Lean green
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
efficient machine
As truck-makers question the need to further reduce NOx and particulates, ACEA hopes to persuade Brussels to adopt a new way of measuring commercial vehicle efficiency, which could ultimately cut CO2 emissions.
Words: Brian Weatherley Imagine a world where the fuel-efficiency of a new truck is shown with the same kind of colour-coded A-G table used on refrigerators. A world where road hauliers can enter their own 'mission' parameters into a computer-based calculator which, at the touch of a button, shows exactly what that new truck's fuel efficiency and CO2 footprint would be in their own operation. It's not science fiction, it's science future — and it's the kind of system that the European automobile manufacturers' association ACEA wants the European Commission (EC) to adopt in the ongoing battle to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from commercial vehicles
ACENs desire to establish a real-world way of measuring the efficiency of tomorrows trucks comes at a time when CV manufacturers have expressed disquiet over the EC's diesel engine emission strategy and, in particular, what its focus of attention should be after Euro-6, which comes into force on 31 December 2013 and sees particulates (PM) halved and oxides of nitrogen (MN) slashed by a further 77%.
Future strategy
As NOx and particulate levels continue to fall, engine manufacturers are questioning the wisdom of reducing them even further — especially if in the process those cleaner, greener engines end up burning more fuel. And as everyone accepts that CO2 (rather than NOx or particulates) is now the real elephant in the emissions room, the future strategy for engine makers must surely he to burn less fuel and thereby produce less CO2.
While the debate rumbles on,ACFIA director of regulatory projects Stefan Larsson insists that the current method of measuring what comes out of a diesel enginc tail-pipe needs to change when the spotlight shifts to tackling CO2 emissions from the road transport sector. What ACEA is proposing is a major step change towai measuring, monitoring and ultimately improving a truc fuel efficiency, reducing CO2 along the way.
Right now regulators and operators measure engine emissions and fuel consumption with clearly different yardsticks. For the former, it's grams watt/hour, for the latter it's litres/10( or miles/gallon. In terms of emission legal levels are set using laboratorybased test cycles approved by the legislators.
Real-world parameters
liowever.ACEA wants to measun overall efficiency of a CV (not just engine) in order to ultimately dete mine its CO2 footprint, using real-' parameters. "We have to look at th issue regarding metrics,says Lam "For passenger cars, the metric use litres/100km [or grams/km for CC): This isn't very good for goods vehi We have to have a metric that indl. the work being done [by the truck A Stefan Larsson These are vehicles which are used for business, they' task to perform and carry cargoes which are either h or require a certain volume [of load space', or they'r carrying passengers."
"The metrics we'd like the EC to have as a basis when it's looking at fuel efficiency is grams/tonnelkm [i.e. for load-based HGVs]. grams per cubic metre/kin [for volume-based liCiVs] or grams/passenger/km [for buses]."
While the proposition sounds infinitely logical, Larsson admits: "This creates a bit of a problem because quite a few people are happy with the current litres/100Icm measure. It's easy to understand — but it doesn't serve our purposes very well. So the first task is to convince the authorities that you have to address this problem with different metrics" To achieve its goal of changing the way the EC treats CV emissions, ACEA is developing its own three-part strategy that will initially see the creation of a robust. reliable and comprehensive mission matrix into which different types of trucks can be slotted.
It's already developed a basic first-stage 'vehicle segmentation portfolio' that ranges from city delivery vehicles to heavy construction trucks Next, it has to come up with an overall vehicle efficiency rating for each category of vehicle based on actual best practice operating parameters "What we're advocating is a labelling approach that will provide a tool for customers [operators1 to compare different offers from the
Efficiency labelling system
The obvious analogy is the way white goods are sold under the green-to-red energy efficiency labelling system, "Yes, that is one possible approach," confirms Larsson.
"This is a challenge for sure. First, we need to develop the methodology. then, depending upon the level of accuracy, we can determine the number of steps. If we have a very high accuracy, we can have lots of 'colours: If we have less accuracy, we need to have fewer steps, otherwise it won't make sense but the experience we have with computer simulation is that you can achieve quite a high accuracy."
While a labelling system for NOV efficiency might sound
fanciful. Larsson explains that with CO2 now being measured for the first time as part of the forthcoming Euro-6 regulations a basis for the labelling of engines already exists "The next [step] is labelling of entire vehicles and predicting the overall efficiency of the whole vehicle and the combinations,he says "Then you have to have labelling of other components such as bodywork and trailers, which can be based upon a-rule-of-thumb with regard to. say. aerodynamics" Differing views
It will be interesting to see how ACEA's truck manufacturing members (which include the big seven players) react to having their products compared in such a system, particularly it' it leads to clear winners and losers. However, Larsson diplomatically maintains that while "not everyone is supporting all our views with the same enthusiasm, everyone has agreed we have a common view. In general, we have fewer issues among the CV people than we have with light-duty manufacturers — because we've much more harmonised products from the CV people."
More significantly. he says:"-the truck manufacturers are already so competitive that you won't have a silver bullet that would change things between them — they're already very close. But its not only for labelling, it's also a tool to give more correct values for different road transport applications with regard to grams/tonne/km."
Clearly, it would he impossible to try to physically collect operating data for every single truck on El J roads
-so ACEA will be using sophisticated computer modelling to come up with the vehicle matrix and labelling system.
"What we're advocating to the EC is to use computer simulation that is commonly available," explains Larsson. "Of course we need a lot of [data] input, but quite a bit of it is already available through our current activities, such as certifying engines. We can also get engine maps, and we have the standard specs for the trucks themselves, as quite a few of the manufacturers have these kind of [computerbased] services available to their customers."
Computer modelling tool
Interestingly, such a vehicle efficiency computer modelling tool already exists on the other side of the Atlantic. Through funding provided by the US Department of Energy, the Argonne National Laboratory has developed a programme that Larsson says "is very close to what we are looking at. We'll use that tool as a demonstrator, what the EC decides is up to them, but we won't he starting from scratch': Ultimately, the third stage of the ACEA scheme would be to have an online facility that would allow operators to enter their own operating parameters and further personalise the vehicle efficiency comparative data. In this respect. Larsson believes that for the next generation of emissions legislation it will be truck operators, rather than manufacturers, who will be the most important stake holders, and biggest critics, of any future vehicle efficiency scheme developed by ACEA especially if its used as basis for EU legislation. Indeed, Larsson accepts that ACEA has to get it right. "Our customers will closely scrutinise the effects of what will be proposed. We stror believe that it's better to have a good tool rather than a one so we're suggesting to the EC that it's used for labelling purposes, "We'll advise against legal limits on a complete vehic basis, with one important reason being the number of parties involved in the manufacturing process of compl heavy-duty vehicles. Legal limits should, in our view, or be considered for products that have a well-defined pa responsible for compliance."
Improved logistics
Whether the EC is ready to embrace this new way of regulating CV fuel efficiency remains to be seen.
But no one doubts that ACEA's proposal could, if adopted, take CO2 legislation down a very different r to the one we're travelling now a point confirmed 1 Larsson. "What's important is not only the vehicle, tit also improved logistics, which results in a more efficic use of vehicles. The problem we have is that regulatoi like to regulate products not applying a more holi: approach that includes the conditions regarding their
"This is a more challenging task and often doesn't fit what they like to have from a political point of vie, Fortunately for us, additional studies are showing the importance of improved logistics to further reduce C from the transport sector." •