Tier 3 Vehicle and Fuel Standards: Proposal Overview May 13, 2013 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EPA’s Clean Power Plan Proposed Rules for Reducing GHG Emissions from Power Plants Presentation to ACPAC June 16,
Advertisements

Energy Producing States Coalition December 2, 2012 Steve Higley Manager, Outreach American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers Washington, DC Impending.
Swed Gov’t summary HRO/ Background and Approach Present situation EU plans to implement new specifications for petrol and diesel for the years.
Recent EPA Regulation Development Presented by Bill Luthans to the 56 th Meeting of the Joint Advisory Committee Meeting for the Improvement of Air Quality.
Template Emission Controls Affecting Northeast Texas Presentation to the NETAC Policy and Technical Committees Sue Kemball-Cook, Krish Vijayaraghavan,
Final Rulemaking to Establish Light-Duty Vehicle CAFE and GHG Standards Joint Briefing for WP29 June 2010 Informal document No. WP ,
Current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Renewable Fuels Activities September 2006.
1. 2 First authorized to be established by the Clean Air Act of 1970.
Moving Efficiently: Improving How We Transport Goods in America Glen P. Kedzie Vice President, Energy & Environmental Counsel American Trucking Associations.
Reducing Emissions from Existing Trucks and Buses
Sohail Ghanchi Energy Technology and Policy The University of Texas at Austin.
Tier 3 Vehicle and Fuel Standards: Final Rule National Tribal Forum on Air Quality May 21,
1 Corporate Average Fuel Economy Rulemaking National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Informal Document No. WP th session, June.
Canada’s Passenger Automobile and Light Truck Greenhouse Gas Emission Regulations for Model Years Briefing for WP.29 Steve McCauley Environment.
South Coast AQMP/SIP Ozone & PM2.5 Control Strategy Laki Tisopulos, Ph.D., P.E. Assistant Deputy Executive Officer South Coast Air Quality Management.
Should Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards be Changed? Stuart Evans Chemistry 127: The Art of Negotiation, Beloit College Draft of February.
Adoption of California Motor Vehicle Emission Standards Including Greenhouse Gases (GHG) March 18, 2008 Department of Environmental Protection Division.
0 Office of Transportation and Air Quality Update for Air Directors: Transportation and Air Quality Christopher Grundler Deputy Director NACAA Spring Meeting.
PUBLIC WORKSHOP STATEWIDE DIESEL ENGINE IDLE REDUCTION STANDARD August 23, 2007 Department of Environmental Protection Division of Air Resource Management.
EPA’s Proposal for Nonroad Diesel Engines & Fuel
David McNew/Getty Images The downtown skyline is enveloped in smog shortly before sunset in Los Angeles, California.
1 EPA’s Proposal for Nonroad Diesel Engines & Fuel May 2003 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air Quality Informal document.
Clean Air California’s Success -- and Future Challenges.
1 The Renewable Fuels Standard: A Status Report Dr. Michael Shelby EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality March 7 th.
Bill Harnett March 30, 2010 WESTAR Spring Meeting.
Driving Down GHG Emissions, Driving Up Fuel Efficiency: Coordinating a Groundbreaking National Vehicle Policy Kathryn Thomson Counselor to the Secretary.
Diesel Risk Reduction Plan California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board.
Controlling Emissions from In- Use and New 2 and 3- Wheelers in Asia Narayan Iyer, Adviser (Technical), Bajaj Auto Ltd, Pune, India Workshop on Developing.
STATEWIDE WORKSHOP ON THE CALIFORNIA MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS STANDARDS INCLUDING GREENHOUSE GASES August 23, 2007 Department of Environmental Protection.
CO 2 Emissions from Cars, Trucks & Buses in the Metropolitan Washington Region Presentation to the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board.
STATEWIDE WORKSHOP ON THE CALIFORNIA MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS STANDARDS INCLUDING GREENHOUSE GASES December 5, 2007 Department of Environmental Regulation.
Clean Fuels and Vehicles: Importance for Urban Air Quality Katherine Buckley Air and Climate Program Manager U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1 EPA’s Climate Change Strategy Robert J. Meyers Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation December 3, 2007.
2  World oil reserves  U.S. owns 2-3%  U.S. uses 25% The Importance of Energy Independence.
California Environmental Protection Agency AIR RESOURCES BOARD Public Transit Bus Fleet Rule and Emission Standards for New Urban Buses California Air.
On-Board Diagnostics II (OBD II) and Emission Warranty Regulatory Update California Air Resources Board Mobile Source Control Division September 28, 2006.
Orange County Board of County Commissioners Chapter 15, Proposed Modifications to Article III Air Quality Control Environmental Protection Division June.
1 Public Hearing to Consider Minor Amendments to the ZEV Regulation Sacramento, California October 24, 2013.
California’s Efforts to Address Air Quality Impacts Related to Goods Movement Activities.
Proposed Amendments to Heavy-Duty On-Board Diagnostic Requirements August 23, 2012 Heavy-Duty OBD.
Class Project Report, May 2005 ME/ChE 449 Sustainable Air Quality Highway Transportation: Trends from 1970 to 2002 and Beyond By Scott Kaminski Instructor.
Class Project Report, May 2005 ME/ChE 449 Sustainable Air Quality Highway Transportation: Trends from 1970 to 2002 and Beyond By Scott Kaminski Instructor.
HD 2007 Rule Overview Clean Diesel Engine Implementation Workshop Bill Charmley & Paul Machiele US EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality August.
On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) II Regulatory Update Mobile Source Control Division California Air Resources Board April 25, 2002 Sacramento, California.
Class Project Report, May 2005 ME/ChE 449 Sustainable Air Quality Highway Transportation: Trends from 1970 to 2002 and Beyond By Scott Kaminski Instructor.
ARB Phase III Reformulated Gasoline Auto Industry Comments Ann M. Schlenker DaimlerChrysler Representing the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers September.
Sierra Nevada Ozone Summit June 4, 2008 State Strategies to Reduce Emissions of Ozone Forming Pollutants Kurt Karperos Chief, Air Quality and Transportation.
Improving Air Quality: Controlling Mobile Sources Chapter 11 © 2007 Thomson Learning/South-WesternCallan and Thomas, Environmental Economics and Management,
1 South Coast AQMD Staff Comments on Proposed Regulation for In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicles South Coast Air Quality Management District Agenda Item No.
Proposed Carbon Pollution Standard For New Power Plants Presented by Kevin Culligan Office of Air Quality Planning And Standards Office of Air and Radiation.
November 15, Clean Air Act Framework National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set public health goals Planning process considers science,
1 Dr. Tao Zhan, Research Division Dr. Leela Rao, Mobile Source Control Division El Monte, California May 18, 2010 Public Workshop on Proposed Revisions.
111D OPTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR MISSOURI David Weiskopf Sustainable Energy Fellow Natural Resources Defense Council October 28 th.
1 Diesel-Vehicles Emission Control in Japan Environmental Management Bureau, Ministry of the Environment, Japan Masayuki KOIWA.
Garry Kaufman Air Pollution Control Division.  Background on Oil and Gas Air Regulation in Colorado  Basis for Additional Air Quality Requirements for.
Page 1 Legal and Policy Directions for Biofuels Proposed Federal Renewable Fuels Regulations Biofuels: Legal and Policy Dimensions The Law Foundation of.
Allen Lyons 2015 I/M Solutions Forum Virginia Beach 1.
Auto Regulatory and Technology Trends IM Solutions | May 7, 2013 | Schaumburg, IL John Cabaniss Director, Environment & Energy Association of Global Automakers.
1 Advanced Clean Cars Program Clean, efficient vehicles needed to meet California’s health and climate change goals Commercialization of advanced vehicle.
Office of Transportation and Air Quality, USEPA National Association of Clean Air Agencies Fall Membership Meeting October 20, 2008.
California Air Resources Board Industrial Strategies Division Oil and Gas and GHG Mitigation Branch Proposed Regulation on the Commercialization of Alternative.
Methanol Deployment: FFVs, GEM and Electric Drive Strategies for LDVs Michael Jackson Mdj Research 1822 Harris Avenue San Jose, California USA
The Florida Energy and Climate Commission (FECC)
Steve Page Office Director, OAQPS NACAA Spring Meeting 2010
(Model Years ) Jeffrey King Chief, Energy and Climate Programs CEEPC
Nonroad Diesel Engine and Fuel Standards
California Low Emission Vehicle (LEV II) Program in the Northeast
Benefit & Cost Analyses in Support of an ECA Application for Mexico
Maryland's Air Quality: Nitrogen Reductions and the Healthy Air Act
Presentation transcript:

Tier 3 Vehicle and Fuel Standards: Proposal Overview May 13,

Overview Background on Tier 3 Vehicle Standards Fuel Standards Emissions and Air Quality Impacts Benefits and Costs Comment Period and Hearings 2

What is Tier 3? 3 Systems approach to reducing motor vehicle pollution: more stringent vehicle standards enabled by gasoline sulfur control Creates a harmonized vehicle program –Coordinated with California LEV III and Light-duty GHG standards finalized last year for model years (MY) –Enables auto industry to produce and sell one vehicle nationwide Part of comprehensive approach to create cleaner, more efficient vehicles –Begins phasing in with model year 2017 –To allow coordinated compliance with LEV III and LD GHG

Why Tier 3: Air Quality and Public Health Tier 3 standards would have immediate health and air quality benefits Will help attain and maintain ozone and PM NAAQS –Provides cost-effective national reductions that avoid more expensive local controls Reduces pollution near roads –More than 50 million people live, work, or go to school near major roads 4

Why Tier 3: Harmonized Vehicle Program California finalized LEV III standards last year –EPA issued a waiver under CAA in December 2012 The auto industry supports Tier 3 because they want to produce and sell one vehicle nationwide Tier 3 is harmonized with LEV III –Would begin in 2017 to allow coordinated compliance with GHG and LEV III 5

Tier 3 Vehicle Standards Phase in between 2017 and 2025 Tighter VOC and NOx tailpipe standards –80% reduction from today’s fleet average Tighter PM tailpipe standard –70% reduction in per-vehicle standard Evaporative emissions standards –Reduced fuel vapor emissions and improved system durability 6

Vehicle Standards Vehicles we propose to address –Light-Duty Vehicles (LDVs –passenger cars and very small trucks) –Light-Duty Trucks (LDTs – larger pickups and minivans) –Medium-Duty Passenger Vehicles (MDPVs) Heavy duty vehicles between 8,500 and 10,000 lbs GVW, designed for passenger transport – Heavy-duty (HD) pickups and vans “Class 2b and 3” vehicles -- 8,500 to 14,000 lbs GVW 7

Vehicle Tailpipe Standards: NMOG and NOx FTP FTP=Federal Test Procedure –Standard test procedure designed to capture cold start and average drive cycle emissions. Proposed Emission Standards –Fleet average standards in the form of NMOG+NOx Provides flexibility to the manufacturers to certify to a lower fleet average with no compromise in environmental benefits –Standards would decline from a fleet average today of 160 mg/mi to 30 mg/mi by 2025 –Propose declining fleet average starting MY 2017 for 6000 lb GVW 8

NMOG+NOx Fleet Average Standards Phase-in and credits: –Program will allow vehicle manufacturers to earn credits in 2015 and Final Tier 3 Standard 30 mg/mi

Vehicle Tailpipe Standards: NMOG and NOx SFTP SFTP=Supplemental Federal Test Procedure –Introduced in late 1990’s to address operation not captured in historic test cycles –Two SFTP specific test cycles US06 – Rapid accelerations and high speeds SC03 – Air conditioning usage at hot summer temperatures –SFTP standards are composite of FTP, SC03, and US06 Proposed Tailpipe Emission Standards –Tier 3 composite SFTP standards for NMOG+NOx would focus on preventing excess fuel enrichment and lubricating oil consumption Declining from a fleet average of about 100 mg/mi to 50 mg/mi Fleet average decreases between 2017 to 2025 (consistent w/FTP) 10

Vehicle Tailpipe Standards: PM Existing Tier 2 PM standards –Tier 2: FTP – 10 mg/mi, SFTP – 70 mg/mi (weighted) Proposed Tier 3 PM per-vehicle standards –FTP standard of 3 mg/mi –SFTP: US06-only standard of 10 mg/mi for LDVs~LDT2s and 20 mg/mi for LDT3s and LDT4s –Cap standards: Intended to bring all vehicles to typical levels already being achieved To encourage optimization of fuel controls, oil consumption controls, and combustion chamber design –Phase in from 10% to 100% of an OEM’s fleet from MY 2017 to MY

Standards for Heavy-Duty Pickups and Vans Proposing standards of comparable stringency to light-duty, but numerically higher to reflect more demanding duty cycles Phase in from 2018 to 2022 –For vehicles >6000 GVW, CAA requires 4 years of lead time and 3 years of regulatory stability –Proposal includes optional phase-ins that allow for this 12

Vehicle Standards: Evaporative Emissions Key elements –Lower the existing standards to bring nationwide the evap control technology used in California –Incentivize improved in-use system durability through system design improvements, extended useful life –Introduce a new leak emission standard –Bring nationwide the Onboard Diagnostic requirements used in California (helping to also facilitate the new leak standard) Standards cover all gasoline powered highway vehicles 13

Certification Fuel Changes Updating vehicle certification test fuel specifications used for vehicle testing Key highlights –10 ppm sulfur –15 vol% ethanol Forward looking with respect to ethanol content Ensures new vehicles are designed for the fuels they may see in the future –87 octane Also proposing certification test fuel specifications for E85 to provide greater consistency and stability in FFV testing Provisions to allow for testing on other fuels for vehicles that require their use (e.g., premium) 14

Why Lower Sulfur Gasoline? Both Tier 3 and LEV III vehicle standards depend upon lower sulfur gasoline –Sulfur at current levels degrades the performance of vehicle catalytic converters the primary emission control system on vehicles Tier 3 vehicle standards not achievable without lower sulfur Lower sulfur also provides immediate reductions in NOx and VOC emissions from the existing fleet California already has lower sulfur gasoline (as do Europe, Japan, S. Korea, and several other countries) –Other states prohibited from controlling gasoline sulfur on their own Enables some lower-cost technologies for complying with vehicle greenhouse gas standards 15

Tier 3 Fuel Standards Lower the average sulfur standard from 30 to 10 ppm starting January 1, 2017 –California is already 10 ppm sulfur on average, and Europe and Japan have a 10 ppm cap Proposing to either: –Maintain the current per-gallon sulfur caps (80 ppm at refinery gate, 95 ppm at retail); or –Lower caps to 50 ppm at refinery gate, 65 ppm at retail Seeking comment on 20 ppm/25 ppm caps Lower caps would take effect on 1/1/

Fuel Flexibilities Proposing the superset of flexibilities that have proven successful in past EPA fuel programs Annual average standard with a sufficiently high per-gallon cap Early credit program to phase in the sulfur standard from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2019 Relief for small refiners and refineries <75,000 barrels per day –Delay of 3 years through December 31, 2019, consistent with the end of the early credit phase-in for large refiners –Total of 35 refineries representing a total of 10% of gasoline production Economic and Technical Hardship provisions available to all refiners –EPA has granted hardship relief to over a dozen refineries under past fuel regulations; many more for RFS 17

Refinery-by-Refinery Results Of the total 111 refineries regulated: –29 No capital changes (no or minimal cost), –66 Revamp existing unit (moderate costs), –16 Add new grassroots posttreater (higher costs) 18 Revamp New - Grassroots

Tier 3 Emission Impacts Emission reductions will continue to grow beyond 2030 as more of the fleet continues to turn over to Tier 3 vehicles 19 National Onroad Inventory Reductions TonsPercentTonsPercent NO x 284, ,00028 VOC 45, ,00023 PM 2.5 NA 7,50010 CO 747,00045,765,00030 Benzene 1,62548,58136 Total air toxics 15,000390,00023

Ozone Reductions in

Ozone Reductions in

PM 2.5 Reductions in

Benefits of Tier 3 23 Total Ozone and PM-related Premature Mortality Avoided: 820-2,400 in 2030 (based on range of ozone and PM mortality studies) Other PM- and ozone-related health impacts avoided in 2030: Hospital admissions and asthma-related ER visits: 3,200 Asthma exacerbations: 22,000 Upper and lower respiratory symptoms in children: 23,000 Lost school days, work days, and minor restricted activity days: 1.8 million Total Monetized Benefits in 2030 (2010$): $8 to $23 Billion

Summary of Costs and Benefits Fuel Sulfur Standard –0.89 cents per gallon –$2.1 billion in capital costs over 6 year phase-in period –Based on a detailed, peer-reviewed, refinery-by-refinery analysis Vehicle Standards in 2025 –$130 per vehicle Annual Cost in 2030 –Vehicle Program: $2.0 billion –Fuel Program: $1.3 billion –Total Program: $3.4 billion Total Monetized Benefits in 2030 – $8 to $23 Billion 24

RIA Table of Contents Executive Summary Chapter 1: Vehicle Program Technological Feasibility Chapter 2: Vehicle Program Cost and Effectiveness Chapter 3: Establishing New Emissions Test Fuel Parameters Chapter 4: Fuel Program Feasibility Chapter 5: Fuel Program Costs Chapter 6: Health and Environmental Effects Associated with Exposure to Criteria and Toxic Pollutants Chapter 7: Impacts of the Proposed Rule on Emissions and Air Quality Chapter 8: Comparison of Costs to Emission Reductions and Air Quality Benefits Chapter 9: Economic Impact Analysis Chapter 10: Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 25

Public Participation Comment period closes June 13 Hearings held April 24 and 29 –Philadelphia and Chicago –Broad spectrum of stakeholders, including citizens –All testifiers supported Tier 3 except oil industry American Petroleum Institute, American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, Marathon 26