中型和重型公路车辆零排放成本分析（英）-NREL.pdf

Decarbonizing Medium- 74% VMT 39% stock; 26% VMT Buses are also included and described here. FAF: Freight Analysis Framework HEV: hybrid electric vehicle ICEV: internal combustion engine vehicle VIUS: Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey AEO: U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2019. Annual Energy Outlook 2019. https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/. FAF: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2019. Freight Analysis Framework - 2017. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/faf/. VIUS: U.S. Census Bureau (US CB), 2004. Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey (VIUS). Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2002/econ/census/vehicle-inventory-and-use-survey.html.NREL | 12 Drivers of Vehicle Adoption Vehicle adoption in TEMPO is determined by total cost of driving (TCD): o Upfront vehicle cost (manufacturers suggested retail price [MSRP]) o Fuel costs (vehicle fuel economy and fuel price) o Maintenance costs o Vehicle usage (VMT) o Financial horizon considered (or discount rate) o Monetized charging time cost for BEVs (charging availability and speed) o Logit formulation – captures heterogeneities. Lowest TCD captures greatest market share. Nonfinancial factors like availability of make/models, driver preferences, manufacturing or infrastructure constraints, and other external drivers of adoption are not considered. Resale value is not considered. Example of a ZEV reaching cost parity with ICEV Cost parity = ZEV reaches breakeven within assumed financial horizon (despite higher vehicle cost, thanks to lower operational costs)NREL | 13 Key Assumptions • Zero-emission vehicle technologies (BEV , FCEV): MSRP and fuel economy improving over time, in line with DOE projections and vetted with industry: o Batteries: $80/kWh (pack level) in 2035 and $50/kWh in 2050 (see battery and fuel cell assumptions) o Fuel Cells: $80/kW in 2035 and $60/kW in 2050 (see battery and fuel cell assumptions) o Conventional ICEV fuel economy is assumed to improve by 32%–37% across vehicle classes by 2050 (see details). • Zero-emission infrastructure and fuels (see fuel price trajectories): o BEV charging is assumed to become progressively available as BEVs are adopted o BEV average charging price reaches $0.18/kWh by 2030 and is held constant through 2050 o FCEV fueling is assumed to phase in and be fully available by 2040 o Hydrogen average refueling price reaches $4/kg by 2035 and is held constant through 2050 o Results for alternative fuel price assumptions available in sensitivity scenarios here. • Beyond technology advancements, how we think about the investments and the financial horizon considered when adopting transportation technologies can have a substantial impact on cost of driving: o 3–5 years financial horizon considered when determining cost parity for ZEVs (see details). Additional savings can be accrued over over vehicle lifetime but are assumed to not impact adoption decisions.NREL | 14 Key Uncertainties The following parameters are highly uncertain and significantly affect model outcomes and trade-offs between different technologies (see sensitivities): • Fuel cost evolution (diesel, electricity, and especially hydrogen) and infrastructure utilization. • Vehicle costs and fuel economy. • Financial horizon – years of incremental cost savings considered by fleet owners when making purchase decisions; may be different for different use cases. • Vehicle adoption decisions – the assumption that fleets will make decisions based on tangible economic considerations, versus other harder-to-quantify factors like decarbonization pledges. • Future freight demand growth, stock turnover, and freight logistics including truck operations and trip distance distributions. o Charging speed and value of charging time for BEVs are also uncertain. • Limited data for non-freight uses (26% of VMT, here assumed to reach cost parity in line with short-distance freight trucks). SYSTEM-LEVEL PERSPECTIVE: MARKET SEGMENTATIONNREL | 16 2019 MHDV Emissions TEMPO MHDV market segmentation: • Freight demand (ton-miles in 2017) from FAF, segmented by shipment distance bin. • Freight demand growth over time from AEO (+55% by 2050). • Total VMT by vehicle size class from AEO. • Load factors by vehicle class from VIUS. • Vehicle use by distance bin derived from FAF-VIUS synthesis. • Total vehicle stock based on AEO and separated into shipment distances using FAF and VIUS. • Vehicle sales: estimated endogenously in TEMPO with tech mix based on TCD. • Vehicle fuel economy from AEO (2017) and future projections vary by scenario. 2019 MHDV Emissions (445 MM ton CO 2 )NREL | 17 2019 MHDV Stock • Stock and sales shares are not necessarily proportional to contributions to emissions, due to wide disparities in VMT and fuel economy. • Heavy trucks are ~40% of total vehicle stock but are responsible for about 70% of emissions due to lower fuel economy and greater VMT. • For trucks, 2019 total stock is based on AEO and separated into shipment distances using FAF and VIUS. • Bus stock is estimated from AEO passenger-miles traveled (PMT). 2019 MHDV Stock (13 M vehicles)COST PARITY ANALYSISNREL | 19 Cost Parity by Distance Bin Light-Medium Trucks Vehicle Sales Energy Share 35% 11% Energy Share 10% Different freight distance bins impact vehicle VMT and TCD, in turn affecting when ZEVs reach cost parity BEV-150 reach cost parity for 100–249- mile uses in 2026 BEV-150 reach cost parity for 0–99-mile uses in 2028 (lower VMT) FCEV reach cost parity in 2032, BEV- 500 in 2035 (high charging costs) Energy Share 26,000 26,000 56,000 12,000 Average Annual VMT Year ZEVs Reach Cost Parity Shipment Distance Bin [miles] 0-99 100-249 250-499 500-749 0% 10% 1% 0%NREL | 20 • Two ZEV tech solutions and pathways for many applications provide more options and mitigate risks. o BEVs achieve cost parity with ICEVs before 2035 in every distance bin. • 99% ZEV sales by 2035 or earlier o 2050 stock: 75% BEV , 11% FCEV , 14% ICEV (2050 sales: 88% BEV; 12% FCEV). Vehicle Sales Energy Share 35% 11% Energy Share 26,000 26,000 56,000 12,000 Average Annual VMT Year ZEVs Reach Cost Parity Shipment Distance Bin [miles] 0-99 100-249 250-499 500-749 0% 10% 1% 0% 3-year financial horizon Cost Parity by Distance Bin Light-Medium TrucksNREL | 21 • ZEVs achieve cost parity with ICEVs before 2035 in every distance bin. Two ZEV tech solutions and pathways for many applications provide more options and mitigate risks. • 99% ZEV sales by 2046 o 2050 stock: 66% BEV , 16% FCEV , 18% ICEV (2050 sales: 82% BEV; 18% FCEV , 0% ICEV). Vehicle Sales Energy Share 25% 15% 46,000 46,000 60,000 64,000 11,000 Energy Share Average Annual VMT Year ZEVs Reach Cost Parity Shipment Distance Bin [miles] 10% 3% 1% 1% 0-99 100-249 250-499 500-749 750-999 0% Energy Share Year ZEVs Reach Cost Parity 4-year financial horizon Cost Parity by Distance Bin Medium TrucksNREL | 22 • ZEVs achieve cost parity with ICEVs by 2035 in every distance bin. Two ZEV tech solutions and pathways for many applications provide more options and mitigate risks. • 99% ZEV sales by 2042. Shorter-distance bins dominated by BEVs; longer bins dominated by FCEVs. o 2050 stock: 56% BEV , 16% FCEV , 28% ICEV (2050 sales: 78% BEV; 22% FCEV). o 2050 ton-miles: 35% BEV; 34% FCEV; 30% ICEV . Vehicle Sales Energy Share 40% 73% 143,000 84,000 93,000 68,000 10,000 150,000 153,000 206,000 Energy Share Year ZEVs Reach Cost Parity Average Annual VMT 9% 15% 16% 10% 6% 8% 4% 6% 1000-1499 0-99 100-249 250-499 500-749 750-999 1500-2000 2000+ Shipment Distance Bin [miles] 5-year financial horizon Cost Parity by Distance Bin Heavy TrucksNREL | 23 Impact of Fuel Prices Lowest Cost Technology, 2035, Heavy Trucks, $4/gal diesel • In long-distance bins, FCEVs dominate even for low electricity prices if hydrogen prices are below $4–$5/kg and charging 1 MW. Effect of 1-MW charging varies depending on daily driving distance, the range of BEVs competing in each shipment distance, and assumptions about monetized charging time. • Fuel prices are highly uncertain and charging/refueling solutions will have costs that vary by region and over time. • Central assumptions are close to separation line: multiple ZEV pathways. Charging speed is also uncertain and will vary by location (e.g., depot or public) and vehicle. • Other factors may influence marginal behavior, resulting in less abrupt transitions between technologies. • BEVs tend to outcompete FCEVs on a TCD basis at lower shipment distances, higher charging speeds, and lower electricity prices. 1000 kW 500 kW 1000 kW 500 kW 500 kW 1000 kW Red dot: central assumption