Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the EU context IMMISSIONI & EMISSIONI MILANO – 16th December 2008

What is the Well-to-Wheels study ? It is a Life-Cycle Analysis restricted to quantitative aspects: Green-House Gases (GHG)‏ Energy efficiency Direct costs to “EU inc.” The study aims at clarifying the following issue: How to compare different ways to reduce GHG gases from passenger cars, in the time frame? Efficiency ? Availability ? Costs ? The study estimates the energy balance GHG balance, costs, and availability of ALL technically feasible and alternative fuels from all sources with a significant potential to replace oil-based fuels. Derived figures include cost of GHG avoidance and cost of fossil road-fuel substitution for each alternative fuel process

The WTW analysis is: A CONSENSUAL REFERENCE STUDY TRANSPARENT - ALL assumptions and input data specified and accessible STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT - oil/car/biofuels….industries are collaborating - Several Peer Review Meetings - Many improvements achieved using stakeholder suggestions

Resource Crude oil Coal Natural Gas Biomass Wind Nuclear Well-to-Wheels Pathways Powertrains Spark Ignition: Gasoline, LPG, CNG, Ethanol, H 2 Compression Ignition: Diesel, DME, Bio-diesel Fuel Cell Hybrids: SI, CI, FC Hybrid Fuel Cell + Reformer Fuels Conventional Gasoline/Diesel/Naphtha Synthetic Diesel CNG (inc. biogas)‏ LPG MTBE/ETBE Hydrogen (compressed / liquid)‏ Methanol DME Ethanol Bio-diesel (inc. FAEE)‏

MJMJ MJ non renewable primary input / MJ in the tank GHG(g)MJ GHG(g) in CO2 eq. / MJ in the tank WTT Pathways Decomposition

Tank-to-Wheels Matrix

Vehicle Assumptions

Tank-to-Wheels study Vehicles Performance & Emissions Time lag for km/h [s] < 13 > 30 Gradeability at 1 km/h [%] > 180> 600 Range (20 km ZEVRange) [km] Top speed Continuous [km/h] Time lag for 0-50 km/h [s] Time lag for km/h in 4th gear [s] Acceleration [m/s²] < 4 < 13 > 4.5 Minimum Vehicle Performance Set All technologies fulfil at least minimal customer performance criteria All technologies fulfil at least minimal customer performance criteria “Vehicle / Fuel” combinations comply with emissions regulations “Vehicle / Fuel” combinations comply with emissions regulations  The 2002 vehicles comply with Euro III  The vehicles comply with EU IV

Cost of fossil fuels substitution and CO 2 avoided  Some cost elements are dependent on scale (e.g. distribution infrastructure, number of alternative vehicles etc)‏  As a common calculation basis we assumed that 5% of the relevant vehicle fleet (SI, CI or both) converts to the alternative fuel –This is not a forecast, simply a way of comparing each fuel option under the same conditions –If this portion of the EU transportation demand were to be replaced by alternative fuels and powertrain technologies, the GHG savings vs. incremental costs would be as indicated  Costs of CO 2 avoided are calculated from incremental capital and operating costs for fuel production and distribution, and for the vehicle The costs, as calculated, are valid for a steady-state situation where 5% of the relevant conventional fuels have been replaced by an alternative. Additional costs are likely to be incurred during the transition period, especially where a new distribution infrastructure is required.

Costing basis  We considered the cost from a macro-economic point of view (cost to “EU inc.”)‏ –The cost of internationally traded commodities is the market price whether imported or produced within Europe (unless the production cost in Europe is higher)‏ –The 12% capital charge excludes the tax element (internal)‏  Cost elements considered –For fuels produced within Europe Raw material cost Production cost (capital charge + fixed operating costs + energy/chemicals costs)‏ –For imported fuels: market price –Distribution and retail costs –Additional cost of alternative vehicles (compared to state-of-the- art gasoline PISI)‏

Costing basis: oil price  Oil price is important because –It sets the cost of fossil fuels –It influences the cost of virtually all other materials and services  We have considered two oil price scenarios –25 €/bbl (30 $/bbl)‏ –50 €/bbl (60 $/bbl)‏  All other cost elements are adjusted according to an “Oil Cost Factor” (OCF) representing the fraction of the cost element that will follow the oil price

Additional cost of alternative vehicles Base: Gasoline PISI

Road fuels and vehicle market assumptions: Substitution scenario These figures are for replacing like for like and may not be representative of an evolving car market Total demand and gasoline/diesel ratio significantly changed from version 1 Car population figure reduced from version 1

Overall picture: GHG v. total energy Liquid fuels, DME/LPG/CNG/CBG Alternative fuels are generally less energy-efficient than conventional ones vehicles

Overall picture: GHG v. total energy Hydrogen Most hydrogen pathways are energy-intensive vehicles

Overall picture: GHG mitigation Costs

CONCLUSIONS:  Easy to do worse, even with advanced technologies…  To do better than conventional vehicles, you have to pay, and the study is useful to rank and compare  No single fuel pathway offers a short term route to high volumes of “low carbon” fuel: contributions from a number of technologies/routes will be needed.  Conventional biofuels save GHG if made on EU set- aside land, but the GHG saving per € and per ha is much worse than in other sectors Well-to-Wheels Analysis

JEC Study History Version 1: 2001 – 2003 Version 1 published December 2003 Workshop at JRC 2004 to review and start of updates Version 2: 2004 – 2005 Version 2a published May 2006 Biomass availability workshop May 2006 Version 2b published December 2006 Version 2c published May 2007 after small corrections Version 3: 2007 – 2008 (MAINLY FUELS UP-DATE)‏ Preliminary results published these days Full release expected first quarter 2009 Version 4: 2008 – 2010 (MAINLY “CARS” UP-DATE)‏ Expected first quarter 2010

Download: > visitors and > downloads (latest version)‏ Better input data TBS to: Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains

THEEND Many Thanks

Some more technological bits…. Source: PSA