11 Alternative Transportation Technologies: Hydrogen, Biofuels, Advanced Efficiency, and Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles National Research Council Report Results Alan Crane and Joan Ogden National Hydrogen Association Conference May 5, 2010

22 COMMITTEE ON ASSESSMENT OF RESOURCE NEEDS FOR FUEL CELL AND HYDROGEN TECHNOLOGIES MICHAEL P. RAMAGE, NAE, [1] Chair, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company (retired), Moorestown, New Jersey RAKESH AGRAWAL, NAE, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana DAVID L. BODDE, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina DAVID FRIEDMAN, Union of Concerned Scientists, Washington, D.C. SUSAN FUHS, Conundrum Consulting, Hermosa Beach, California JUDI GREENWALD, Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Washington, D.C. ROBERT L. HIRSCH, Management Information Services, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia JAMES R. KATZER, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Washington, D.C. GENE NEMANICH, ChevronTexaco Technology Ventures (retired), Scottsdale, Arizona JOAN OGDEN, University of California, Davis, Davis, California LAWRENCE T. PAPAY, NAE, Science Applications International Corporation (retired), La Jolla, California IAN W.H. PARRY, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C. WILLIAM F. POWERS, NAE, Ford Motor Company (retired), Boca Raton, Florida EDWARD S. RUBIN, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ROBERT W. SHAW, JR. Aretê Corporation, Center Harbor, New Hampshire ARNOLD F. STANCELL, [2] NAE, Georgia Institute of Technology, Greenwich, Connecticut TONY WU, Southern Company, Wilsonville, Alabama Alan Crane, Study Director, National Research Council [1] NAE, National Academy of Engineering. [2] Resigned from the Committee June 2009.

33 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Report Completed in 2008 Analyzed costs & CO 2 /oil impacts of HFCVs at maximum practical penetration rate Also analyzed impacts of alternatives to H2 and FCVs (biofuels and high efficiency vehicles) on CO 2 /oil Did not consider PHEVs or EVs

44 PHEV Study (2010) Supplement to Hydrogen report and examines PHEVs on same basis Determined a maximum practical penetration rate for PHEVs and impacts on oil and CO 2 Reviewed the current and projected technology status and costs of PHEVs Considered factors affecting how rapidly PHEVs could enter the marketplace

55 Presentation Outline PHEV Study Methodology and Scenarios PHEV Market Penetration Rates Oil and CO 2 Savings Battery and Vehicle Costs Timing and Transition Costs to Achieve Market Competitiveness for PHEVs Infrastructure Issues Conclusions

6 PHEV Methodology Similar to H2 study methodology Assume vehicle penetration rate consistent with estimated technology development, costs, and other factors. Compare to a Reference Case where no advanced technologies are implemented. Calculate gasoline consumption and CO 2 emissions relative to the Reference Case and subsidies needed until competitive. 6

7 SCENARIOS 1) H2 SUCCESS H2 & fuel cells play a major role beyond ) EFFICIENCY Currently feasible improvements in gasoline internal combustion engine technology are introduced 3) BIOFUELS Large scale use of biofuels, including ethanol and biodiesel. 4) PLUG-IN HYBRID SUCCESS PHEVs play a major role beyond ) PORTFOLIO APPROACH More efficient ICEVs + biofuels + FCVs or PHEVs introduced

8 CASE 1: H2 SUCCESS Scenario

9 CASE 2: ICEV EFFICIENCY Currently available improvements in gasoline internal combustion engine technology used to increase efficiency The fuel economy of gasoline vehicles assumed to improve 2.7 %/year from %/year from %/year from Gasoline HEVs dominate; no FCVs or PHEVs

10 CASE 3: BIOFUEL SUCCESS

11 CASE 4: PHEV SUCCESS 2 mid-size vehicle types: PHEV-10s, PHEV-40s 2 market penetration rates: –Maximum Practical ( same as H2 FCVs but start earlier (2010) –Probable 2 electricity grid mixes (business as usual and de-carbonized generation) PHEV gasoline and electricity use based on estimates by MIT, NREL, ANL

12 CASE 5: PORTFOLIO APPROACH Efficient ICEVs + Biofuels + Adv. Veh.

13 PHEV Market penetration projections Maximum Practical (with optimistic tech development estimates): 4 million PHEVs in 2020 and 40 million in 2030 Probable (with probable technical development): 1.8 million PHEVs in 2020 and 13 million in 2030 Many uncertainties in projections, especially willingness and ability of drivers to charge batteries almost every day. 13

14 PHEV Growth Rates (# PHEVs in the light duty fleet)

15 PHEV Fuel Savings Relative to Efficiency Case

16 PHEV Fuel Savings Relative to HEVs (continued) PHEV fuel savings highly dependent on driving and charging patterns. Average PHEV-10 projected to use 81% of the fuel used by a comparable HEV (40 mpg), saving about 70 gallons in 15,000 miles. PHEV-40 uses 45%, saving about 200 gallons. HEVs will continue to improve fuel economy, reaching 60 mpg fleetwide by 2050, reducing these PHEV savings.

17 Portfolio Fuel Savings

18

19 GHG Emissions with a BAU Electric Grid

20 GHG Emissions with a De-carbonized Electric Grid

21 Batteries are key question Need acceptable cost for reasonable range, durability, and safety Looked at 10 and 40 mile midsize cars - PHEV-10s and PHEV-40s Battery packs with 2 and 8 kWh useable or 4 and 16kWh nameplate energy –Start of life, not after degradation –200 Wh/mile –50% State of Charge range (increases to compensate for degradation)

22 PHEV Battery Pack Costs Current battery pack cost estimates range from $500 to $1500/kWh * NRC chose $625 optimistic and $875 probable NRC cost in 2030 $360 optimistic and $500 probable * These costs are based on the nameplate size of the battery pack. The report also lists costs on a useable energy basis, which initially at least is about half the battery capacity. Current costs are for low volume production of batteries to be installed in vehicles starting in 2010, which were ordered at least 2 years ago.

23 Current Cost Estimates Compared $ /kWh (McKinsey Report) $1000/kWh (Carnegie Mellon University) $ /kWh (Pesaran et al) $ /kWh (NRC: America’s Energy Future report) $875/kWh (probable) NRC PHEV Report $625/kWh (optimistic) NRC PHEV Report $560/kWh (DOE, adjusted to same basis) $500/kWh (ZEV report for California)

24 Future Cost Estimates Compared $600/kWh (Anderman) $ /kWh in 2020 (NRC PHEV) $420/kWh in 2015 (McKinsey) $350/kWh (Nelson) $ /kWh by 2014 (DOE goals adj.) NRC estimates higher than most but not all Assumed packs must meet year lifetime Dramatic cost reductions unlikely; Li-ion technology well developed and economies of scale limited

25 Vehicle Costs PHEV-40 Total Pack cost now $10,000 - $14,000 Total PHEV cost increment over current conventional (non-hybrid) car: $14,000 - $18,000 PHEV cost increment in 2030: $8,800 - $11,000 PHEV-10 Total Pack cost now $ $3,300 Total PHEV cost increment over current conventional (non-hybrid) car $5,500 - $6,300 PHEV cost increment in 2030: $3,700 - $4,100

26 Electric Infrastructure No major problems are likely to be encountered for several decades in supplying the power to charge PHEVs, as long as most vehicles are charged at night. May need smart meters with TOU billing and other incentives to charge off-peak. Charging time could be 12 hours for PHEV-40s at 110-V and 2-3 hours at 220-V. Thus home upgrade might be needed. If charged during hours when power demand is high, potential for significant issues with electric supply in some regions.

27 Transition Costs Function of vehicle costs, driving costs and number of vehicles Breakeven when PHEV fleet fuel savings equal new vehicle subsidies Results sensitive to vehicle costs and oil price

28 PHEV-10PHEV-40PHEV-40 Sensitivity Cases High Oil DOE Goal 30/70 mix PHEV-40/PHEV-10 Market penetration Max. practical Probable Breakeven Year Cum. Cash flow to breakeven ($billion) Cum. Vehicle Retail Price Diff to breakeven ($ billion) # Vehicles at breakeven (million) TRANSITION COSTS: PHEVs 1-3 decade transition time; Transition cost $10s-100s Billions; Results very sensitive to oil price and vehicle (battery) cost

29 PHEV-10PHEV-40PHEV-40 Sensitivity Cases High Oil DOE Goal H2 FCV Success Partial Breakeven Year Cum. Cash flow to breakeven ($billion) Cum. Vehicle Retail Price Diff to breakeven ($ billion) # Vehicles at breakeven (million) Infrastructure Cost at breakeven ($ Billion) 10 (in-home 132 (in-home 13 (in-home 10 (in-home 8 ( H2 stations for first 5.6 million FCVs) 19 ( H2 stations for first 10 million FCVs) 29 TRANSITION COSTS: PHEVs and H2 FCVS

30 Major Findings PHEVs are likely to remain expensive without a breakthrough in battery technology. PHEV-40s are unlikely to achieve cost-effectiveness before 2040 without breakthrough PHEV-10s may be cost-effective before 2030 Achieving DOE costs goals could make PHEV 40s cost effective in years. The U.S. could have tens of millions of PHEVs on the road in several decades, but that would require tens or hundreds of billions in subsidies.

31 Major Findings (continued) PHEVs have the potential to significantly reduce fuel consumption and emissions of CO 2. HEVs have similar, but somewhat less, potential than PHEVs. No major problems are likely in supplying the power to charge PHEVs for next several decades, as long as most vehicles are charged at night. Charging during day could create significant infrastructure issues.