Executive Summary

This is the third report of the National Research Council (NRC) Standing Committee to Review the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV).1 The PNGV program is a cooperative research and development (R&D) program between the federal government and the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR) that was initiated by President Clinton on September 29, 1993. The program has three goals:

Goal 1. Significantly improve national competitiveness in manufacturing for future generations of vehicles.

Goal 2. Implement commercially viable innovation from ongoing research on conventional vehicles.

Goal 3. Develop vehicles to achieve up to three times the fuel efficiency of comparable 1994 family sedans.

The Goal 3 vehicles should maintain or improve performance, size, utility, and total cost of ownership and operation of comparable 1994 family sedans and should meet or exceed federal safety and emissions requirements. The first major PNGV milestone, targeted for the end of calendar year 1997, is selection of the most promising technologies for the Goal 3 concept vehicles. (This is usually referred to as the technology "downselect" process.) Goal 3 vehicle schedules are to fabricate concept vehicles by 2000 and preproduction prototype vehicles by 2004.

1  

 Hereafter referred to in this report as the committee.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report Executive Summary This is the third report of the National Research Council (NRC) Standing Committee to Review the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV).1 The PNGV program is a cooperative research and development (R&D) program between the federal government and the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR) that was initiated by President Clinton on September 29, 1993. The program has three goals: Goal 1. Significantly improve national competitiveness in manufacturing for future generations of vehicles. Goal 2. Implement commercially viable innovation from ongoing research on conventional vehicles. Goal 3. Develop vehicles to achieve up to three times the fuel efficiency of comparable 1994 family sedans. The Goal 3 vehicles should maintain or improve performance, size, utility, and total cost of ownership and operation of comparable 1994 family sedans and should meet or exceed federal safety and emissions requirements. The first major PNGV milestone, targeted for the end of calendar year 1997, is selection of the most promising technologies for the Goal 3 concept vehicles. (This is usually referred to as the technology "downselect" process.) Goal 3 vehicle schedules are to fabricate concept vehicles by 2000 and preproduction prototype vehicles by 2004. 1    Hereafter referred to in this report as the committee.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report During this third review, at the request of the U.S. Department of Commerce, the committee was charged with: critically evaluating the research progress and the state of development of energy converters (compression ignition direct injection [CIDI] engine, gas turbines, fuel cells, and Stirling engines), energy storage technologies (batteries, flywheels, and ultracapacitors), and electrical systems and power electronic technologies under consideration by the PNGV evaluating the PNGV efforts to overcome technical barriers identified in the committee's second report, progress the PNGV has made to maintain its current research schedule and milestones, and the efficacy of the future program to achieve the specified PNGV goals of performance, cost, and schedule assessing the relevance of ongoing research to the PNGV's goals and schedule examining the extent to which recommendations from the committee's first and second reports have been addressed by the PNGV The committee was also charged with commenting on several broad program issues: the effort the government has initiated to anticipate infrastructure problems or issues that might arise upon introduction of the PNGV advanced vehicle the means by which PNGV might draw upon foreign automotive technology the process by which PNGV will make choices and reallocate resources in the downselect process now scheduled for the end of 1997 the overall adequacy and balance of the PNGV technical program This summary highlights the committee's principal findings and recommendations and addresses the following: (1) the PNGV's systems analysis efforts, which are needed to properly define performance requirements for the technologies under development towards Goal 3 objectives; (2) progress in technology development; (3) progress on goals 1 and 2; (4) broad program issues; and (5) important barriers to program success. The final section comments on PNGV's response to recommendations in the committee's two previous reports (NRC, 1994; 1996). SYSTEMS ANALYSIS Systems analyses are used for preliminary design studies as well as for performance trade-offs and cost comparisons for alternative vehicle configurations incorporating different subsystem combinations. An appropriately configured and

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report validated set of systems analysis tools can allow an accurate determination of the requirements for the vehicle subsystems, such as energy converters, energy storage, and power electronics. If systems analyses are established at the outset of the program, they can guide the orderly selection and development of subsystem technologies with specific performance requirements for meeting the Goal 3 vehicle objectives. During its second review, the committee expressed strong concern that the systems analysis effort had been significantly delayed by 12 to 18 months and that this delay was likely to jeopardize the technology downselect process scheduled for the end of 1997. That concern remains, although the committee notes that progress has been made since January 1996, when a contract was ultimately initiated to pursue aggressively the effort outlined in the PNGV Technical Roadmap. Progress to date has resulted in the creation of a rudimentary vehicle model and the initial development (or assembly from various sources) of models for the many vehicle subsystems and components. These subsystem models vary in quality from excellent representations (with substantial documentation) of some subsystems, such as internal combustion engines, to very generic, simplistic models for less understood subsystems like the fuel cell. Although attention has been focused on creating systems analysis tools, little effort has been made to understand how the tools will be used by the PNGV technical teams (especially the vehicle engineering team) in studies necessary for the technology downselect process. Minimal participation by the vehicle engineering team has delayed the accurate establishment of optimal vehicle requirements. Also, interactions with the other technical teams appear to be minimal. This will affect the accuracy and usefulness of the subsystem models. Establishing reliable models requires good validation data, but much of the available data are considered proprietary by potential providers. The lack of such data is hindering the efforts of the PNGV systems analysis team and, if not corrected, will further aggravate program schedules. Also, lack of government funding has necessitated reductions in technical efforts by the national laboratories, which will affect the realization of systems analysis objectives for fuel cells, batteries, ultracapacitors, and flywheels. Furthermore, cost and reliability models, which are critical to evaluating designs, are inadequate and significantly behind schedule. The committee believes the foundation for the systems analysis part of the PNGV program has now been established. This belief is based on a detailed review of the technical approach and a demonstration of the systems analysis capabilities to the committee. However, the systems analysis work is at least a year behind schedule. If there is to be a truly meaningful downselect process in the 1997 to 1998 time frame, a reasonably reliable systems analysis of competing systems must be available before the end of the time period. Completing trade-off studies by the end of 1997 to allow selection of the preferred vehicle concepts remains a major challenge, especially in light of insufficient funding.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report Recommendation. The managers of the PNGV should conduct a program review with the leadership of the vehicle engineering team and systems analysis team to assess the capability of the existing projects to achieve program performance requirements for the technology downselect process. A corrective action plan should be formulated and implemented as a matter of some urgency. This will ensure that systems studies are designed and implemented to provide the necessary optimization and trade-off information to make the best choices. It would be logical for the systems analysis team to place a priority on enacting those models that appear to be sure contenders for the technology selection process in 1997. Recommendation. The managers of the PNGV should define and obtain the necessary resources for conducting systems analyses in 1997 and 1998. TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT To achieve the Goal 3 fuel economy target, the efficiency of the combustion engine or fuel cell, averaged over a driving cycle, will have to be approximately double today's efficiency and will have to reach a level of at least 40 percent thermal efficiency. This is a very challenging goal. The candidate systems for the Goal 3 vehicle (as listed above in the committee's statement of task) have not changed during the past year. Energy Converters CIDI Engine There has been limited progress during the last year in developing CIDI engines in the PNGV program, per se. However, the production of relatively advanced small-displacement CIDI engines in Europe, and ongoing work to improve them, indicates that the PNGV CIDI performance goals, with the possible exception of emissions, are potentially achievable. The 1995 engine characteristic targets established by the PNGV CIDI technical team have been met or exceeded in test engines. An adequate plan has been developed, and a technology road map applicable to CIDI has been completed. Research priorities have been established, and efforts to address them have begun. The highest technology risk appears to be the ability to develop fuel management and after-treatment systems to meet uncertain federal exhaust emission requirements in 2004. The PNGV has an ongoing modest effort to reduce emissions both from the engine and through after-treatment. But funds are limited, and results are insufficient to date to assess a rate of progress. The production cost of a CIDI engine appears to be an impediment to meeting the challenging goals set forth for 2004. It appears that the complex high

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report pressure injection system, variable geometry turbocharger, and high cylinder pressures, combined with the need for lightweight, high strength materials will result in a substantial cost premium. Also, the testing of lightweight structures and cost-reduction features for the CIDI engine are at least a year behind schedule for the year 2000 concept vehicle. Although, as noted above, there are significant risks that CIDI engines will not meet the PNGV goals, this technology is, by far, the best understood and most highly developed among the power plant technologies being pursued in the program. It is, therefore, highly likely that CIDI engine technology will be among the selected candidates for use in the year 2000 concept vehicles. This technology deserves substantial and focused program attention with adequate (increased) financial support. Recommendation. The PNGV should expand efforts to devise lightweight, low-cost alternative CIDI engine structures, and additional resources should be made available. Recommendation. The PNGV should immediately assess the possible effect of regulatory actions aimed at reducing the atmospheric level of fine particulate matter on the viability of passenger car CIDI engines, and the research and development program should be modified, if necessary. To help the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) make decisions based on the best possible information, the EPA should be continually informed of decisions made by PNGV during the downselect process. Furthermore, the PNGV and EPA should work together to determine the trade-offs between vehicle performance and environmental standards and associated impacts on social benefits and costs. Gas Turbines Gas turbines represent a "promising" technology for hybrid vehicles; however, development is behind schedule, and major technical barriers remain. These barriers include the availability of suitable turbine materials that could withstand the high temperatures demanded for Goal 3 vehicles and the need for low-cost heat recovery devices (recuperators or regenerators). Also, there is still considerable uncertainty about critical design parameters for the subsystems because to date no comprehensive PNGV system studies have been completed for automotive gas-turbine powered vehicles. Recent system studies indicate that gas-turbine powered vehicles have the potential to approach the thermal efficiency, weight, and volume requirements for an 80-mpg fuel economy level. However, these systems studies are primarily first-order analyses, and more detailed systems studies involving tradeoff analyses are necessary to identify promising systems and subsystem configurations. Gas turbine manufacturers have stated that they can meet or approach the PNGV objectives. This claim has not been proved. However, based on information

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report presented by the manufacturers and the state and progress of turbine technology in general, the claim seems feasible given sufficient development time and adequate resources. Significant progress has been made in the manufacture of high quality ceramic turbine components with complex shapes using processes with good potential for scale-up to the required manufacturing volumes. Impressive gains (e.g., shorter production times) have also been documented with the silicon nitride gelcast approach, but it is still far from what would be required to achieve a low enough production cost for automotive parts. Despite the progress to date, especially in the critical areas of ceramic turbines and ceramic heat-recovery devices, even the most optimistic projections (for the development time required based on current funding levels) would put the gas turbine well beyond the time frame for a meaningful demonstration of the PNGV concept vehicle. Recommendation. Gas turbine development should continue, and acceleration of the basic technology and systems and design optimization efforts should be considered. Some of the deficiencies and inconsistencies among the developers indicate that a better technical focus in areas such as bearings, overall system optimization, and manufacturing goals should be defined. Stirling Engines Stirling engine technology has been selected by General Motors for development in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) program, which is in its initial engine evaluation. Much will be learned about the potential of the Stirling engine for possible application to the PNGV program through this program. Cost, manufacturing hurdles, and durability for automotive applications are not well understood at this time. Being an external combustion engine, the five heat exchangers required (heater head, regenerator, air pre-heater, gas cooler, and radiator) create the most uncertainty. Cold-start emissions also need to be determined. The DOE HEV program is expected to provide a benchmark regarding the performance of these components as well as an assessment of the critical issue of working fluid containment. Recommendation. The PNGV should review results from the General Motors/DOE HEV program on an ongoing basis, and the potential use of a Stirling engine in a PNGV prototype vehicle should be assessed through appropriate vehicle systems, modeling, and packaging studies. Fuel Cells Current PNGV and worldwide efforts to develop fuel-cell power plants for cars focus on the proton-exchange-membrane (PEM) fuel cell, which is generally

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report considered the most promising fuel-cell candidate for the HEV. Like other fuel-cell technologies, it operates best on hydrogen as a fuel. However, because an infrastructure for production, storage, and distribution of competitively priced hydrogen is not likely to be developed in the foreseeable future, the strategy of the PNGV program is to convert gasoline on board the vehicle to hydrogen for use by the fuel cell. This approach requires a fuel processor on board the vehicle to convert gasoline into a hydrogen-rich fuel stream with very high efficiency (i.e., to retain the fundamental efficiency advantage of electrochemical energy converters over combustion engines). Furthermore, the fuel stream entering the fuel-cell stack must be almost entirely free of carbon monoxide (CO) and other fuel-processing contaminant byproducts that can poison the noble metals used as the fuel-cell anode electrocatalysts. The most challenging issues are: (1) developing a high efficiency, thermally integrated fuel processor for gasoline; (2) developing a method and/or system for reducing CO concentrations to very low levels in the hydrogen gas stream emerging from the fuel processor; (3) integrating and controlling a fuel processor and fuel-cell stack to achieve highly efficient operation over a wide range of power outputs; (4) finding a CO-tolerant electrocatalyst for the hydrogen anode in the fuel cell; and (5) achieving the stringent PNGV cost goals for the complete fuel-cell power plant with its integrated controls. Progress has been made in (1) developing fuel processors for potential use with gasoline, (2) attaining much improved performance levels in the electrochemical cell stack, as required to meet PNGV goals, and (3) developing and evaluating controls and ancillaries for efficient thermal and water management and for operation of fuel cells at the desired pressures. Resolution of the major technical and cost issues will require more funding, time, and effort than are currently available; thus, the prospect of reaching PNGV goals on schedule is low. Present high costs of commercial phosphoric-acid fuel cells used for stationary power, and the high cost of the materials used for PEM fuel-cell components indicate that costs must be reduced by about two orders of magnitude to meet the PNGV targets. The committee is of the opinion that it is unlikely dramatic reductions can be obtained without significant technological developments and major breakthroughs. The PEM fuel-cell technology probably cannot be cost-competitive in the PNGV time frame or substantially thereafter. Even though the PEM fuel cell appears to be beyond the PNGV time frame, it does offer high potential for very low emissions and high thermal efficiency. Because other fuels more compatible with fuel cells than gasoline, such as methanol or possibly hydrogen, may become commercially available in the long run, it seems important for PNGV program decisions to weigh the longer-term high efficiency and low-emissions potential of fuel cells powered by nongasoline fuels. Recommendation. Development of automotive fuel-cell technology should be continued with emphasis on achieving breakthroughs in areas critical to achieving high efficiency, long life, and low manufacturing cost.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report Recommendation. Because a high performance, compact, efficient, and low-cost gasoline fuel processor is a key to early automotive fuel-cell applications, high priority should be given to a 50-kW gasoline fuel processor. However, a demonstration project should be funded only if design studies can reliably indicate the attainment of the performance goals that have been set with respect to CO content and total system efficiency. Energy Storage Devices Batteries During the last year, the PNGV battery program has progressed well, and the growing focus on electrochemical batteries as the most promising energy storage option for the hybrid vehicle seems appropriate to the committee. The PNGV program has refined the performance and cost criteria for HEV energy storage based on assumed vehicle powertrain response modes. Because these criteria are not based on detailed vehicle systems analysis of performance requirements and cost trade-offs, they should be used as guides rather than as hard rules for selecting and developing batteries for hybrid vehicles. The committee concurs with the selection of the lithium-ion battery technology as the primary candidate for development of hybrid vehicle batteries. The first phase of this development, completed in 1996, benefited from a sound starting point and technical approach and has been successful. Plans for a second phase are to develop a battery system design that minimizes safety concerns under all operating conditions and has potential to approach the PNGV cost goals. The PNGV is also funding two efforts to develop nickel-metal hydride hybrid batteries. These efforts have not yet yielded results that permit assessment of the potential of this technology for the Goal 3 vehicle. Battery requirements may be able to be relaxed based on a more detailed vehicle systems analysis. If so, this would expand the selection of possible battery types that may be applicable, including alternatives such as high-power versions of lead-acid batteries or nickel/cadmium batteries. At present the PNGV appears to rely on the DOE programs and evaluations of the three USCAR partners to advance and assess the potential of advanced lead-acid batteries for the HEV. The plans for developing a more systematic hybrid vehicle battery design testing methodology and, presumably, a physical capability for testing, are most appropriate and deserve support of the PNGV, as does a program of fundamental research for the exploration of breakthroughs. Recommendation. Development of the high-power lithium-ion battery should continue to the prototype module level, with early emphasis on safety under all foreseeable conditions. The control requirements for the safe operation of

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report modules and batteries in the hybrid mode(s) should be determined, and development of potentially low-cost electric and thermal control systems should be initiated. Recommendation. The ongoing exploratory development of high-power nickel metal hydride batteries should be completed. Based on these data and test data from promising nickel metal hydride batteries available from other sources, the PNGV should determine whether this technology offers advantages over lithium-ion in hybrid applications and how these advantages might be captured for the Goal 3 vehicle. Flywheels Flywheels offer very attractive power-to-weight and power-to-volume characteristics for hybrid vehicles, both in delivering power and in recovering kinetic energy during braking. However, major issues related to safety, cost, and packaging remain to be resolved if flywheel subsystems are to become an integral part of HEV power sources. Since the committee's second review, the PNGV flywheel technical team has planned a series of efforts starting in January 1996 and has made progress in defining a mission statement and constructing a development plan for the flywheel activity. The team is also involved in integrating other flywheel design and testing activities occurring outside of the PNGV. If funding of about $1.3 million can be made available for fiscal year 1997, a laboratory-scale flywheel subsystem is scheduled to be ready for testing by the end of 1997. The committee concurs with the flywheel technical team's assessment that flywheel subsystems are unlikely to be integrated in the first concept vehicles. The committee believes that other activities outside of the PNGV, such as related work funded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency, have produced significant data that will be important to the technical team's evaluation of flywheel subsystems as part of the technology selection process in 1997. Recommendation. After the appropriate vehicle systems analysis trade-off studies are completed, performance objectives for flywheel subsystems should be established that satisfy the requirements of the fast-response power plant vehicle system.2 A plan should then be developed for the integration and evaluation of a flywheel subsystem into post-2000 concept vehicles. Recommendation. The Advanced Research Projects Agency comprehensive flywheel failure-containment plan should be pursued, including the compilation of burst/collision failure test data from all available sources. 2    A fast-response power plant reacts very much like a conventional automotive engine.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report Ultracapacitors Ultracapacitors are potential energy storage devices for some hybrid vehicle configurations and have been proposed for limiting the surge current load on hybrid vehicle batteries. Ultracapacitors can deliver high specific power over short time periods and operate for many cycles, but their specific energy is well below that of batteries and the Goal 3 vehicle requirements. They also have a problem in that the projected cost for energy storage capacity is about two orders of magnitude higher than the PNGV cost goal. In addition, the requirement for more complex power conversion devices will add to the ultracapacitor system cost as compared with batteries. The ultracapacitor projects are in an early stage of research and development. Current programs are behind schedule, and the milestones for 1996 have not been met. Given the state of development and the technical and cost barriers, it is highly unlikely that the ongoing projects will meet the PNGV performance, cost, and schedule goals. None of the ultracapacitor concepts currently under development appears capable of meeting the PNGV cost goals. Thus, it seems too early to attempt cell stack engineering scale-up. It would be appropriate at this stage to assess the progress being made in ultracapacitor development for other applications with the intention of determining needed research, development, and demonstration for hybrid vehicles. Additional systems studies using better models for capacitors, batteries, and the balance of system can provide a more realistic view of the long-term potential of ultracapacitors. Recommendation. The PNGV should conduct appropriate systems studies to determine the prospects for ultracapacitors in hybrid vehicles in comparison with high power batteries and other energy storage devices, such as flywheels. Recommendation: Ultracapacitor activities for application to hybrid vehicles should be limited to basic and applied research at universities, national laboratories, and industrial R&D centers, aimed at fundamental advances and breakthroughs. Electrical and Electronic Power Conversion Devices All of the PNGV HEV configurations (including vehicle subsystems and accessories) require electric motors/alternators, electric power inverters, sophisticated electronic and electric controllers, and electric power conversion and control devices to maximize efficiency. During this third review, major issues identified by the committee affecting the realization of the PNGV goals include the following: (1) no data were presented to the committee that would establish confidence that the goal for overall driveline efficiency can be increased to 80 percent from the estimated 70 percent based on current technology; (2) it appears that insufficient technical effort is being directed toward reducing the power

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report requirements of vehicle electric and electronic subsystems (such as power steering, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems, cooling pumps) below the current potential demand of up to 30 percent of the vehicle drivetrain power; (3) the current cost of many of the electrical subsystems is estimated to be 50 percent to 300 percent above the PNGV targets; and (4) assigning targets to the individual components without the benefit of an overall vehicle system definition supported by systems analysis will not result in an overall optimization of vehicle performance and cost. Overall the committee concluded that very little was accomplished by the PNGV electrical and electronics power conversion devices team during the past year. The PNGV Technical Roadmap power electronic building block milestone for 1995 was not met, and at the current rate of accomplishment, the second milestone, established for 1997, will also be missed. Furthermore, many tasks in the road map are not being addressed. The team has been without an appointed leader for most of the year, and the team has virtually no full-time participants. The committee also sensed that the PNGV appears to have placed an inadequate degree of urgency and importance on this team's activities. The committee believes that this effort is seriously behind schedule and could jeopardize the 1997 downselect process at its current pace. Recommendation. The new leader of the electrical and electronic power conversion devices team should be full time in this role and should determine what is required to make up for lost time and establish the necessary schedule. The team leader should identify the staff necessary for effective team performance and commit them to team activities. One of the highest priorities for the new team leader should be the development of interfaces with the vehicle engineering team and the systems analysis team. Recommendation. The impact of the schedule slippage on the technology down-select process should be reviewed immediately by PNGV management, and plans should be made for meeting schedules to support the overall PNGV effort. MANUFACTURING NEEDS FOR GOAL 3 The manufacturing team is now well organized, well established, and is making progress. A manufacturing technology road map also has been formulated and will need continued refining as new needs are identified to meet the challenges of the Goal 3 product technologies. The manufacturing team members are active participants in the product technology teams and, as needs arise, are able to communicate these needs to government representatives, other consortia, universities, and suppliers. It is unlikely, however, that significant cost and production efficiency achievements will be available for the vehicle systems when the

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report INFRASTRUCTURE The committee's second report cited the importance of considering the impact of the PNGV program on the nation's infrastructure. For example, adoption of alternative PNGV power plants that use fuels such as methanol, dimethyl ether, or hydrogen to achieve the PNGV vehicle efficiency goals would require significant modification of the fuel production, transportation, storage, and retail distribution infrastructures. Indeed almost all aspects of bringing a Goal 3 vehicle to market have significant infrastructure implications. These range from raw material supply to manufacturing capability to production of the products and from environmental impact to ancillary support, such as highway systems and vehicle service, insurance, and maintenance. The infrastructure analysis is an important tool for the PNGV program. As the PNGV continues to refine its technology knowledge base, it is important that the power plant configurations and fuel types being considered are accurately represented and evaluated with suitable infrastructure models as an integral part of the downselect process. Also, for simulation to remain a valuable tool, it is very important that the underlying assumptions of the model be continually re-evaluated, updated, and made transparent as new information becomes available. During the past year, a research team from Argonne National Laboratory has continued the work reported to the committee during its second review in August 1995. The work involved further developing and testing their life-cycle energy and emissions model, GREET (greenhouse gases, regulated emissions, and energy use in transportation). Recommendation. The infrastructure study should be continued. There should be a concerted effort to evaluate the GREET model relative to models developed for similar purposes by the oil industry and other agencies. TECHNOLOGY DOWNSELECT PROCESS From the outset of the PNGV program, the first major milestone was the 1997 technology downselect. This milestone was chosen on the basis that, as a result of three years of studies and research and development, clear technology ''winners" would emerge. The winning technologies would obviously be those with high potential to meet the PNGV goals. Conceptually, after downselect, the "losing" technologies could be dropped (or dramatically de-emphasized), and most of the PNGV development effort would be directed toward the technologies selected as "winners." These efforts would result in the incorporation of the winning technologies in concept vehicles and, later, in production prototypes. However, the perception of what defines the winners and losers has changed. The initial focus was almost entirely on one part of Goal 3 (up to 80 miles per gallon fuel economy), along with the innovations and inventions that would be needed to make the technologies compatible with the Goal 3 car, but more traditional

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report automotive considerations, such as cost, packaging, and system integration, are becoming equally important as decisions must be made on concept car designs. When all of these factors are taken into account, there will probably be no clear winners in the context of the original PNGV plan. This is not because of a lack of technical progress since there has been appreciable progress in virtually all, and very significant progress in some, technologies. Instead, it is related to the PNGV time frame and the realities of costs and manufacturing requirements. Consequently, a primary downselect conclusion will be that some otherwise very promising technologies will not be fully demonstrable within the original PNGV time frame, especially nonconventional technologies, such as fuel cells, gas turbines, Stirling engines, flywheels, and ultracapacitors. Thus, the 1997 downselect will likely encompass, to a large degree, substantially improved and advanced versions of internal combustion engine and drivetrain technologies, batteries, vehicle structure, and manufacturing technologies. As a result, nonconventional technologies run the risk of being discontinued or discarded in the downselect process, although it might well be in the national interest to continue their development under a longer-term, sustained program. Such a program would provide an insurance strategy in the event that the expected nearer-term technologies encounter unexpected barriers to implementation or fall short of fuel economy goals or if future societal goals change. In summary, the original downselect concept of winners and losers no longer appears tenable. The initial technology selections and decisions (especially by the government) on where to focus resources must be made on the basis of technology readiness in addition to performance potential and the likelihood of achieving program objectives as they currently exist or are modified. Impressive advances have been made in several of the technologies that may not make the initial cut but that appear to offer important future benefits. Pursuing the more promising of these longer-term technologies through an extended period appears to be consistent with the original intent and goals (especially Goal 3) of a longer-term (initially defined as 10 years) PNGV program. Recommendation. The PNGV should continue to update systems studies and projections for longer-term technologies as new information becomes available to categorize their potential benefits more accurately. Recommendation. The PNGV should continue R&D on technologies that appear to have the potential for making key contributions toward PNGV goals, even if they are beyond the 1997 downselect time frame. This recommendation is consistent with the committee's previous recommendations. LEVERAGE OF FOREIGN TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENTS In spite of recommendations by the committee in both previous reports that PNGV make "as a matter of urgency" more comprehensive assessments of, and

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report benchmark foreign technology developments relevant to, the programs, there has been little visible response from the PNGV. The PNGV operational steering group, in response to the recommendation in the second report, indicated that this was being done routinely by several government agencies, as well as by each of the USCAR members (see Appendix D). However, only limited evidence of this type of activity was presented to the committee. The committee does not doubt that the USCAR members have knowledge of many foreign technology activities. Clearly, it is in their best interest to do so. Moreover, the USCAR members, as well as their many suppliers, have access to such information through their foreign partners and operations. The committee also knows that several government agencies are tracking some aspects of foreign technology developments. However, it is not clear whether these pieces of information from many groups are synthesized and assimilated in any meaningful way to provide the opportunity for superior foreign technology introduction to the PNGV program. One area of foreign technology development that is visible and will likely influence the PNGV program is development of the CIDI engine. It is an important part of the European automobile engine market, whose share is expected to increase, and offers substantial fuel economy benefits compared to state-of-the-art, multiport fuel-injection gasoline engines. This is a technology that is already in production or in the advanced stages of development by every major European engine manufacturer. It also appears that the technology is close to meeting the most severe European emission requirements (Euro IV). However, it is not clear how the major European and Japanese developments on the CIDI engine will affect the PNGV. This is a significant issue because the CIDI engine is clearly a leading candidate for approaching PNGV Goal 3 objectives. Some very limited information presented by the PNGV to the committee on European and Japanese developments in fuel cells, gas turbines, and batteries indicates no evidence of major breakthroughs that would significantly impact the PNGV. Recommendation. The committee again recommends that the PNGV conduct and routinely update comprehensive foreign technology assessments. These assessments should be used to determine which, if any, of the technologies of interest to the PNGV could benefit from more knowledge of the foreign activities. Recommendation. Because the CIDI engine is a major potential technology in the PNGV, the PNGV should make a special effort to determine to what extent European and Japanese developments are available to members of the USCAR. MAJOR TECHNICAL ACHIEVEMENTS AND BARRIERS A number of achievements were realized by the PNGV in the past year. According to a presentation to the committee by the PNGV, the most important technical accomplishments in 1996 include the following (Viergutz, 1996):

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report demonstration of a prototype fuel-flexible processor for a fuel cell with an 80 percent efficiency for the processor demonstration of a subscale high-power lithium-ion battery cell for 100,000 shallow cycles scale-up of a lean NOx (nitrogen oxides) catalyst demonstrating 30 percent NOx reduction fabrication of ceramic gas turbine scrolls and rotors through a process with high-volume potential survival of a glass-fiber-reinforced, composite front-end structure design in a 35 mph barrier crash test development and construction of advanced technology demonstration vehicles, some of which incorporated requirements related to those of the PNGV, such as Ford's Synergy 2010, Chrysler's ESX, and General Motors EV-1 Despite significant progress in a number of critical areas, there continues to be a wide gulf between the current status of system and subsystem developments and the performance and cost requirements necessary to meet major PNGV milestones. Some of the technical barriers to achieving PNGV objectives can probably be overcome with sufficient funding and management attention; others require inventions and very significant technical breakthroughs. As stated in the second report, the effort being expended on candidate technologies and systems is not consistent with the likelihood that they will meet performance goals within the program schedule (NRC, 1996). Work on many critical systems is inadequately funded and lacks integrated technical direction. The assessment of technical barriers to the development of major candidate subsystems presented in this report was used to construct Table ES-1. In the committee's view this table provides an approximate assessment of the broad potential for candidate technologies and a gross indication of the relative progress over the past year. The committee made a distinction between systems for which technical breakthroughs are needed to meet targets established by the PNGV and those for which incremental development with adequate resources (funding and staff) is likely to lead to required achievement. For each major subsystem, the committee identified the most critical barriers to meeting the PNGV performance and cost requirements, as well as the likelihood of meeting established schedules. These three factors were used to derive a first approximation of the overall potential to meet PNGV goals, regardless of the schedule, and to highlight program priorities. At the committee's November 1996 meeting, the PNGV provided a list of major barriers to success and the program needs to overcome these barriers. These barriers are delineated in Table ES-2. As can be seen, there are a number of technical, production cost, funding, schedule, and other issues that need to be resolved.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report TABLE ES-1 Potential of PNGV Candidate Technologies and Assessment of Research Progress Major Subsystems Critical Technical Barriers Likelihood of Meeting Technical Objectivesa Likelihood of Meeting Costb Likelihood of Meeting Schedulec Overall Potential Regardless of Scheduled Basic Needs Overall Progress Since Last Review Hybrid Drivetrain Power Sources CIDI Combustion control NOx catalyst High Medium High High Resources Modest Fuel cell Fuel processor/reformer Low Low Low Medium Breakthroughs Modest to Good Turbine Structural ceramics Exhaust heat recovery Low Low Low Medium Resources, focused R&D Modest Stirling Heat Exchangers Leakage Control Medium Low Low Medium Resources, focused R&D Small Energy Storage Lithium-ion battery Scale-up System safety High Medium Medium Medium Resources, focused R&D Good Nickel metal hydride battery Efficiency Power density Medium Medium Medium Medium Resources, focused R&D Modest Ultracapacitor Efficiency Self-discharge Safety Low Low Low Low Breakthroughs, resources Small Flywheel Safety Medium Medium Low High Resources, focused R&D Small Power electronics Efficiency Medium Medium High High Resources Small Note: This table represents a general committee judgment at an aggregate level of detail. The critical technical barriers are those that appear to be most challenging today and in many instances appear to require technical breakthroughs. See Chapter 4 for a more complete description of the key developments needed. a Regardless of cost or schedule. b Assuming the technical goals can be met. c In achieving the technical goals. d Overall potential over the long term of meeting the technical goals and cost.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report Based on the data provided, the committee believes that the following conclusions can be drawn: When incorporated in a vehicle, none of the energy converters/powertrains will come close to meeting the cost objectives within the time frame of the PNGV program. The CIDI engine is the energy converter with the highest potential of meeting the PNGV program performance requirements within the schedule and cost constraints. The CIDI engine may be negatively impacted if EPA promulgates more stringent exhaust emissions standards for diesel engines. The successful development of fuel cells, Stirling engines, and gas turbines that meet or approach the cost and performance requirements of the PNGV program is substantially beyond the current time frame of the program. Flywheels appear to have potential to provide energy storage needs of a hybrid vehicle once the safety and cost issues have been resolved. The successful development of ultracapacitors as storage devices is well beyond the time frame of the PNGV program. The committee is not suggesting that development of these technologies be terminated. However, it is most timely for the PNGV to reprogram funding and development efforts aggressively to be consistent with expected successful results within the current PNGV schedule through 2004. Investments in technology developments for the PNGV that have a projected success beyond that schedule should be continued but should be reduced and/or more highly focused. This position is consistent with the committee's position in the first and second reports (NRC, 1994; 1996). ADEQUACY AND BALANCE OF THE PNGV PROGRAM Because of the lack of specific data requested by the committee from the PNGV, the committee found it extremely difficult to evaluate the adequacy and balance of funding to accomplish the PNGV Goal 3 objectives. The ultimate proof, of course, will be embodied in the timeliness of the 1997 technology downselect, the content and level of the performance achieved by the 2000 concept demonstration vehicles, and the performance and cost projections of 2004 preproduction prototypes. However, there are no clear criteria today other than the PNGV Technical Roadmap and the generalities of Goal 3 objectives. With appropriate focus and resources there may still be sufficient time in the PNGV's current schedule to make some candidate technology systems viable (for example, the CIDI engine, in conjunction with other subsystem improvements [see Tables ES-1]). However, in the absence of a significant acceleration in their rate of development, for other fundamentally promising candidate technologies

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report TABLE ES-2 PNGV's Presentation to Committee on Assessment of Major Issue Challenges and Issues Recommendations by the PNGV Technical • control of particulates and NOx from CIDI engines • compact fuel-flexible fuel processor for PEM fuel cells • flywheel safety • thermal management of lithium battery systems • high yield fabrication of complex ceramic componentry Funding is required to support a sufficient level of effort for addressing the engineering research challenges. Production cost • low-cost lamination material and processing for electric motor rotors and stators • low-cost aluminum sheet, carbon fiber for structural applications and magnesium • low-cost power electronic building blocks and liquid coolants • low-cost high yield ceramic fabrication methods • low-cost high-pressure fuel injector and pump • low-cost electronic materials and fabrication processes for batteries and fuel cells • low-cost flywheel containment Appropriate levels of effort required for technical cost challenges. Funding • cost-share requirements of high-risk DOE programs • inability to mobilize supplier resources • long lead-time from identification of R&D need to contract initiation • administrative complexity of government programs • difficulty in redirecting/influencing existing government programs • non-strategic distribution of resources Policy change and active implementation needed by upper levels of government and industry management.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report Schedule • probability of meeting all performance and cost targets by 2004 is declining due to continued inadequate resource commitment • technology selection date broadened to pre-1997 and post-1997 data-driven events There should be an emphasis on schedule of technology development at component level with later demonstration at vehicle level.   • recognition that concept vehicles pre-2000 and post-2000, with focus for 2000 on fuel economy benchmark demonstration • recognition that initial hybrid vehicle concept vehicles and design were introduced in 1996, for pre-1997, focus should be on: (a) lithium and NiMH battery systems (b) PEM gasoline-fueled fuel cell systems (c) double-layer capacitors would be eliminated Adequate funding levels are required to meet engineering research challenges.   For 1997, make decision on viability of current ceramic gas turbine designs. For 1998: (a) decide on viability of high-volume fabrication of ceramic components (b) decide on whether to proceed with next generation of ceramic gas turbine (c) decide on safety potential of lithium-ion battery system (d) resolve flywheel safety issue (e) assess CIDI emissions based on operating hardware   Other • potential change in emissions regulations • potential requirement for zero emission vehicle range Funding issues and regulatory environment need to be resolved.   Source: Viergutz (1996).

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report (such as fuel cells, gas turbines, Stirling engines, and some battery candidates), progress beyond that achieved in the DOE HEV program is unlikely to make these technologies available within the PNGV time frame for demonstration of good performance in practical vehicles with acceptable risk. The USCAR partners have decided to conduct independent vehicle demonstrations of the concept vehicles. Meeting the PNGV schedule with credible concept vehicles for 2000 will demand greatly increased efforts in 1997. Currently, the committee is not aware of what PNGV would consider acceptable levels of performance for concept demonstration vehicles. The appropriate role of the government during the demonstration phase needs to be considered. Government's role is normally expected to apply to longer-term objectives. There is no definable funding line in the Fiscal Year 1997 budget specifically to support the PNGV R&D activities and no way to rely on such funding in subsequent years. Thus, it is not clear to the committee at what level "PNGV-related" technology efforts being supported by the government will be continued in parallel with the industry's concept vehicle demonstrations to provide a basis for future advancements in Goal 3 vehicle technology at least through the year 2004. In the committee's view, relevant technology development specifically devoted to risks identified in the Goal 3 demonstration configurations merit meaningful federal support, that is, support consistent with program needs and objectives. However, the PNGV is facing severe problems with funding and resource allocation. Unless these problems are resolved expeditiously, they will preclude the program from achieving its objectives on its present schedule. In the absence of acceptable and sustained resolution to this PNGV-wide funding and resource problem in both government and industry, PNGV's current objectives will no longer be tenable with respect to performance, cost, and schedule. Although the lack of sufficient funds is a major problem for most of the PNGV program elements, Table ES-2 indicates that there are also serious technical hurdles to be overcome. Even with adequate funding, these hurdles may prevent successful development and commercialization of the proposed systems within the PNGV time frame. Recommendation. The PNGV partners (USCAR and the federal government) should immediately develop a schedule of resource and funding requirements for each major technical task. This schedule should show current resources and funding for each major technical task and current shortfalls. Upon completion of this schedule, the PNGV partners should provide a strategy to obtain the necessary resources and funding. Recommendation. In the event that the PNGV (industry and government) does not obtain or chooses not to increase the resource levels and thereby accelerate the pace of development, the PNGV should reconsider the viability of current PNGV program objectives with regard to performance, schedule, and cost.

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report PNGV RESPONSE TO THE PHASE 2 REPORT In the second report, issued in March 1996 following the second review of the PNGV research program, the committee offered a number of recommendations (see Appendix C) for the PNGV's consideration (NRC, 1996). In addition to specific technology evaluations and recommendations, the committee offered six major recommendations: Strengthen program management and technical leadership in both government and industry and make management more efficient. Initiate and accelerate a comprehensive systems analysis program. Obtain and re-allocate federal and industry funding to activities with promising technological potential within the time horizon and needs of the program. Conduct comprehensive assessments and benchmark foreign technology developments relevant to the PNGV. Continue to address infrastructure issues as an integral part of the program. Increase the involvement of other U.S. government agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), and the EPA. The first five recommendations, above, were made in the first committee report (NRC, 1994); the committee feels that insufficient attention or progress has been made in correcting these deficiencies since the first review. The slow rate of progress or lack of attention to the first three issues listed above may ultimately jeopardize the PNGV's ability to accomplish its goals. For those issues that the PNGV elected to respond to in its June 18, 1996, letter (see Appendix D), the committee considered the response to be to the point, well articulated, and understandable within the context of conducting a complex joint industry-government program. USCAR rejected the recommendations made by the committee on the issue of organization and management in the first and second reports. The committee addressed this issue in the previous reports; therefore, it did not address it in the current review. However, the timely results of the PNGV program will be a major indicator of the effectiveness of USCAR's organization and management structure. The committee was also concerned that the PNGV response did not specifically respond to the committee's recommendations on structural materials and powertrain developments (see chapters 5 and 6 in the committee's second report [NRC, 1996]) and the broad evaluations of the potential for various technologies to meet the PNGV performance, cost, and schedule objectives as summarized in the committee's second report (included herein in Chapter 7 as Table 7-1). The committee recognizes that the program is in only its fourth year; however, a realistic

OCR for page 8
Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Third Report evaluation of the potential of each technology should provide a guide for a more appropriate allocation of resources as recommended by the committee. In the committee's view, DOD, DOT, NASA, and EPA need to be more supportive and integrated into the PNGV research program. The relevance of certain ongoing R&D programs funded by these agencies to the PNGV technical objectives supports this view. PNGV's response indicated that it was satisfied with the interagency participation to the extent that project resources permit such cooperation. While the committee understands this PNGV response, the level of support in terms of resources and funding is minimal in many areas. REFERENCES NRC (National Research Council). 1994. Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles. Board on Energy and Environmental Systems and the Transportation Research Board. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. NRC. 1996. Review of the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles, Second Report. Board on Energy and Environmental Systems and the Transportation Research Board. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Viergutz, O. 1996. Major Impediments to Program Success and Suggested Resolutions. Presented to the Standing Committee to Review the Research Program of the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles at the National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., November 12, 1996.