Search Results

This paper analyzes four recent major studies carried out by MIT, a GM-led team, Directed Technologies, Inc., and A. D. Little, Inc. to assess advanced technology vehicles. These analyses appear to differ greatly concerning their perception of the energy benefits of advanced technology vehicles, leading to great uncertainties in estimating full-fuel-cycle (or “well-to-wheel”) greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction potentials and/or fuel feedstock requirements per mile of service. Advanced vehicles include, but are not limited to, advanced gasoline and diesel internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) with gasoline, diesel, and compressed natural gas (CNG) ICEs, and various kinds of fuel-cell based vehicles (FCVs), such as direct hydrogen FCVs and gasoline or methanol fuel-based FCVs.

Quantifying Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) emissions and fuel consumption is a difficult problem for a number of different reasons: 1) HEVs can be configured in significantly different ways (e.g., series or parallel); 2) the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) can consist of a wide variety of engines, fuel types, and sizes; and 3) the APU can be operated very differently depending on the energy management system strategy and the type of driving that is performed (e.g., city vs. highway driving). With the future increase of HEV penetration in the vehicle fleet, there is an important need for government agencies and manufacturers to determine HEV emissions and fuel consumption. In this paper, several critical issues associated with HEV emissions and fuel consumption are identified and analyzed, using a sophisticated set of HEV and emission simulation modeling tools.

Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) offer great promise in improving fuel economy. In this paper, we analyze why, how, and by how much vehicle hybridization can reduce energy consumption and improve fuel economy. Our analysis focuses on efficiency gains associated solely with vehicle hybridization. We do not consider such other measures as vehicle weight reduction or air- and tire-resistance reduction, because such measures would also benefit conventional technology vehicles. The analysis starts with understanding the energy inefficiencies of light-duty vehicles associated with different operation modes in U.S. and Japanese urban and highway driving cycles, with the corresponding energy-saving potentials.

A vehicle's energy consumption and emissions are extremely sensitive to the operating modes of that vehicle. The LA4 test cycle in the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) is the current basis for evaluating a vehicle's energy consumption and emissions, but it was developed more than 20 years ago and does not represent today's typical driving patterns. In this paper, we describe a set of computer simulation models to evaluate energy consumption and emissions of internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, electric vehicles (EVs), and hybrid-electric vehicles (HEVs) under a variety of driving cycles. Using these models, two real-world vehicles -- a 92 Ford Taurus and a 97 GM EV1, -- and a hypothetical rangeextender type HEV, are modeled and analyzed under five different driving cycles. We focus our analysis on vehicle performance characteristics such as driving range, equivalent fuel economy, EV and HEV system efficiency, pure electric drive range, and tailpipe emissions.

The strong correlation between vehicle weight and fuel economy for conventional vehicles (CVs) is considered common knowledge, and the relationship of mass reduction to fuel consumption reduction for conventional vehicles (CVs) is often cited without separating effects of powertrain vs. vehicle body (glider), nor on the ground of equivalent vehicle performance level. This paper challenges the assumption that this relationship is easily summarized. Further, for hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) the relationship between mass, performance and fuel consumption is not the same as for CVs, and vary with hybrid types. For fully functioning (all wheel regeneration) hybrid vehicles, where battery pack and motor(s) have enough power and energy storage, a very large fraction of kinetic energy is recovered and engine idling is effectively eliminated.

This paper is written to provide information on the fuel efficiency, emissions and energy cost of vehicles ranging from a pure electric (ZEV) to gasoline hybrid vehicles with electric range varying from 30 mi (50km) to 100 mi (160km). The Federal government s PNGV and CARB s ZEV have different goals, this paper explores some possibilities for hybrid-electric vehicle designs to meet both goals with existing technologies and batteries. The SAE/CARB testing procedures for determining energy and emission performance for EV and HEV and CARB s HEV ruling for ZEV credit are also critically evaluated. This paper intends to clarify some confusion over the comparison, discussion and design of electric- hybrid- and conventional- vehicles as well.

The effects of hybridization on heavy-duty vehicles are not well understood. Heavy vehicles represent a broader range of applications than light-duty vehicles, resulting in a wide variety of chassis and engine combinations, as well as diverse driving conditions. Thus, the strategies, incremental costs, and energy/emission benefits associated with hybridizing heavy vehicles could differ significantly from those for passenger cars. Using a modal energy and emissions model, we quantify the potential energy savings of hybridizing commercial Class 3-7 heavy vehicles, analyze hybrid configuration scenarios, and estimate the associated investment cost and payback time.