MIT recommends steps to slash gasoline use by 2035—It's feasible—but challenging on many fronts

[OKIsItJustMe]

Caveat Lector: Work partially sponsored by Shell Oil Company

---

http://web.mit.edu/mitei/research/spotlights/slash-gas.html

MIT recommends steps to slash gasoline use by 2035

It's feasible—but challenging on many fronts

How much gasoline would the nation save in the year 2035 if lightweight hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles dominated the marketplace? More than 68 billion gallons, or about half the fuel currently used by today's vehicles.

Detailed analyses in a new MIT report demonstrate that such changes are feasible. Indeed, the report concludes that over the next 25 years the fuel consumption of new vehicles could be reduced by 30-50 percent and total U.S. fuel use for vehicles could be cut to 2000 levels, with greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions cut by almost as much.

Accomplishing such changes will require not just developing improved and new engines, vehicles, and fuels but also convincing people that they don't need to buy bigger, faster cars. Each step will be difficult, yet all must be pursued with an equal sense of urgency.

"We've got to get out of the habit of thinking that we only need to focus on improving the technology—that we can invent our way out of this situation," said John B. Heywood, the Sun Jae Professor of Mechanical Engineering, who led the research. "We've got to do everything we can think of, including reducing the size of the task by real conservation."

Carefully crafted government policies will be needed to bring about this large-scale move away from business as usual, the researchers emphasize.

The new report, On the Road in 2035: Reducing Transportation's Petroleum Consumption and GHG Emissions, integrates five years' work by MIT teams examining different approaches to cutting transportation fuel use and emissions. Projects analyzed specific propulsion technologies, vehicle performance and design, market penetration rates for the various technologies, consumer expectations, new fuels, and potential policy measures.

Each project involved quantitative analysis of potential gains and when those gains might come. Integrating the studies allowed a broad system perspective. For example, teams calculated the fuel economy and emissions gains achievable with, say, hybrid technology. Then, using analyses of cost and consumer preferences, they projected how rapidly sales volumes of hybrids may build up and how much total U.S. gasoline consumption would decline as a consequence.

"That last task is very important because unless you've got lots and lots of vehicles with the better technology, the impact is limited," said Heywood. "The need to bring better technology into production and build up volume inevitably makes the time frames for technologies to make a difference long. Optimists want to move faster, but it's not clear we can really do it much faster."

Slashing transportation fuel use and GHG emissions by 2035 will require immediate action on several challenging fronts. The following steps are key.

For the near term (up to 15 years), we should increase our efforts to improve light-duty vehicle engines and transmissions, but all improvements must go towards increasing fuel efficiency rather than making cars bigger and faster. Also critical is reducing vehicle weight and size.

For the mid and long term (15-30 years, and more than 30 years), we should ramp up work on radically different technologies such as plug-in hybrids and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.

We must also develop and market more environmentally benign fuels based on non-petroleum sources. For example, research on biofuels should continue. The US emphasis on corn-based ethanol is not obviously justifiable, but biofuels based on other feedstocks and conversion technologies should be pursued. In general, the use of biofuels will grow but not as fast as expected just a few years ago.

The final key is policy action. A coordinated set of regulatory and fiscal measures will be needed to push and pull improved technologies and greener alternative fuels into the market place in high volume. Measures should require auto manufacturers to make smaller, more-efficient cars, encourage consumers to choose those vehicles, and discourage everyone from driving so much.

Overall, the report shows that there are many opportunities for change. However, the challenges involved are enormous.

"Transitioning from our current situation onto a path with declining fuel consumption and emissions, even in the developed world, will take several decades—much longer than we had hoped or realized," said Heywood. "We've got to start now."

Other authors on the report are Anup Bandivadekar, MIT PhD 2008 (Engineering Systems Division, ESD); Kristian Bodek MS 2008 (Technology and Policy Program, TPP); Lynette Cheah, graduate student in ESD; Christopher Evans MS 2008 (TPP); Tiffany Groode PhD 2008 (Department of Mechanical Engineering); Emmanuel Kasseris, graduate student in Mechanical Engineering; Mathew Kromer MS 2007 (TPP); and Malcolm Weiss of the MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment. The authors are members of MIT's Sloan Automotive Laboratory, of which Heywood is director, and are involved in the MIT Energy Initiative.

The full report plus its predecessor On the Road in 2020 (published in 2000) and related theses, conference papers, journal articles, and news articles are available at the http://web.mit.edu/sloan-auto-lab/research/beforeh2/otr2035/">Fueling our Transportation Future website.

—Nancy Stauffer, MIT Energy Initiative

This research was supported by Concawe, Eni S.p.A., Environmental Defense, Ford Motor Company, the Alliance for Global Sustainability, the MIT-Portugal Program, and Shell Oil Company.

---

MIT assessments of various propulsion technologies yielded these estimates of their potential fuel consumption in 2035. The analyses assumed that these new cars—to be sold in the United States—have the same performance and interior size as today's average mid-size car. The 2035 vehicles have more efficient engines and transmissions, 20 percent lower weight, and reduced drag and tire resistances.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. We are slow to believe, even slower to implement.

http://www.damninteresting.com/hydrogen-injection-proven-in-real-world-usage


As early as the 1970s, auto researchers have known that adding hydrogen to the ignition phase in a combustion engine dramatically increases the efficiency of the reaction, while also reducing pollution. But until recently, there was no safe, reliable means to provide a steady supply of hydrogen to an engine. Now, a company called Canadian Hydrogen Energy is marketing their Hydrogen Fuel Injection (HFI) system to North American shipping companies, and the system is proving useful.

The HFI system is a bolt-on apparatus which includes an electrolysis unit, and a water reservoir. It uses power from the engine’s alternator to electrolyze distilled water, and produce hydrogen on demand. The hundreds of semi trucks in North America which are now using this system enjoy improved horsepower, and emit about half of the particulates they did before the unit was added.

Sherwin Fast, the president of Great Plains Trucking, reports that their four HFI-equipped trucks have saved them $700 a month in fuel. With the units about $14,000 each, it will take some time to recoup the expense; but in the meantime they’re also helping to save the environment. Instant Karma… just add water.

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. Interesting NASA study from 1977

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19770016170_1977016170.pdf

[jwirr]

4. A very good example of that is the suggestion to ride buses that was

around in the 60-70s. I am still trying to get my kids and grandkids to use the bus when they can. No such luck - "that is for old people and people who are handicapped." It is our minds we need to change when it comes to lifestyle.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

5. The bus should become something of a social event, perhaps

they could do the taxi thing with the flashing lights on the ceiling, asking trivia questions, making popcorn, handing out beads and trinkets.

[jwirr]

6. That is definitely a promotional idea. I also want to start taking the

great grand children on it to do fun things. One of them is just about old enough to start riding it alone now. He loves the school bus.

[GoesTo11]

3. Oops. Forgot overlooked the possibility of public transportation

and bikes and walking-friendly cities, which would eliminate the need for car travel, not just make it as efficient as a hybrid. That's thinkin' within the system for ya!

[depakid]

7. By 2035?

:crazy:

[happyslug]

8. This is based on the concept of Peak Oil and how oil production will drop

Basically oil fields production varies from field to field but once you start to look at the fields as a whole, the production follows a classic bell curve. I.e. the slow and steady production increase till Peak, and then a slow and steady production drop after Peak. The two curves mirror each other, thus if we use 2005 as the peak oil production year (And that appears to be the case, which lead to the slow increase in price till 2008, then speculators step in and really forced the price up, which forced the recession and a huge drop in demand and the present "low" price for oil) 2035 is just 30 years away, which indicates that oil production on 2035 will be about the same as it was in 1975.

Please note I am mentioning WORLD WIDE OIL PRODUCTION. The US, lower 48 states only, peaked in 1970 and we are presently producing roughly the same amount of oil as we did about 1932. Alaska oil is a separate issue, but not by much, Alaskan oil came on line in the 1970s AFTER the Oil embargo of 1973 but before the Iranian revolution of 1979, but the North Slope peaked in the 1988. Alaska oil production seems to be dragging out more then normal fields but part of that is that the US pushed Alaska Oil as part of US Oil independence in the 1970 (This leading to a huge production increase) AND to get most of the oil out the Pipeline had to be finished, once the Alaskan Oil pipeline was finished oil production could go full out, gaining leading to a very rapid increase to peak and a slow decline afterward, Alaska is producing as much oil today as it did in the early 1980s and that is expected to fall even more in the next few years.,

Alaskan Oil Production:
http://www.oilempire.us/alaska.html

US and Alaskan Oil Production since 1935:
http://www.oilempire.us/alaska.html#peakoil

The below Oil Drum showing that a peak in oil production hit in December 2008 (and the price of oil peaked and all types of old wells were brought back into service) bypassing the previous 2005 production peak. My position on this is that the December 2008 Price Peak appears to be more a temporary peak that can NOT be sustained then a true peak, thus my position that peak production occurred in 2005 and the December 2008 is one of many temporary production peaks we will hit over the next few years as the price of oil goes through the roof (and as the price goes through the roof causing another recession and drop in price and drop in production which is characteristic of boom and bust energy production when no one is controlling the price).

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3835

People tend to forget that the US is still the #3 producer of oil in the world, The US produced 7.9% of all oil produced in the world, only exceeded in production by Russia at 12.4% and Saudi Arabia at 12.3% of of world wide oil production. Together the top three producers make almost 1/3 of world wide oil production. Of the rest of the oil producers only Iran manger to produce more then 5% (And Iran barely makes that cut off at 5.5%.

Furthermore the US produced only 310 mt of the oil it uses, and imports another 587 mt for internal use (Mostly from Canada, Mexico, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia)

http://www.tsl.uu.se/uhdsg/Data/IEA_Key_Stats/IEA2008.pdf

International Energy Agency Web Site:
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/stats/index.asp

The Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO) Stat page:
http://www.peakoil.net/statistics