11/30/12 1 Hui He December 2012 Technology assessment of China’s new passenger car fleet and international comparisons Motivations Identify differences in eet features across regions. Identify technology gaps among manufacturers (esp. between independent and joint venture automakers), among market segments, and between domestic and import eets. Provide policy recommendations based on ndings. Transfer the comprehensive (and expensive) EU/US technology studies to China. The technology assessment study is the rst step of a series work that link the EU/US technology and cost study to China. 2
14
Embed
Technology assessment of China’s new passenger car fleet ... · 11/30/12 1 Hui He December 2012 Technology assessment of China’s new passenger car fleet and international comparisons
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
11/30/12
1
Hui He December 2012
Technology assessment of China’s new passenger car fleet and international comparisons
Motivations § Identify differences in "eet features across regions.
§ Identify technology gaps among manufacturers (esp. between independent and joint venture automakers), among market segments, and between domestic and import "eets. Provide policy recommendations based on #ndings.
§ Transfer the comprehensive (and expensive) EU/US technology studies to China. The technology assessment study is the #rst step of a series work that link the EU/US technology and cost study to China.
Technologies analyzed in this paper depending on data availability
4
Area Technologies Potential CO2
reduction!Analyzed in this
report!
# # # # Powertrain# # #
Engine#
Low friction lubrication 0.5% Engine friction reduction 2-4% Variable valve timing (and lift) 4-6% x Cylinder deactivation 5-6% Turbocharging 2-5% x Turbo, gasoline direct injection 8-15% x Cooled EGR, turbo, GDI# 20-25% x Compression ignition diesel 15-25% Digital valve actuation 5-10%
Transmission#
Early torque converter lock-up 0.5% Optimized shifting 2-6% 6+ speed 2-8% x Continuously variable 8-11% x Dual-clutch, automated manual 9-13% x
# # #Vehicle ## # #
Aerodynamics 2-5% Tire rolling resistance 2-4% Accessories (steering, air cond., alternator) 1-4% Lower refrigerant emissions (low-leak, low-GWP) 2-10%
Mass-reduction Advanced material components 1-5% Integrated vehicle design 5-10%
Hybrid systems Stop-start mild hybrid 6-8% x (with limited data) Full hybrid electric system 30-35%
*Source of technology potential: EPA NPRM
11/30/12
3
Major analyses of the report
§ China’s "eet-average vehicle features (based on 2010 data), fuel consumption, adoption rates of various engine and transmission technologies, comparisons with EU-gasoline cars and US cars
§ Fleet features and technology adoption by domestic "eet and import "eet
§ Fleet features and technology adoption by major market segments and comparisons with EU corresponding segments
§ Corporate-average "eet features and technology adoption by major domestic manufacturers, focusing on potential gap between Chinese independent brands and joint venture manufacturers
5
Comparison of "eet characteristics and technology adoption rates by region
China, 2010 Segment Mini Small Lower medium Medium Large SUV Minivan Market share 6% 15% 32% 10% 4% 10% 16% Typical model Chery QQ3 BYD F3 Hyundai Elantra Honda Accord Audi A6 Honda CR-‐V Wuling Zhiguang Diesel share 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 6% 0%
Although import fleet currently is <5% of overall fleet, fuel-consumptive cars (upper medium, large, sports, luxury), SUVs and MPVs represent 79% of the import sales. Among which, SUVs represent nearly half of import vehicles.
Small, 2.3%! Lower medium, 4.8%!
Medium, 7.8%!
Large, 6.6%!
Luxury, 10.4%!
MPV, 4.0%!SUV, 47.7%!
Others, 16.5%!
Import SUVs are signi#cantly heavier and more powerful, and consume more fuel than domestic SUVs
14
2.8!
19.2!
15.9!
19.9!
10.5!
4.4!
8.2!
5.6!
2.1!
15.7!
11.0!
17.1!
8.9!
4.0!
7.0!5.3!
0!
5!
10!
15!
20!
25!
En
gin
e S
ize
!(L
)!
Ke
rb W
t (k
g)/
100!
Po
we
r (k
w)/
10!
Ma
x S
pe
ed
(k
m/h
)/10!
Co
mb
ine
d F
C (
L/
100k
m)!
Fo
otp
rin
t (m
2)!
Po
we
r-to
-We
igh
t R
ati
o
(W/k
g)/
10!
En
gin
e S
pe
cifi
c P
ow
er
(kW
/L)/
10!
Import SUV! Domestic SUV!
11/30/12
8
For any given size, import vehicles on average consume more fuel than domestically produced vehicles
15
4!
6!
8!
10!
12!
14!
16!
2.0! 2.5! 3.0! 3.5! 4.0! 4.5! 5.0! 5.5! 6.0!
Co
mb
ine
d F
ue
l C
on
su
mp
tio
n (
L/1
00-k
m)!
Footprint (m2)!
Domestic fleet! Import fleet!
Linear (Domestic fleet)! Linear (Import fleet)!
Market share of top 18 manufacturers analyzed (over 80% of sales)
16
Chang'an, 8.3%!
Shanghai-GM, 8.3%!
SAIC-GM-Wuling, 8.0%!
Shanghai-VW, 7.6%!
Bejing-Hyndai, 5.3%!
Dongfeng-Nissan, 5.3%!
FAW-VW, 5.3%!Chery,
4.2%!
Guangqi-Honda, 4.0%!
BYD, 3.6%!Chang'an-Ford, 3.0%!
Tianjin-FAW-Toyota, 2.9%!
Geely, 2.9%!
Dongfeng-Citroën-Peugeot, 2.8%!
Dongfeng-Yueda-Kia , 2.5%!
Great Wall, 2.2%!
FAW Car, 2.1%!
Tianjin-FAW-Xiali, 1.9%!
Others, 20.0%!
11/30/12
9
Most Chinese automakers produce smaller cars than joint venture automakers, but their fuel consumption
Case analysis: Chinese brand vs. EU and US brands with similar product mix
20
!""#$ %&"'()#"* +,
-./01
--/.1
--/01
-21
--1
-31
-.1
-41
351
6)7"(1*)
17"89&*1(:;
)1<7
=>9?1
00@01
0@521
0@331
05551
05251
00551
00251
0@551
0@251
0A551
B"(C1,
"89&*1<>9?1
0/21
0/21
0/-1
01
0/@1
0/D1
0/-1
0/.1
@1
EF98F"
1G8H"1<I?1
25/A1
2A/31 2D/01
251
201
2@1
2A1
2D1
221
EF98F"
1GJ"
K8LK1J)7
"(1<>,=I?1
A/-1
A/.1 A/.1
A1
A/@1
A/D1
A/-1
A/.1
D1
M))*J(8F*1<N@?1
0@O1
5O1
5O1
5O1
05O1
@5O1
A5O1
D5O1
25O1
%+P1:Q)J
;)F1<O
?1
5O1
A5O1
A4O1
5O1
05O1
@5O1
A5O1
D5O1
25O1
-R19":(G1:Q)
J;)F
1<O?1
5O1
5O1
AAO1
5O1
05O1
@5O1
A5O1
D5O1
25O1
!ST1:Q)
J;)F
1<O?1
5O1
5O1
AAO1
5O1
05O1
@5O1
A5O1
D5O1
25O1
PU(C)=GUJ"
(K&:(9"(1:Q)
J;)F
1<O?1
5O1
D2O1
AAO1
5O1
05O1
@5O1
A5O1
D5O1
25O1
++P1:Q)J
;)F1<O
?1
3/A1
31
3/@1
2/51
2/21
-/51
-/21
3/51
3/21
./51
MU"#1K)F
GUNJ;
)F1<I=055>N
?1
5O1
5O1
-O1
5O1
05O1
@5O1
A5O1
D5O1
25O1
S%P
1:Q)
J;)F
1<O?1
11/30/12
11
Major #ndings
§ The overall Chinese "eet is lagged in many key efficiency technologies behind Europe and US.
§ Technology adoption status vary by segment. Smaller car segments (dominated by domestic makers) are more lagged.
§ Mini vans are extremely inefficient and lagged in all key technologies.
§ Import vehicles are mainly large, luxurious cars and SUVs that in general consume more fuel.
§ Most Chinese automakers are not as advanced as joint venture companies in technology adoption.
21
Preliminary recommendations
22
§ Stringent regulatory standards are needed to drive technology innovation and upgrades, enhancing the competitiveness of the Chinese auto industry.
§ The current policy (or lack of effective policy) on fuel consumption of import cars has failed to bring vehicles with world-class efficiency onto the Chinese market. Future regulations should apply the same set of noncompliance penalties used for domestic vehicles to imports as well.
§ Given that the advanced technologies in large-car segments are more market-ready, future standards should re"ect this.
§ Special incentives are needed to improve the efficiency of minivans or to replace the segment with more efficient and similarly functional vehicles.
§ Flexibility and incentives may be needed to allow some Chinese automakers that are behind on technologies and have relatively narrow product lines to be able to meet the future stringent standards within a reasonable range of cost increases.
11/30/12
12
23
Thank you!
Backup slides
24
11/30/12
13
Comparison between EU and Chinese passenger car "eet by segment
25
Parameters Mini EU Mini Small EU Small Lower Medium