A benefit-cost assessment of new vehicle technologies and fuel economy in the U.S. market ☆

Increasingly stringent fuel economy and emissions regulations alongside efforts to reduce oil dependence have accelerated the global deployment of advanced vehicle technologies. In recent years, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) and consumers have generally been successful in mutually deploying cleaner vehicle options with little sacrifice in cost, performance or overall utility. Projections regarding the challenges and impacts associated with compliance with mid- and long-term targets in the U.S., however, incur much greater uncertainty. The share of existing new vehicles that is expected to comply with future regulations, for example, falls below 10% by 2020. This article explores advanced technologies that result in reduced fuel consumption and emissions that are commercially available in 2014 Model Year compact and midsize passenger cars. A review of the recent research literature and publicly available cost and technical specification data addressing correlations between incremental cost and fuel economy is presented. This analysis reveals that a 10% improvement in the sales-weighted average fuel economy of passenger cars has been achieved between 2011 and 2014 at costs that are at or below levels anticipated by the regulations by means of reductions in weight, friction, and drag; advancements in internal combustion efficiency; turbocharging combined with engine downsizing; transmission upgrades; and the growth of hybrids. Benefit-cost analyses performed on best-selling models in the selected classifications reveal that consumers thus far are not substantially incentivized to purchase fuel economy. Under baseline conditions, benefit-cost ratios are above a breakeven value of unity for only 6 of 28 models employing improved fuel-economy technologies. Sales-weighted data indicate that the “average” consumer that elected to invest in greater fuel economy spent $1490 to realize a 17.3% improvement in fuel economy, equating to estimated savings of $1070. Thus savings were, on average, insufficient to cover technology costs in the baseline scenario. However, a sensitivity analysis reveals that a majority of new technologies become financially attractive to consumers when average fuel prices exceed $5.60/gallon, or when annual miles traveled exceed 16,400. The article concludes with techno-economic implications of the research on future fuel economy regulations for stakeholders. In general, the additional cost consumers incur in exchange for a given level of fuel economy improvement in the coming years will need to be steadily reduced compared to current levels to ensure that the expected benefits of fuel savings are financially warranted.

[1]  W. Ross Morrow,et al.  Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Analysis of Policies to Reduce Oil Consumption and , 2008 .

[2]  John M. DeCicco,et al.  IMPROVING AUTOMOTIVE EFFICIENCY , 1994 .

[3]  Christopher Yang,et al.  Meeting an 80% Reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation by 2050: A Case Study in California , 2009 .

[4]  T. Anderson Summary of Fuel Economy Performance (Public Version) , 2010 .

[5]  David L. Greene,et al.  Vehicles and E85 Stations Needed to Achieve Ethanol Goals , 2008 .

[6]  Nic Lutsey Comparison of Emissions, Energy, and Cost Impacts of Diesel and Hybrid Models in the United States in 2010 , 2011 .

[7]  D. Greene,et al.  Survey evidence on the willingness of U.S. consumers to pay for automotive fuel economy , 2013 .

[8]  H. Huo,et al.  Projection of Chinese Motor Vehicle Growth, Oil Demand, and CO2 Emissions Through 2050 , 2007 .

[9]  Lee Schipper,et al.  New car test and actual fuel economy: yet another gap? , 1994 .

[10]  David L. Greene,et al.  Short-run Pricing Strategies to Increase Corporate Average Fuel Economy , 1991 .

[11]  John M. DeCicco,et al.  Recent advances in automotive technology and the cost-effectiveness of fuel economy improvement , 1996 .

[12]  David L. Greene,et al.  Costs and benefits of automative fuel economy improvement: A partial analysis , 1993 .

[13]  H. Allcott,et al.  The Review of Economics and Statistics , 2014 .

[14]  Lynette Cheah,et al.  Meeting U.S. passenger vehicle fuel economy standards in 2016 and beyond , 2011 .

[15]  Saad Mekhilef,et al.  A review on global fuel economy standards, labels and technologies in the transportation sector , 2011 .

[16]  Joann E D’Esposito Bureau of Labor Statistics Web Site , 2000 .

[17]  Marlo Lewis Re: 2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010- 0799 and/or NHTSA-2010-0131 , 2012 .

[18]  EnergyInformationAdministration Annual Energy Outlook 2008 With Projections to 2030 , 2008 .

[19]  G. Duleep Comparison of Vehicle Efficiency Technology Attributes and Synergy Estimates , 2011 .

[20]  R. A. Simmons,et al.  Understanding the Global Energy Crisis , 2014 .

[21]  David L. Greene,et al.  Engineering-economic analyses of automotive fuel economy potential in the United States , 2000 .

[22]  Ertugrul Taspinar,et al.  An Engine Start/Stop System for Improved Fuel Economy , 2007 .

[23]  Thomas H. Klier,et al.  New Vehicle Characteristics and the Cost of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standard , 2008 .

[24]  Why the New Market for New Passenger Cars Generally Undervalues Fuel Economy , 2010 .

[25]  K. Kurani,et al.  Car buyers and fuel economy , 2007 .

[26]  Aaron Hula,et al.  Light-Duty Automotive Technology, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 Through 2015 , 2015 .

[27]  D. Greene Why the New Market for New Passenger Cars Generally Undervalues Fuel Economy , 2010 .

[28]  Hyung Chul Kim,et al.  LIFE CYCLE OPTIMIZATION OF OWNERSHIP COSTS AND EMISSIONS REDUCTION IN US VEHICLE RETIREMENT DECISIONS , 2005 .