings into question the sustainability of the associated vehicle technologies. The Transportation study assesses both qualitatively (by the 3As criteria) and quantitatively (by the contribution to reduced consumption) to determine a roadmap for technologies and non-technical measures that can help meet the objective of sustainable energy. This roadmap is then put into a practical context by considering the policies necessary to ensure that the objectives are met in the most efficient and effective way possible.
This BEA Workshop provides an overview of the Transportation study report and its conclusions, and illustrates some of the solutions now in place and in development to ensure our transportation industry is sustainable and affordable well into the future.
| Dr Simon Godwin (WEC Transport Study Leader & Manager, Automotive Issues, Daimler AG Brussels) was assigned to the Daimler Representative Office for EU Affairs in 1st November 2006, responsible for automotive, regulatory and technical issues. From 2003 to 2006 he was Manager of Regulatory Affairs in the Washington Affairs Office, having spent 5 years in Mercedes-Benz Passenger Car Development in Product Strategy and Advanced Development departments. Previously he worked for 3 years at a City of London investment bank. Simon gained his bachelor's degree in physics from Oxford University and his PhD in mechanical engineering from Imperial College, London. |
Leading off by explaining a little of the rationale for this WEC study, Simon illustrated highlights from its final Report, covering the background, a technology roadmap, assessment of existing technologies, breakthrough technologies and policy implementation. Clearly, the overriding priority was to develop and support technologies, old and new, to reduce future fuel consumption and implement policies which achieve this aim.
He showed how global energy demand was predicted to grow by 70% from 2003 to 2030, with Transportation predicted as an approximately constant proportion, at around 20%. Transportation therefore has a major part to play, as individual vehicles continue to dominate passenger transport, and with the forecast of high-growth aviation demand. Using WEC's 3As - ACCESSIBILITY, AVAILABILITY and ACCEPTABILITY - as its analysis baseline, the study looked at technologies over the next 50 years in terms of fuel and vehicle and propulsion system technologies.
A ‘technology roadmap’ to 2050 showed that it will be mainly advances in internal combustion engine technologies (ICEs), with some penetration of FCEV & BEVs, which will characterise automotive technology over this period. From around 2020-30, biofuels and alternative fuels will enhance the 3As for conventional auto technologies, with alternative fuel (electricity/hydrogen) and vehicle (fuel cell/electric) technologies beginning to make an impact much later in the period. He went on to illustrate the Report’s energy analysis results for passenger vehicles, showing the potential breakeven points under different conditions for diesel and hybrid vehicle technologies, and breakthrough scenarios (the advantages and barriers) for hydrogen and fuel cells, electric vehicles, and biofuels technologies. To break into the market, the technology development must be mature and there needs to be an economic breakeven through reduced fuel costs compensating for the higher technology costs. For diesel and hybrid vehicles the economic breakeven depends on the conditions of fuel prices and customer behaviour. For hydrogen fuel cells and other advanced electric vehicle technologies, breakeven depends on significant cost reductions over time and on overcoming the many barriers to entry for all these technologies. The prize, however, is a future with emissions free personal mobility.
Looking at global policy objectives, he stressed the need to avoid overcomplexity of different targets and programmes for each energy sector, region and country. Indeed, it is more effective if policy is formulated at global or at least regional level and the multitude of energy objectives (GHGs, primary energy, fossil energy, petroleum) are reduced to one priority on which policy measures can focus and which acts as a catalyst for the other objectives. For example the EU has implemented its most ambitious policy on GHG emissions. The Report recommended an integrated approach to policy making, to involve all stakeholders, each taking an equitable share of the burden, encouraged by consistent economic incentives and employing only the most cost-effective solutions. Perhaps easier said than done, but the equation is relatively simple: Mobility is essential for growth and Growth supports Sustainability. Looking at the factors affecting car use and ownership, Simon noted that mobility through car ownership is a personal expression of economic growth, so smart growth policies can help to manage mobility demand growth. He illustrated some of the measures that could reduce congestion and travel within Mobility systems and emphasised the bottom line that policy targets must be clearly defined and policy measures must enable targets at least cost.
For the full Transportation Study Report go to the WEC website at – www.worldenergy.org
|
"Technologies for Reducing Fuel Consumption - improving ICE efficiency" |
Kean Harrison is an engineer with world leading motorsport and automotive engineering specialists, Prodrive. As well as running motorsport programmes for Aston Martin Racing and the Subaru World Rally Team, Prodrive helps vehicle manufacturers and, increasingly, businesses from a range of different industry sectors, to develop innovative new technologies. |
Kean gave a highly technical presentation on the new generation Gomecsys (GO) engine, a variable compression ratio (VCR) engine now being developed and tested by Prodrive. He began with a warning that CO2 fleet emissions targets would not be achieved without a significant technology 'step' change, and he believed that legislation would be needed to enforce CO2 emissions reduction.
He outlined the numerous technology options for reducing CO2 emissions, setting these against the relevance and benefits offered by the new GO engine technology. Illustrating the GO engine's piston stroke at low, high and variable compression ratios (CR), he described the efficiency of the design concept, and showed the engine cycle variation statistics. Most significantly, they had been able to extract more energy from each combustion event, whilst also reducing exhaust temperatures. Piston friction was reduced due to low connecting rod angularity and combustion chamber design was optimised with no valve cut-outs necessary whilst maintaining 15:1 CR. The true Atkinson 720° engine cycle could be optimised to suit engine road conditions and the design was compatible with existing engine packaging/vehicle integration.
The Mercedes M271 engine forms the basis for the GO engine simulation model, and was chosen as the base/benchmark engine because it is the leading market example of a lightly downsized, pressure charged engine. It was initially calibrated against generic performance data, and later in the project phase, once the M271 was running with Prodrive's in-house DP200 Micro Proteus controlled ECU, real test bed data was used to correlate the simulation model. The VCR additions were overlaid to form a high confidence model, which was used to increase knowledge of trends/interactions and to help in the development of the engine control strategy. The validated Mercedes engine model was used in conjunction with PID controllers to form a base line to which the VCR engine would be compared.
Due to a limited time/budget (only a year to deliver and test the prototype engine), several key engine sites, which represented real world driving conditions, were looked at. This enabled Prodrive to explore capabilities ahead of VCR engine completion and put VCR technology within the context of real engine running conditions (Exhaust temperature limits, cylinder pressure limits, end of compression temp limits, etc). The dyno test phase could then be entered with greater insight and understanding of the engine trends and interactions.
Kean then went into finer detail about the technical highlights of the GO engine design, illustrating the new engine block; the radical application of a 'motor-cycle style' crankshaft and its assembly and components; the piston and connecting rod assembly; the eccentric gear and ring gear and the actuation system. He explained how Prodrive had developed their unique DP200 engine control unit tailored to the particular requirements of the GO engine, and he illustrated the results of the development testing phase of the project.
In conclusion, Kean confirmed that so far they had achieved up to 10% fuel efficiency (FE) improvement delivered at ECE cycle loads, together with up to 80% of M271 full load performance within a development imposed 100bar limit. Prodrive would continue with VCR test bed development to deliver target performance (25% FE), and to un-mask efficiency potential, whilst investigating opportunities to improve combustion, the negative contribution of friction, alternative methods of pressure-charging, and refining auto-operation and transient control strategy. The final phase would be to develop VCR strategy to vehicle demonstrator level, and they would also be investigating the complimentary application of HCCI and flex-fuel technologies.
| "Transportation Technology Breakthrough - the Impact on the future fuel-mix of Alternative Gas-to-Liquid Fuels " |
Malcolm Wells, a graduate in politics, joined the oil and gas industry as a political campaign manager in 1998. He campaigned successfully against tax increases and the Climate Change Levy before being appointed to the UK Oil and Gas Industry Task Force. He joined Sasol Chevron in 2002 where he is responsible for communications and where he provides support for all the projects and marketing activities of the Sasol Chevron alliance. In this role he has written and presented widely on the development of Gas to Liquids (GTL) projects and markets. |
Malcolm opened with a brief overview of the role of GTL in the future energy fuel mix. The EIA International Energy Outlook 2006 predicted that, with the growth in GDP per capita in places such as India and China, world energy demand is expected to grow by 57% over the next 25 years. Furthermore, global gas reserves-to-production ratios are at 65 years, compared to oil at 40 years. Fuel switching in the transport sector is quite difficult, with crude oil still bearing the main load, but Transportation accounts for 40% of energy requirements and gas is far easier to adapt for transportation use than other energy sources.
GTL projects seek large gas reserves (the conversion rate is approximately 10,000 standard cubic feet of gas per barrel of GTL product produced), an economically priced gas feedstock and access to the open ocean. He illustrated the GTL process and partnership products, and explained the Sasol Chevron joint venture established to promote and market this technology globally. Showing actual and projected demand growth met by different transportation fuels (1998-2030), he illustrated the benefits of GTL diesel for the engine. Though one drawback for GTL is its slightly higher fuel consumption, they had found that mixed fuel stock was better on balancing fuel consumption rates. Regardless, GTL gave a more efficient burn, leading to reduced engine noise and reduced exhaust smoke. GTL diesel was therefore cleaner than its conventional counterparts, producing lower emissions, high performance, and extended engine life. This had been proven in comprehensive, rugged road trials across Africa, and numerous joint trials are currently in progress with major engine manufacturers in Europe, Asia and other parts of the world. He was particularly proud of Sasol Chevron's latest GTL marketing campaign, their 3-year Cheetah Tracker programme, promoting a switch to GTL technology use to underpin European emissions abatement, and spearheading cheetah conservation in Africa. These road trials were currently achieving 180kg less CO2 per 10,000 km travelled.
He stressed that development of GTL/CTL/BTL technologies is only suited to companies with BIG budgets, since >34K plants will be needed to secure security and diversity of supply as required by the regulators. The CO2 profile of GTL products was slightly better than a modern refinery level, and the real carbon savings are in Carbon Monoxide and particulate emissions. Though obviously not the whole solution, Malcolm stressed Sasol Chevron's belief that GTL technology must be included as part of a fuel mix solution.
Summing up, Malcolm said:
• a future of cleaner fuels will involve a range of solutions using a range of feedstocks - there is no single answer in the short- to medium- term and possibly not in the long-term.
• the future of fuel must be put on an evolutionary basis - it is unrealistic to plan on the basis of a major upheaval in drivetrain technology or in the fuel supply chain.
• cleaner alternatives are available now and they should be encouraged - the best should not be made the enemy of the good.
• a cleaner fuel future requires co-operation across the stakeholder spectrum, no one group can deliver the whole solution.
| "The Ethical Considerations for a Rational Transportation Policy" |
Christian Wolmar is a writer and broadcaster specialising in transport. He has spent nearly all of his working life as a journalist, and was at The Independent from 1989 to 1997, mostly as transport correspondent. Although he mainly concentrates on transport matters, he covers other social policy issues, and has written on a wide range of subjects from cricket to the Private Finance Initiative, rail privatisation and the London Underground. |
Christian opened by describing the transport dichotomy - we all need it, but nobody wants it! So should government encourage more transport, for healthier GDP and economic growth, or should it attempt to limit the use of transport because of its damaging environmental effects, and thereby decrease GDP? These contradictions remain unsolved.
The argument for reducing traffic levels, and so GHG emissions, is obvious - easier access and movement; improved commercial success in city centers, reduced accidents, better health and fitness, improved air quality, less stress and more productive use of land, to list just a few. But the moral argument is rarely made - we have a duty to do everything we can to save the world from heating up irreparably. He disagreed strongly with those who argued that any efforts made here in the UK would be futile and insignificant compared with the actions of China and India. All efforts, by everybody, should arguably be an incentive to encourage global cooperation on action to mitigate GHG emissions.
However, the current UK government has avoided tackling many of the most contentious transport issues, and so far has generally opted for more roads, more rail passengers, and more airports - failing signally to address the inherent problems of such expansion, and the short- and long-term contradictions of such a policy. Some GHG emission reduction schemes have been initiated, mainly centered on controlling traffic levels to reduce congestion, but moves made at the start of the Blair administration towards a more environmentally friendly transport policy have now been reversed. There remain serious conflicting policy areas between the Departments of Environment and of Transport, which, unless these departments are reunited, bodes badly for the achievement of any long-term strategy for an integrated transport policy in the UK. Projects such as the sustainable communities initiative in already highly populated SE England are good for regeneration, but do not demonstrate transport sustainability. Consultation between central and local government and communities has been woefully inadequate.
In Christian's opinion, there is a good reason for a government's reluctance to grasp this thorny transport nettle - transport is a long-term issue, but policy benefits are short term, within the lifetime of a politician, and the incentives to take momentous decisions affecting the far future are simply not there. Government speeches on climate issues, though increasingly impassioned, have as yet been short on real, effective action. The only time transport growth was ever driven down effectively was by the application of transport tax increases, but these were dismantled after a short time, and have never been re-implemented.
Of course, a rational transport policy should have as its principle aim the facilitation of people's mobility. But it must also recognize and deal with the environmental damage caused by transport, two goals that are fundamentally at odds. With the exception of cycling and walking, there is no such thing as a sustainable form of transport. All modern mechanized travel is theoretically damaging to the environment, and as technological solutions are by no means yet far enough advanced to effectively improve this situation, Christian posited that surely the starting point for any ethical transport policy should be for travel to be reduced.
It is unlikely that the private sector providers of much of public transport will act to reduce demand, as that would damage their commercial interests. Politicians need to consider the wider context, but it is intrinsically politically difficult to use market forces to damp down demand, particularly for transport. Regrettably, this has led to completely contradictory policy initiatives from the government. Whilst Blair agreed that environmental issues, especially global warming, are the greatest threat facing humanity today, on the other hand his government has consistently supported the airlines' low airfare strategies that have led to such a massive growth in passengers and flights. Similarly, there is confusion when applying measures to meet the UK's Kyoto target - recent budgets have consistently refused to raise fuel taxes, with motoring costs, in real terms, arguably lower now than those of 20 years ago - and bus fares have outstripped inflation by 20% since 1997. Fuel tax is seen as merely a fiscal measure, not part of a coherent transport policy, despite evidence to the contrary when the Tories' fuel tax escalator was introduced in the early 1990s.
These contradictions go to the core of political and economic policy. Transport growth is a side effect of economic growth and decoupling the two is a holy grail that no government has yet managed to find. A national road charging policy is still on the horizon, but no road-map for that is yet in sight. Local governments are introducing schemes slowly, but without central government financial support for improving local transport systems, these are very slow to impact. New public transport infrastructure requires considerable resources and ongoing financial subsidy, but encouraging people to commute over longer distances in support of regeneration projects really has no bearing on achieving a modal shift away from cars to rail travel. This government has refused to apply policies to damp down demand for road or aviation transport, as "it would be too damaging for the economy".
So how to secure public backing for an ethical transport policy? Could the spectre of the radical changes and hard choices needed to deal with global warming and climate change be enough to swing public opinion by showing that increasing transport use is a problem rather than a goal. Coherent, national policies need to be implemented, with strong, committed leadership from central government, and the issues need to be tackled in a systematic way.
Christian believes that ultimately government must use its ability to influence the market through pricing. It is ridiculous that the cost of public transport relative to motoring has risen every year since the fuel tax escalator was abolished by the Blair government in 2003. Pricing mechanisms to influence the market, such as taxing motorists and encouraging more rail travel, must be given higher priority. A fiscally neutral road pricing policy would merely reduce congestion, but would not stimulate a modal shift from private to public transport, or address environmental issues. A universal road-pricing scheme would be the start of an ethical transport policy because it would allocate road space more fairly. Market mechanisms are the chosen weapon of most political policies, so why should transport and environment be any exception.
However, a national road-pricing scheme now looks pretty unlikely, having little popularity or support from local authorities or the public. Despite this failure, he enumerated a myriad of other little things that can be done to create a more ethical approach to travel and transport policy, i.e. reducing local residential speed zones everywhere; reversing bus fare increases; raising fuel taxes; wider parking controls; changing planning laws; greater use of personal transport plans; funding pedestrianisation; boosting cycling facilities; etc., etc. Much of what needs to be done is well known and already implemented somewhere in the world. If the UK government could bring all these ideas together, present them in the context of a global emergency which must be addressed and affects the 'now' generation, not just those of the future, we would then have the beginnings of an ethical transport policy well able to answer the demands and transport issues of the future.