Techtrend

Reality May Bite for BEV Backers

Reality May Bite for BEV Backers
Dave Zoia April 16th, 2010

Reality may be setting in.

A year ago, it was all EVs all the time, as auto makers, battery suppliers and regulators alike had high hopes and lofty market projections for the new-generation of electrically powered cars and trucks about to hit the market.

But if the chatter at this week’s SAE World Congress is any indicator, it appears some of the bloom has gone from the battery-electric-vehicle rose.

David Friedman, a researcher with the Union of Concerned Scientist, spoke about the fading enthusiasm for E85 fuel, but what he had to say easily could be applied to BEVs, as well.

“The waning interest in ethanol is the classic boom/bust cycle,” he says. “It was once seen as the ‘fuel of the future.ʼ Now that some concerns have been raised, people say it’s a failure. It’s really somewhere in between, but it needs some more work.”

The same could be said of battery power, as well. Developers have been promising great things from lithium-ion, initially billed as the long-awaited enabler for the mass-market EV.

But while Li-ion batteries represent a step up from what we had before, as the dawn of another EV era approaches, it is clear the big breakthrough required to make electrically driven vehicles ubiquitous remains somewhere down the road, and it’s probably time to lower those near-term expectations.

The real promise, we’re now told, is with lithium-air battery technology, which offers even more power density that will allow auto makers to chip away at cost and/or extend driving range. But that silver bullet is still 20 years of development away, experts say. We’ll have to wait and see whether it arrives at all.

Donald Hillebrand, director-Center for Transportation Research at Argonne National Laboratory, contends not much has changed from 15 years ago when, led by General Motors’ EV1, the industry made its last unsuccessful foray into electrification. Cost still is high, recharging remains an issue and range continues to be limited.

Hillebrand says projections that call for EVs to take 13% of the new-vehicle market in 2020 “are way too optimistic,” adding we’re about to find out if this new wave of EVs “is a trend or a fad.

“BEVs may be sent back to the minor leagues for more work,” he says.

Range anxiety is still one of the biggest issue, and there are no good solutions in sight, according to Hillebrand. Fast-charging stations and battery-swap depots make no commercial sense, he says, citing his “back of the envelope” calculations indicating today’s Li-ion batteries are 20 times too expensive to allow a battery-swap business to turn a profit.

Based on driving patterns and energy costs, a $15,000 fast-charge station would earn $60 per year, the Argonne official says, meaning it would take some 250 years to earn a return on investment.

Hillebrand isn’t alone. A consensus appears to be forming that plug-in hybrids, alternative-fueled vehicles and advanced gasoline- and diesel-powered models provide more immediate answers to meeting upcoming fuel-economy and clean-air targets, while BEVs once again may miss the market sweet spot.

Auto manufacturers and policy makers shouldn’t put all their eggs in one basket, says Stricker, whose company has led the world in hybrids but is approaching BEVs with caution.

“We need to avoid a ‘build it and they will comeʼ strategy.”

Otherwise, all that over-promising and under-delivering may open the door for “Who Killed the Electric Car? – The Sequel.”

Original manusciprt:
http://blog.wardsauto.com/dzoia/

US military warns oil output may dip causing massive shortages by 2015

Surplus oil production capacity could disappear by 2012 a report from US Joint Forces Command, says. Photograph: Katja Buchholz/Getty Images

The US military has warned that surplus oil production capacity could disappear within two years and there could be serious shortages by 2015 with a significant economic and political impact.

The energy crisis outlined in a Joint Operating Environment report from the US Joint Forces Command, comes as the price of petrol in Britain reaches record levels and the cost of crude is predicted to soon top $100 a barrel.

“By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million barrels per day,” says the report, which has a foreword by a senior commander, General James N Mattis.

It adds: “While it is difficult to predict precisely what economic, political, and strategic effects such a shortfall might produce, it surely would reduce the prospects for growth in both the developing and developed worlds. Such an economic slowdown would exacerbate other unresolved tensions, push fragile and failing states further down the path toward collapse, and perhaps have serious economic impact on both China and India.”

The US military says its views cannot be taken as US government policy but admits they are meant to provide the Joint Forces with “an intellectual foundation upon which we will construct the concept to guide out future force developments.”

The warning is the latest in a series from around the world that has turned peak oil – the moment when demand exceeds supply – from a distant threat to a more immediate risk.

The Wicks Review on UK energy policy published last summer effectively dismissed fears but Lord Hunt, the British energy minister, met concerned industrialists two weeks ago in a sign that it is rapidly changing its mind on the seriousness of the issue.

The Paris-based International Energy Agency remains confident that there is no short-term risk of oil shortages but privately some senior officials have admitted there is considerable disagreement internally about this upbeat stance.

Future fuel supplies are of acute importance to the US army because it is believed to be the biggest single user of petrol in the world. BP chief executive, Tony Hayward, said recently that there was little chance of crude from the carbon-heavy Canadian tar sands being banned in America because the US military like to have local supplies rather than rely on the politically unstable Middle East.

But there are signs that the US Department of Energy might also be changing its stance on peak oil. In a recent interview with French newspaper, Le Monde, Glen Sweetnam, main oil adviser to the Obama administration, admitted that “a chance exists that we may experience a decline” of world liquid fuels production between 2011 and 2015 if the investment was not forthcoming.

Lionel Badal, a post-graduate student at Kings College, London, who has been researching peak oil theories, said the review by the American military moves the debate on.

“It’s surprising to see that the US Army, unlike the US Department of Energy, publicly warns of major oil shortages in the near-term. Now it could be interesting to know on which study the information is based on,” he said.

“The Energy Information Administration (of the department of energy) has been saying for years that Peak Oil was “decades away”. In light of the report from the US Joint Forces Command, is the EIA still confident of its previous highly optimistic conclusions?”

The Joint Operating Environment report paints a bleak picture of what can happen on occasions when there is serious economic upheaval. “One should not forget that the Great Depression spawned a number of totalitarian regimes that sought economic prosperity for their nations by ruthless conquest,” it points out.

Origianl subscript:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/11/peak-oil-production-supply

The Future Belongs to DCT

Continuously variable transmissions and automated manuals are destined to lose popularity and the market will swing toward automatics and dual clutch transmissions. These were the collective predictions of 700 auto industry executives gathered in Berlin in December for the CTI International Symposium on Innovative Automotive Transmissions.

In an electronic vote in the conference hall after an on-stage discussion between experts, 38 percent of delegates felt DCT technology was just as good as AT technology; 37 percent believed it to be superior. When asked which transmission technology would be the first to disappear, almost half of all delegates singled out AMTs; 30 percent felt CVTs would be the first to dwindle, while only 10 percent thought manual transmissions would disappear.

Andy Yu, vice president of engineering at BorgWarner Drivetrain Systems, was emphatic that dual clutch was the superior technology. “It’s only because of history, and the manufacturing infrastructure that has been built up, that we still adhere to planetary automatics,” he commented. “The question isn’t just that of the torque converter versus the clutch – in the U.S., a lot of the investment is in planetary, so it is hard to move away from this manufacturing base.”

Citing the example of China, where there is no established automatic infrastructure, he said that with the advantage of a free choice, automakers would always go for the dual clutch solution.

“Our joint venture is proceeding; the first products will launch in 2011,” Yu told delegates. “There is a lot of activity beyond this [China] too, such as in Japan and with European automakers for a smaller DCT that will give a very high efficiency transmission for the A and B segments.”

The expected decline of CVTs could be attributed to their still-poor efficiency levels, explained Prof. Leopold Mikulic, vice president of powertrain technologies at Daimler AG. Replacing the CVT transmission of the front-drive A- and B-Class models with a DCT would result in fuel savings of five percent, he said. “The A-Class has a high proportion of automatics [in its sales] but we need to improve the efficiency and economy, which is where the CVT has certain disadvantages. We also have to look at market trends, and we expect DCT to take a significant proportion of front transverse applications.”

“It is true that both are not cheap technologies,” continued Mikulic, “but DCT uses some elements from standard transmissions, so there will be synergies and lower costs there.”

Asked if the lubricants had a significant impact on fuel efficiency, Mikulic said that work on the ATF would be essential for further developments. “We are busy working on this,” he said. “We’re looking at a gain of 1 to 1.5 percent.”

The solutions eventually chosen would be dependent on the vehicle platforms, observed Ralf Najork, group vice president of R&D at Getrag. For premium vehicles with between 300 and 500 horsepower the most important factor will become a wide spread of ratios, rather than the number of gears. “Front wheel drive systems are different,” he noted. “Here we are fighting for every gram of CO2. The EU color labeling system will be decisive in [influencing] how we choose the ratios. For instance, we might adjust them to get under the under-120 g/km color.”

DCT will be very big in front wheel drive, concluded Najork. AMT failed because of comfort, but it will be seen again. With electric fill-in torque its shift quality might be brought up to an acceptable standard, and it could be used as a three or four speed unit in conjunction with a range extender motor.

AMTs would continue to be important in commercial vehicle applications, observed Georg Weinberg, head of truck product engineering and vice president of Daimler Trucks, the world leader. “AMTs are efficient in heavy goods vehicles, especially in direct drive. Powershift is well accepted, but DCT is also possible.”

“DCT means no interruption of torque when shifting, so you could run the engine at a lower speed,” said Weinberg. “Up to 2 to 3 percent fuel savings could be possible, depending on the class of vehicle and the terrain.”

For a medium sized car, an AMT can offer a fuel economy benefit over the equivalent model of around 4 percent, said Mark Findlay of industry analysts Drive Systems Design. He stated that its relatively low extra cost could prove attractive to automakers; an automated transmission capable of handling 400 Nm would cost between ?750 and ?950, some ?250 more than its manually-shifted equivalent.

Findlay presented a matrix of transmission types, weights and costs, as follows:

Transmission type          Unit weight
(based on 400 Nm capacity), kg         Unit cost, ?
Manual transmission         55         500-750
AMT         65         750-950
AT         85         1000-1200
DCT         90         1100-1300
CVT         95         1300-1500

Original subscript:
http://www.dctfacts.com/industry-at-a-glance/future-belongs-dct.aspx

Composites take prime chassis roles at ZF

The ZF rear axle study with wheel-controlling transverse composite leaf spring (shown in green) depicts functional integration and lightweight construction in a passenger-car chassis.

A transverse axle layout and a strut module with integrated wheel carrier are design proposals from ZF that spotlight weight reduction by putting an accent on composite usage.

The lightweight axle design features a transverse leaf spring—made of epoxy resin and continuous-glass-fiber filaments—to handle rear suspension and stabilizing functions as well as rear wheel guidance.

ZF says its rear suspension with composite leaf spring is approximately 12% lighter than a conventional MacPherson suspension and approximately 10% lighter than a conventional twist-beam suspension. When compared to a steel leaf spring, the company’s composite version can be up to 60% lighter, according to ZF’s Gabriele Fruhmann, Project Leader for composite leaf spring rear suspension.

The transverse leaf spring layout enables the elimination of two conventional coil springs, the antiroll bar, mounts and links, as well as two control arms, Fruhmann said.

According to Werner Kosak, Vice President of ZF’s Global Chassis Systems Engineering, “one control arm on each side of the rear suspension is replaced by a composite leaf spring, and also because of the additional integration of stabilizer bar and coil spring, there is weight reduction and cost reduction.”

Micro and mini cars are prime targets of ZF’s wheel-guiding leaf spring. “Electric-drive vehicles are also good candidates for this technology because of the low weight of the leaf springs as well as the available packaging space in front of and above the leaf springs between the longitudinal links,” said Kosak.

The first production application of ZF’s rear suspension with composite leaf spring is possible as early as the 2014 model year, according to Kosak.

A lightweight suspension strut module with integrated wheel carrier has been a ZF Sachs development study project since early 2009.

In one design proposal, the strut, knuckle, and bellows spring are made of long-strand glass-fiber-reinforced plastic. The bellows spring replaces the conventional steel support springs.

“Our focus is a weight reduction of 50% with this new damper compared to a current series aluminum strut,” said Ron Griffith, Director of Engineering and Sales for Suspension at ZF Sachs Automotive of America.

The first application of the composite strut module with integrated wheel carrier is likely to be in the 2015 time frame on micro and mini cars, according to Griffith.

Original subscript:
http://www.sae.org/mags/aei/7840/

Emissions limits, greater fuel efficiency for cars, light trucks made official

By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, April 2, 2010

Consumers will pay more for cars upfront but may save money in the long term under new rules finalized Thursday by the Obama administration that will increase fuel efficiency and for the first time set greenhouse gas emissions standards for cars and light trucks.

The new fuel efficiency standards, issued by the Transportation Department and the Environmental Protection Agency as the result of a May 2009 deal with the auto industry, represent a peaceful end to a contentious legal battle over how to regulate tailpipe emissions. At a time when it is unclear whether Congress will pass climate legislation this year, the new rules also mark the White House’s most significant achievement yet in addressing global warming.

By model year 2016 vehicles must get an average of 35.5 miles per gallon. The requirements will add as much as $985 to a vehicle’s initial cost, according to EPA estimates, but buyers will save about $4,000 on fuel over the life of the car, administration officials said.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson estimated that the tougher Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements will save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the life of cars and trucks sold between the 2012-16 model years with those vehicles’ improved efficiency.

“These historic new standards set ambitious but achievable fuel economy requirements for the automotive industry that will also encourage new and emerging technologies,” LaHood said. “We will be helping American motorists save money at the pump while putting less pollution in the air.”

Environmentalists hailed the move, saying it will transform the U.S. auto market.

The fuel economy standards move up goals set in a 2007 energy law, which mandated a 35 mpg average by 2020. Passenger cars and light trucks now are required to get an average of 27.5 mpg. As a result of the new rules, greenhouse gas emissions from cars should be reduced 21 percent by 2030.

“These standards are good for consumers, the companies, the country and the planet,” said David Doniger, policy director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s climate center.

Gloria Bergquist, vice president at the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said the new requirement “gives us a clear road map for future fuel economy increases. We have a hill to climb, and it’s steep, so we will need consumers to buy our fuel-efficient technologies in large numbers to meet this new national standard.”

Some critics worried about the cost. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) called it “the result of backroom deals and an ideological agenda that will cause more Americans to lose their jobs. Even though unemployment is at nearly 10 percent, this administration continues to press expensive regulations as if the economic recession never happened.”

The NRDC, by contrast, estimated that in 2020, the standards will save consumers $65 billion in fuel costs by cutting oil consumption by 1.3 million barrels a day while also cutting carbon dioxide emissions by more than 220 million metric tons in that year.

The rules cover four types of pollutants — carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and hydrofluorocarbons — so automakers can meet the standards through an array of measures.

Many will probably substitute a new refrigerant called HFO-1234yf, which the EPA could approve in months, that releases a far less potent greenhouse gas than the one now used in air-conditioning units. Auto companies will probably add hybrid and electric cars as well as produce vehicles with smaller turbocharged engines and with engines that do not have to idle at stop signs or in traffic.

California pioneered the idea of greenhouse gas limits for vehicles, setting standards in 2004 that were adopted by 13 other states and the District. Automakers challenged the rules in court, and the Bush administration refused to grant California a waiver from the Clean Air Act, effectively blocking the standards from taking effect.

Once President Obama took office, the alliance, which represents 11 U.S. and foreign automakers, pressed for a deal with the states, labor groups and environmental organizations.

Canada adopted identical emissions standards for its vehicles Thursday, broadening the impact of the regulations. Canada’s environment minister, Jim Prentice, said his government was “pleased to be taking this step to further harmonize our climate change action with the Obama administration — a step that will protect our environment and ensure a level playing field for the automotive industry.”

Original subscript: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/01/AR2010040101412.html