GHG g CO2eq/km

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 1

Elektromobilität – Sichtweise des JRC-IE

Die geplante Entkarbonisierung der europäischen Transportwege…

… und die wichtige Rolle der Elektronen und Protonen

Norbert Frischauf

JRC-IE, Petten, NL

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 2

European Commission (27 Commission members) European

Parliament

SG

European Court of Auditors

The Council of the European Union

The Committee of the Regions

Court of Justice Economic and

Social Committee

RELEX ENTR ENV SANCO RTD JRC

IPSC ^IPTS IE ^{IHCP ITU}

IES IRMM

The JRC is one of the DGs of the EC…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 3

… and a peculiar organisation

• General:

DG of the European Commission

Founded in 1957

7 institutes in 5 countries

• Size:

2750 staff

More than 1000 partner organisations

• Finances:

Total budget 2008: 333 M€

Income 2008: 48 M€

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 4

… to provide customer-driven scientific and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and monitoring of EU policies … The JRC functions as a centre of science and technology (S/T) reference for the

European Union, independent of special interests, private or national ...

The Mission of the JRC

The Mission of the JRC

JRC – Gemeinsame Forschungsstelle

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 5

Quelle: Parry et al., 2001

EU EU - - Target Target 2009:

2009:

+0,7 +0,7 ° ° C C

Climate Change is a top issue for the EU…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 6

Nuon Windpark in Egmond aan Zee, NL

… as is the topic of energy security

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 7

The evolution of the Policy Context (Lisbon Treaty, December 2009)

Towards an energy strategy for Europe 2011-2020 (DG ENER)

→ Towards a new Action Plan (spring Council 2011)

Europe 2020 Strategy (March 2010) → → → → Smart/Sustainable/Inclusive Growth Flagship Initiative “Resource-efficient Europe” → To decouple growth/energy & resource use

Roadmap for low carbon energy system by 2050 (DG ENER)

→ 80-95% CO ₂ reduction (2050)

Transport Whitepaper (2010-2020) (DG MOVE)

→ Decarbonisation of Transport as one main priority

Beyond 20% CO ₂ reduction by 2020 (DG CLIMA)

Decarbonisation is THE buzz word of today

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 8

An 80% reduction in CO ₂

emissions from road transport in the EU requires an almost complete decarbonisation of all cars on European streets

Clean and efficient vehicles are a must!

EU Commitment: 80% GHG reduction by 2050

But: Road transport relies practically exclusively on oil And: transport related GHG

account today for 25% of the global

GHG emissions (2050: 50%!)

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 9

More efficient vehicles (less fuel consumption for same performance) Switching to cleaner fuels (lower CO ₂ emissions per unit of energy) Smart driver choices and behaviour

More efficient vehicles

Switching to cleaner fuels

Smart driver choices and behaviour

Progress is required in all areas…

Three axes of developments are essential:

Enhancing security of EU energy supply by

• Diversification

• Lower consumption

Enhancing knowledge and innovation for EU competitiveness

Efficiency

Cleaner Fuels

Driver Factor

Efficiency

Cleaner Fuels

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 10

… so that a GHG reduction can be achieved

Fuels

Efficiency

Modal shift, efficiency and alternative fuel play ALL a significant role in cutting GHGs by 2050

None of them is sufficient on its own, hence ALL need to be pursued

Modal Shifts

Ref: IEA 2010 draft

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 11

Through combination of

Technology improvements

(direct injection, OBD, transmission, reduced drag, lightweight materials, …)

Hybridisation

including more efficient (electric) drive train + regenerative braking

Provided that efficiency gains are not used for larger, heavier and faster cars!

Up to 50% reduction in fuel use per km for average new LDV reachable by 2030

Efficiency improvement

is cost-effective (even at relatively low oil prices)

has immediate pay-off in reduction of GHG emissions net negative CO2 reduction costs are possible

Efficiency improvements bring swift benefits

Immediate contribution, absolutely needed

However, not enough CO ₂ reduction potential

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 12

Current fuels: Gasoline/Diesel

“ “ But how long But how long still available?

still available? ” ”

Major advantage: High energy density, which has enabled present-day passenger car configuration (weight, space, performance)

fuel distribution infrastructure

These fuels are rather “cheap”

(mainly because lack of internalisation of external costs)

Gasoline/Diesel will not be easily replaced

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 13

No major changes needed in vehicle stock or in fuelling infrastructure Can be implemented in short-term

Note: synthetic liquid fuels from coal and gas do not offer GHG benefits unless combined with CCS

Liquid biofuels (Bio-ethanol, Bio-diesel)

Sustainability criteria, incl. ILUC

2 ^nd generation technologies needed for adequate balance between food-feed-fuel

Still carbon-containing ⇒ not enough GHG emission reduction potential

even when combined with improved efficiency measures

“Reserve” liquid biofuels preferentially for aviation

where current liquid fuels are much more difficult to substitute (both at engine and infrastructure level)

Biomass conversion to power/heat has better CO ₂ balance than to 2 ^nd generation liquid fuels

BUT

Selecting the right fuel is key…

Can contribute moderately in the near term, but not enough

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 14

Gaseous fuels (Compressed Natural Gas, Liquefied Petroleum Gas)

Non-C containing “fuels”: Electricity and Hydrogen Require modifications to engine

and to infrastructure

Indispensible for realising deep CO ₂ reductions Require different drive train and fuelling concepts Will need time to implement and contribute to CO ₂

emission reduction

Must be produced from low-carbon (zero-

carbon) primary energy sources, otherwise no gain

Must be used in high-efficiency drive trains

… to decarbonise the transport sector

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 15

Well-to-Tank WtT (fuel)

+ disposal/

recycling should in principle also be considered

http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/WTW

Covers the full chain in terms of

Emissions (gCO ₂ eq/km) (New European Driving Cycle - NEDC) Energy requirements (MJ/km) (NEDC)

Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)

Extraction/

harvesting

Production/

Processing Distribution Tailpipe

Tank-to-Wheel TtW

(drive train, auxiliaries..) Well-to-Wheel WtW

If WtW/LCA are used as assessment tools...

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 16

Resource

Crude oil Coal

Natural Gas Biomass Wind Nuclear

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)

… various pathways have to be considered

Ref: JEC study

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 17

Ethanol

-200 0 200 400 600

Gasoline Pulp to animal feed Pulp to heat Conv. Boiler NG GT+CHP Lignite CHP Straw CHP Conv. Boiler NG GT+CHP Lignite CHP Straw CHP Wheat straw Farmed wood Sugar cane

MJ / 100 km

Total Fossil

Sugar bee t Whe at

DDGS as animal

feed DDGS as

fuel

Bio-diesel

0 100 200 300 400 500

Conv. Diesel RME: glycerine as chemical RME: glycerine

as animal feed REE: glycerine as chemical REE: glycerine as animal feed SME: glycerine as chemical SME: glycerine as animal feed

MJ / 100 km

Total Fossil

2010+ vehicles

WtW analysis: Bio-fuels

The conversion of biomass into bio-fuels is not energy-efficient

Ref: JEC study

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 18

WTW GHG

0 50 100 150 200

Gasoline PISI Conv. Diesel DICI+DPF CNG (4000 km)

PISI CNG PISI hyb.

C-H2 PISI C-H2 PISI hyb.

C-H2 FC C-H2 FC hyb.

g CO

/ km

TTW WTT

ICE FC WTW energy

0 100 200 300 400

Gasoline PISI Conv. Diesel DICI+DPF CNG (4000 km)

PISI CNG PISI hyb.

C-H2 PISI C-H2 PISI hyb.

C-H2 FC C-H2 FC hyb.

MJ / 100 km

TTW WTT

ICE FC

2010+ vehicles

WtW analysis: H ₂ from NG - ICE and FC

For H2 production from NG, GHG emission are only reduced with FCV

Ref: JEC study

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 19

WTW GHG

0 50 100 150 200 250

Gasoline PISI Conv. Diesel DICI+DPF CNG (4000 km)

PISI C-H2 PISI

L-H2 PISI

g CO

/ km

TTW WTT WTW energy

0 100 200 300 400

Gasoline PISI Conv. Diesel DICI+DPF

CNG (4000 km) PISI

C-H2 PISI L-H2 PISI

MJ / 100 km

TTW WTT

2010+ vehicles

WtW analysis: H ₂ from NG - compr. vs. liquid

Liquid H ₂ is less energy efficient than compressed H ₂

Ref: JEC study

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 20

Ref: JEC study 0

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Energy MJ/ 100km

G H G g C O 2 e q /k m

A shift from Fossil A shift from Fossil

Fuels towards Fuels towards Renewable Fuels is Renewable Fuels is Energy Demanding Energy Demanding A shift from Fossil A shift from Fossil

Fuels towards Fuels towards Renewable Fuels is Renewable Fuels is Energy Demanding Energy Demanding

Renewable Fuels

Bio-Diesel, Bio-Ethanol Synthetic Bio-fuels (wood)

Hydrogen ex-Wind/ex- Bio

Crude Oil

Present Situation

The reduction of GHGE requires energy…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 21

… and comes with a 2-dimensional price tag

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

0 100 200 300 400 500

€/t CO2eq. avoided

€ s p e n t / to n n e f o s s il f u e l s u b s ti tu te d

DME w ood

EtOH sugar beet EtOH w heat

Liquid fuels from wood: integrated in paper mills

Liquid fuels from wood:

free-standing processes

hydro gen pathw ays OIL PRICE

50€/bbl (78$/barrel)

Compressed biogas

c o s t o f re p la c in g d ie s e l o r g a s o li n e ( € /t o n n e )

Conventional biofuels in EU Ethanol from straw

Conventional biofuels:

bioethanol processes biodiesel processes Advanced biofuels processes:

wood to DME wood to liquids

commercial processes

C O 2 tr a d e s a t ~ 2 0 € /t

DME wood BOH sugar beet

BOH

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 22

for vehicle fleet and

representative driving behaviour

Ref: IEA 2010 draft

Deep GHG reductions call for BEVs & FCVs

GHG intensity of passenger transport in 2007 and 2050

IEA Baseline (no EV, no FCV) and BLUE Map scenarios

BEV/FCV Case

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 23

JRC-EUCAR-CONCAWE: Well-to-Wheel Analysis (WtW) Extraction/

harvesting

Production/

Processing Distribution Tailpipe

Major update this year

S ou rc e: D ai m le r, 2 00 9

BEV & FCV can compete with ICE/PHEV

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 24

Electricity and hydrogen can play a role in road transport >2020, but require near-term action Performance improvement and cost reduction, to reach levels similar to ICE

Co-development of vehicles (incl. batteries, fuel cells) AND of recharging/refuelling infrastructure to avoid “chicken-and-egg” situation

Potential technical show-stoppers:

Batteries Electric Vehicles, Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles:

Battery performance (energy density, power density, cyclic degradation, ..)

Fuel Cells Vehicles:

On-board hydrogen storage

H2 production and distribution technologies, refuelling (safety aspects)

Fuel cell performance (degradation, …) For all:

Clean energy sources (RES, nuclear, CCS) Smart grid

Addressed by:

step-up in research and demonstration to achieve performance at acceptable cost

BEV & FCV face technical issues…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 25

Non-technical show stoppers:

Customer acceptance (costs, performance in terms of range and recharging time, safety perception of H2, but also cleaner

energy sources)

Valley of death between demonstration and full market roll-out Chicken-and-egg: vehicle versus refuelling/recharging

infrastructure Lack of skills

Absence of / lack of harmonisation of standards and regulations

Verification of sustainability Raw material security

Noble metal group elements as catalysts

Rare Earth metals in batteries and electric motors

… and market challenges

Incentives

“feebates”

Adequate curricula

International

agreements

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 26

Evolution of LDV by technology type

IEA BLUE Map scenario

The IEA envisions an EV paradigm shift

ICE, including hybrids, decline after 2030

PHEV, BEV and FCV will reach ~80% of sales in 2050

Ref: IEA 2010 draft

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 27

Ref. Campanari IJHE, 2009 (battery = Li-ion)

WtW efficiency, WtT and TtW losses for BEV and FCV

For “nominal”

conditions:

BEV seems superior

to FCV (lower WtT losses)

But

A realistic simulation of drive cycles is needed

The FAQ: BEV vs. FCV or BEV and FCV?

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 28

Ref. Campanari IJHE, 2009

WtW consumptions for BEV and FCV

Both the comparison of WtW consumption…

WtW energy consumption of BEV seriously affected by driving range

⇒

⇒ ⇒

⇒ BEV competitive for ranges below 300-400 km

BEV from electricity mix: highest consumption of all (Italian mix as reference)

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 29

Ref. Campanari IJHE, 2009

WtW CO ₂ emissions of BEV, FCV and conventional vehicles

… and GHGE favour FCV at greater ranges

BEV WtW GHGE seriously affected by driving range (similar to energy consumption) Some commercial vehicles outperform BEV

For today’s typical driving ranges only FCV is feasible

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 30

Ref. Thomas, IJHE, 2009

“Acceptable’’ range for LDV only possible with Li-ion batteries BEV only competitive for ranges < 100km

T y p ic a l m a s s o f c u rr e n t L D V ~ 1 .5 t o n

BEVs suffer from low energy density…

Higher mass for BEV than for current ICE gives rise to higher energy consumption and, with current electricity mix also to higher GHG emissions, despite higher efficiency.

This does not apply for FCV –

even when H2 is produced by

reforming natural gas.

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 31

Ref. Thomas, IJHE, 2009

… both gravimetric and volumetric

FCV feature 50% less loss of useful space than BEV with Li-ion batteries

Volume of H2 storage + FC system and of batteries

as function of vehicle range

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 32

Fuelling time

FCV: average H ₂ fuelling times for >16000 refuellings of 140 FCV: 3.3 minutes (NREL) BEV: charge time depends on

• recharging rates: avoid overheating and maintain voltage balance

• driving range

• power rating of dispensing equipment

For acceptable (but not yet achievable) ranges: tens of hours – or alternative concepts:

change of battery pack, necessitating different business model

Vehicle cost

At present slight advantage BEV

Fuel cost per km

(= fuel price per unit of energy (€/MJ) * fuel efficiency TtW (MJ/km) = €/km)

BEV superior only when off-peak charging possible

Fuelling infrastructure cost (before full deployment)

Lower up-front investments for BEV

BEV vs. FCV: The user perspective

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 33

Technology measures are definitely required

to achieve needed CO ₂ emission reduction from road transport:

Implement a.s.a.p. all possible efficiency improvement measures

Eliminate ICE from many, if not most LDV in the long term:

• Make transition to all-electric (BEV, FCV) over next few decades

• HEV, 2 ^nd generation biofuels and PHEV in the near term

Conclusion: There is no BEV vs. FCV…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 34

Clean transport is not possible without clean power!!

• Transport must be considered in transitioning to low (zero)-C energy system of which it will

constitute a non-negligible demand part – transport technology policy is de facto a major element in energy technology policy (SET-Plan)

• Decarbonising power generation represents an even more urgent challenge than electric vehicle technologies because of the time it takes to implement

• Impact on grid in terms of needed capacity, but also flexibility to be seriously considered

FCEV represent a range and refuelling advantage over BEV. As of now, batteries are competitive in PHEV and BEV for niches/fleets. Both will benefit from developments in electric drive trains.

Necessary transition to zero-C road transport technologies has a positive impact on

• Local pollution and noise, particularly in urban environment, with health and cultural conservation benefits

• Security of energy supply

… both electrons and protons are required!

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 35

Electric vehicles provide opportunity for grid balancing

Source: Tollefson ( in Nature 2008)

Grid balancing can facilitate increased usage of

intermittent renewable resources.

The focus of the electron R&D is on the grid…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 36

... and the proton R&D focus on the value chain

H ₂

Production

H ₂ Storage

H ₂

Utilisation

Electrolysis Reforming Thermal

H ₂ E _kinetic

E _thermal

E _electric gaseous

liquid slush/solid

E _kinetic E _thermal E _electric H ₂

H

H

H

Chemical Combustion Fuel Cell

H ₂

Distribution

?

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 37

High-pressure gas tank testing facility GasTeF

Compressor and tank testing “bunker”:

1 m thick composite walls 3 meters sand

40 tons sliding door

225 m³ interior filled with N ₂ during tests Compressor and tank testing “bunker”:

1 m thick composite walls 3 meters sand

40 tons sliding door

225 m³ interior filled with N ₂ during tests N ₂ liquid

storage N ₂ liquid

storage

H ₂ and CH ₄ storage H ₂ and CH ₄

storage

The JRC-IE conducts R&D on H ₂ storage…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 38

Environmental and vibration testing of FC systems and their performance

ISO TC 197, IEC TC 105 UN-ECE WP 29

…validates and verifies FC technologies…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 39

The laboratory, equipped with the most advanced facilities and instrumentation, allows the physical/chemical and toxicological characterization of the

emissions from all types of transport fleet.

Its measurements support assessments in:

Vehicle Emissions LAboratory (VELA)

•Energy Efficiency in Transport

•Tank-to-wheel analyses and vehicle and emission inventories modeling

•Several support activities for vehicle related regulations and standards (incl. testing)

… and performs complete systems tests…

JRC-IE on 15 July 2010 – eMobility Workshop at BMWFJ 40

… to turn the Decarbonisation vision into reality