## Draft Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013



# P u b l i c I n t e r e s t E n e r g y R e s e a r c h ( P I E R ) P r o g r a m 

# DRAFT F I N A L P R O J E C T R E P O R T



# CALHEAT RESEARCH AND MARKET TRANSFORMATION ROADMAP FOR MEDIUM

- AND HEAVY

- DUTY TRUCKS

FEBRUARY 2013

CE C

- XXX

- XXXX

- XXX Prepared for: California Energy Commission
Prepared by: California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

Prepared by:
Primary Author(s): Fred Silver, Vice President Tom Brotherton, Regional Director

CalHEAT Truck Research Center/CALSTART 48 Chester Avenue, Pasadena, CA 91106 626/744

- 5600 www.calstart.org and www.calheat.org

Contract Number: 500

- 09

- 019

P repared for

:
California Energy Commission

Reynaldo Gonzalez Contract Manager
Reynaldo Gonzalez Project Manager
Linda Spiegel Office Manager Energy Generation Research Office
Laurie ten Hope Deputy Director Energy Research and Development Division
Robert P. Ogelsby Executive Director

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees or the State of California. The Energy Commission, the State of California, i ts employees, contractors and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights . This report has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission nor has the California Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

i 

## A CKNOWLEDGMENTS

The staff of California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center (CalHEAT) and CALSTART would like to express their appreciation to the CalHEAT Advisory Council, Steering Committee
, and Technical Advisory Group (shown on the following two pages); to t he California Energy Comm ission; and all others who have participa ted in the development of this R oadmap as part of an effort to reduce medium

- and heavy

- duty truck emissions and petroleum use in California to help meet or exceed the mandated environmental policies established thr ough 2050.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

ii



## ADVISORY COUNCIL AND STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Reynaldo Gonzalez, Program Engineer Public Interest Energy Research, CEC ; and Co

- Chair Advisory Council

Fred Silver, Vice President, CALSTART ; Director of CalHEAT ; and Co

- Chair Advisory Council
Jasna Tomic, Program Manager , CALSTART ; and Chairperson Steering C ommittee

Other Members:
Jack Broadbent, Executive Officer, Bay Area Air Quality Management District

Connie Burek, Solutions Specialist, Heavy Equipment & Truck

- IBM Global Business Services

J oe Calavita, HVIP Program Manager, California Air Resources Board
Rick Cameron, Director of Environmental Planning, Port of Long Beach
Kerry Cartwright
, Director Goods Movement, Port of Los Angeles

Mark Duvall, Manager, Technology Development, Electric P ower Research Institute
Doug Failing, Executive Director Highway Programs, Los Angeles County MTA
Jack Kitowski, Chief Freight Transportation Branch, California Air Resources Board
Ben Machol, Manager Clean Energy & Climate Change Office, US Environ. Prot ection Agency, Region 9
Matt Miyasato, Assistant Executive Deputy Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District
Felix Oduyemi, S enior Program Manager, Smart Grid Policy & Planning, So uthern California Edison
Terry Penney, Laboratory Program Manager

— Vehicle Technologies, National Renewable Energy Laboratories
Jeffrey Reed, Director of E merging Technologies, SoCal Gas

Michael Roeth, Executive Director

- North American Council for Freight Efficiency
Seyed Sedriden, Air Pollution Control Officer, San J oaquin Air Pollution Control District
Rose Siengsubcharti Environmental Specialist Associate, Port of Long Beach
Paul Skalny, Managing Director and CTO

- Venture Management Services
Ben Sharpe, International Council on Clean Transportation
Doyle Sumrall, S enior Director of Business Develo pment, National Truck Equipment Association

Erik White, Ass istant Division Chief, California Air Resources Board, Mobile Source Control DivisionDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

iii 

## CAL HEAT TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP

Dan Bowermaster, Senior Project Manager, Electric Transportation, Electric Power Research Institute Michael Britt, Director, Maintenance & Engineering International Operations, United Parcel Service
Dav id Bryant, Vocational Sales Manager, Daimler Trucks North America Tim Carmichael, President, C al ifornia Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition Dennis DePazza, Senior Manager, Terex Utilities Mihai Dorobantu, Director, Vehicle Technologies and Innovation, Eaton Corporation John Duffy, Senior Project Engineer, Kenworth Truck Company Michele Duhadway, Marketin g Specialist, Bosch Rexroth Corporation Vincent Duray, Product Planning Manager

– Hydraulic Hybrids, Eaton Corp oration Gordon Excel, Vice President and General Manager, Americas, Cummins Westport Joe Gold, Director, Fleet Engineering, Frito

- Lay N orth America, Inc. Abas Goodarzi, President, US Hybrid Corporation Darren Gosbee, Engineering Director, Transmission, Integration and Hybrid Powertrain, Navistar Inc. Mark Greer, Green Fleet Market Manager, Altec Industries, Inc. Anthony Greszler, Vice Preside nt Government and Industry Relations, Volvo Powertrain North America Jan Hellaker, Vice President, Volvo Group Mark Howerton, Manager, Strategic Marketing and Product Strategy , Allison Transmission Inc. John Kargul, Director of Technology Transfer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Jim Kesseli, President, Brayton Energy Jon Koszewnik, Chief Technical Officer, Achates Power Inc. John L a Grandeur, Director of Automotive Programs, Gentherm Incorporated John L a p e tz, Vice President, Westport Light Duty NA Jim Mancuso, Vice President, Current Product Engineering, Azure Dynamics Corporation
Dav id Mazaika, Executive Director Strategic Development, Quantum Technologies World Wide Mike Mekhiche, Director, P roducts and Technology , BAE Systems Patric Ouellette, Chief Scientist, Westport Innovations Inc. Terry Penney, Principal Laboratory Program Manager, National Renewable Energy Lab oratory (NREL) Jeff Reed, Director, Emerging Technology, Sempra Energy
Phil ip Schnell, Engineering Program Manager, AVL Powertrain Engineering , Inc. Mike Simon, President and CEO, Transpower Rudy Smaling, Executive Director

– Systems Engineering, Cummins Inc

. Jordan Smith, Manager, Electric Drive Systems, Southern California Edison Company Mike Stark, Senior Technical Sales Manager, Freightliner Custom Chassis Corporation Doyle Sumrall, Senior Director Business Development, National Truck Equipment Assoc iations (NTEA) Joe Vollmer, Director of Government Affairs, Sturman Ind ustries Alan Welch, Director, Engineering Development, Westport Innovations Inc.
Marc Wis eman, Principal, Ricardo Inc

.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

iv



## PREFACE

The California Energy Commission Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program supports public interest energy research and d evelopment that will help improve the quality of life in California by bringing environmentally safe, affordable, and reliable energy services and products to the marketplace. The PIER Program conducts public interest research, development, and demonstrati on (RD&D) projects to benefit California. The PIER Program strives to conduct the most promising public interest energy research by partnering with RD&D entities, including individuals, businesses, utilities, and public or private research institutions.

P IER funding efforts are focused on the following RD&D program areas:

 Buildings End

- Use Energy Efficiency

 Energy Innovations Small Grants

 Energy

- Related Environmental Research

 Energy Systems Integration

 Environmentally Preferred Advanced Generation

 Industrial/Agricultural/Water End

- Use Energy Efficiency

 Renewable Energy Technologies

 Transportation Research and Market Transformation Roadmap for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Trucks is the final report for the CalHEAT Project, Phases 1 through 3 (contract number 500

- 09

- 019 )
, conducted by CALSTART

. The information from this pro ject contributes to PIER’s Transpor ta tion Program.

The California Hybrid
, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center (CalHEAT) was established by the California Energy Com mission in 2010 as a project operated by CALSTART to research, plan, support commercialization and demonstrate truck technologies that will help California meet environmental policies mandated through 2050. The Roadmap describes the objective, approach, results and conclusions of the work done from 2010 through 2012 to identify near

- term actio n items for the period from 201 3 through 2020 to reduce petroleum use and greenhouse gas and particulate emissions fro m medium

- and heavy

du ty trucks. For more information about the PIER Program, please visit the Energy Commission ’ s website at www.energy.ca.gov/research/ or contact the Energy Commission at 916

- 6 54

- 4878

.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

v 

## ABSTRACT

The Californ ia Hybrid
, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center (CalHEAT) was established by the California Energy Commission in 2010

. It is operated by CALSTART to perform resear ch into planning, commercializ ing, and demonstrating truck technolog ies for

more fuel

- efficient m edium

- and heavy

- duty vehicles and to reduce emissions. The role of the research center is to c oordinate the development of a R esearc h and Market Transformation R oadmap to deliver clear actionable ste ps to help meet or exceed the 2020 goals for California in petroleum reduction, carbon reduction, and air quality standards, and identify longer term goals through 2050

. Medium

- and heavy

- duty truck s account for 9 % of greenhouse gases in California, and approximately 20% of fuel consumption

. Imp rovements in efficiency or reduction of petroleum use by trucks provide a substantial opportunity to reduce emissions. CalHEAT has identified 66 action items in the R oadmap
, grouped under E lectrification and E ngine & D riveline efficiencies
, to help mitigat e emissions or improve efficiency

. C learly defined, achievable “stepping stones” provide a pathway through successive stages of technology development and adoption across multiple technology categories and vehicle platforms. CalHEAT has collaborated in the development of this R oadmap with the S tate’s Air Resources Board, Energy Commission, Air Qualit y Management Districts, the U.S. Depart ment of Energy, U.S. Environmental P rotection Agency
, and nationally

- recognized medium

- and heavy

- duty truck associati ons, ma nufacturers, and experts. By 2050, implementation of advance d truck technologies through R oadmap action items could result in a reduction of more than 40 Million Metric Tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions compared to existing technology , ref erred to as “Business as U sual ”. NOx is projected to drop from 249 ,000 metric tons/year in 2012 to 6 7,0 00 metric tons /year by 2050. Assuming a n adoption rate for biofuels of 25%, petroleum consumption by trucks decreases from 3.5 billion gallons per year in 2012 to 1 .5 billion gallons per year by 2050. Keywords: Air quality, California Energy Commission, Cal HEAT, goods movement, greenhouse gas emissions
, low

- emission trucks , medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks Please use the following citation for th is report:
Silver, Fred
, and B r otherton, Tom . ( CalHEAT)

. Research and Market Transformation Roadmap to 2020 for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Trucks

. California Energy Commission. Publication number: CEC

- XXX

- 2013

- XXX

.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

vi 

## TABLE OF CONTENTS

A CKNOWLEDGMENTS

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... i

ADVISORY COUNCIL AND STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS

................................ ......... ii

CALHEAT TECHNICAL ADVISORY GROUP

................................ ................................ ................ iii

PREFACE

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. iv

ABSTRACT

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ v
TABLE OF FIGURES

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... ix

LIST OF TABLES

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... xi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 1

Introduction

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 1
Regulatory Context and Purpose

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 1
CalHEAT Truck Classification and Baseline Report

................................ ................................ ......... 2
CalHEAT Technology Roadmap Summary and Recommendations

................................ ............. 2 CHAPTER 1: Introduction and Summary

................................ ................................ ............................ 3
California Policy Context

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 3

AB 32

– The California Global Warming Solutions Act

................................ ............................... 3 Other California Regulations

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 5 Federal Regulations

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 6 CEC Guidance: What is the Roadmap?

................................ ................................ .............................. 7 CalHEAT Roadmap Goals

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 8 State of the Industry by CalHEAT Classification

................................ ................................ .............. 9

Truck Fuel Use

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 13 Technology Roadmap Summary Results

................................ ................................ ......................... 14 Technology Strategies

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 15

Investment

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 15

Results

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 19 Technology Adoption

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 26Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

vii

CHAPTER 2: Technology Solutions and Action Roadmaps

................................ ........................... 29 Introduction to the Roadmap

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 29 Hybrid Electric

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 33

Electrified Auxiliaries

................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 35

E

- Trucks

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 37

Electrified Power Take

- off

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 39 Plug

- in Hybrids

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 41

Electrified Corridor

................................ ................................ ................................ .............................. 43 Alternative Fuel Hybrids

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 45 Hydraulic Hybrids

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 47 Optimized Alternative Fuel Engines

................................ ................................ ................................ . 49
Waste Heat Recovery

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 51 Engine Optimization

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 54 Alternative Power Plants and Combustion Cycles

................................ ................................ ......... 56 Transmission/Driveline Improvements

................................ ................................ ............................ 58

CHAPTER 3: Conclusions

................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 60 Priority Actions

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 62 Recommendations for Next Steps

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 63 APPENDIX A: Methodology and Sources

................................ ................................ .......................... 65

Resources

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 65 California Truck Inventory and Impact Study

................................ ................................ ................ 65 Vehicle Technologies

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 66 Vehicle Technology Pathways

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 66 Gap Analysis

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 66
Petroleum, CO 2 e, and NOx Reduction Analysis

................................ ................................ ......... 66 Adoption Analysis

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 67
APPENDIX B: Sixty

- six Actions by Technology Strategy

................................ ............................... 68 APPENDIX C: Sixty

- six Actions by Timeline and Action Category

................................ ............. 74Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

viii

Studies and Standards

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 74
Development

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 75

Pilot Demonstrations

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................ 76

Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 77
Deployment Support and Incentives

................................ ................................ ................................ . 78 APPENDIX D: Glossary

................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 79Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

ix 

## TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: California Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals (Mobile and Stationary Sources)

............... 4 Figure 2: Six Truck Categories Based on Technology Applicability

................................ ................. 10 Figure 3: Truck CO 2 e, Average Vehicle Miles Traveled and Population by Truck Category

....... 12 Figure 4: Relative NOx by Truck Category

................................ ................................ .......................... 13 Figure 5: Relative Baseline Truck Petroleum Use, 2010

................................ ................................ ...... 14 Figure 6: Investment in Actions, 2013

- 2020

................................ ................................ .......................... 17 Figure 7: Investment Portfolio by Strategy

................................ ................................ ........................... 17 Figure 8: CO 2 e Reduction from Roadmap

................................ ................................ ............................ 21 Figure 9: Fuel

- related CO 2 Reduction Assumptions

................................ ................................ ........... 23 Figure 10: Impact of Biofuel Adoption on Petroleum Reduction

................................ ...................... 24 Figure 11: Biofuel Related Impact on CO 2 e Reduction

................................ ................................ ....... 25 Figure 12: Projected NOx Reductions

................................ ................................ ................................ ... 26 Figure 13: Technology Adoption by Truck Category

................................ ................................ ........ 27 Figure 14: Technology Adoption all Truck Categories

................................ ................................ ....... 28 Figure 15: CalHEAT Technology Actions

................................ ................................ ............................. 30 Figure 16: Summary Timeline

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 30 Figure 17: Summary Timeline for CalHEAT Roadmap Technology Strategies

.............................. 31
Figure 18: Sixty

- six Actions by Technology Strategy

................................ ................................ .......... 32 Figure 19: Hybrid Electric Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ........................... 34 Figure 20: Electrified Auxiliaries Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ............... 36 Figure 21: E

- Truck Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ................................ ....... 38 Figure 22: Electrified Power Take

- off Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ....... 40 Figure 23: Plug

- in Hybrid Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ........................... 42 Figure 24: Electrified Corridor Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ................... 44 Figure 25: Alternative Fuel Hybrid Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ........... 46 Figure 26: Hydraulic Hyb rid Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ...................... 48Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

x

Figure 27: Optimized Alternative Fuel Engine Technology and Action Roadmap

........................ 50 Figure 28: Waste Heat Recovery Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ................ 53 Figure 29: Engin e Optimization Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ................. 55 Figure 30: Alternative Power Plant and Combustion Cycle Technology and Action Roadmap

.. 57 Figure 31: Transmission/Driveline Technology and Action Roadmap

................................ ............ 59 Figure 32: Technology Pathways

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 61
Figure 33: Six ty

- Six Actions by Technology Strategy

................................ ................................ ......... 69Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

xi 

## LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: AB 32 Scoping Plan Reduction Measures Relevant to Trucks

................................ .............. 4

Table 2: California Goals for Truck

- Related CO 2 e Emissions in MMT by 2050

................................ 8 Table 3: Truck Categories, 2010 Populations and CO 2 e Emissions

................................ ................... 11 Table 4: Investment Portfolio by Strategy, in Millions

................................ ................................ ....... 18 Table 5: Promising Technology Pathways by Truck Category

................................ .......................... 19 Table 6: Sixty

- six Actions in CalHEAT Roadmap

................................ ................................ ............... 70 Table 7: Studies and Standards Action Summary

................................ ................................ ............... 74 Table 8: Development Action Summary

................................ ................................ ............................... 75 Table 9: Pilot Demonstration Action Summary

................................ ................................ ................... 76

Table 10: Pre

- Commercial Demonstration Action Summary

................................ ............................ 77 Table 11: Deployment Support and Incentives Action Summary

................................ ..................... 78Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

1 

## EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

The California Hybrid
, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center (CalHEAT) was established by the California Energy Commission in 2010 as a project operated by CALSTART to research, plan, and support commercialization and demonstrate truck technologies that will help California meet environmental policies mandated through 2050.

The role of the research center is to c oordinate the development of a R esearc h and Market Transformation R oadmap to deliver clear
, actionable ste ps to help meet or e xceed the 2020 goals for California in petroleum reduction, carbon reduction, and air quality st andards, and set up a R oadmap for longer term goals

. Medium

- duty vehicles (MDV) and heavy

- duty vehicles ( HDV) account for 9% of greenhouse gases in California, and approximately 20 % of fuel used. Improvements in efficiency or reduction of petroleum use by trucks provide a substantial opportunity to reduce emissions.



### Regulatory Context and Purpose

The State of California has passed regulations that establish emission reduction targets

. The primary driver is AB 32

– The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006

. A B 32 was signed into law with the goal of re ducing 2020 greenhouse gas emissions to year 1990 levels by 2020, and to meet more stringent ongoin g environmental policies through 2050. The regulations require a reduction of nearly 30% from the projected 2020 levels if no changes occurred, referred to as “Business as Usual
, ” and a reduction of 15% from 2009 level s.

In addition to AB 32, t here are a number of overlapping State and Federal regulations aim ed at decreasing emissions of greenhouse gas es and particulate matter, improving air

- quality, in creasing bio fuel use, decreasing petroleum use and more

.

At the S tate level, the primary additional relevant regulations include AB 1007, which requires the prepar ation of a state alternative fuel plan; AB 2076, which set s specific goals for S tate reduction of petroleum use; a Statewide T ruck and Bus Regulation
, which mandates reduced emissions of diese l particulate matter
, oxides of nitrogen, greenhouse gases and other pollutants from diesel

- fueled vehicles ; and a Diesel Risk Reduction Plan, intended to reduce the public’s risk exposure to diesel particulate matter by 80 percent by 2020 from 2000 levels

. 

### .
In addition, F ederal regulations include fuel economy and carbon emission requirement s that will be applied to new medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks starting in 2014 that will drive emissions reductions and efficiency improvements.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

2



### CalHEAT Truck Classification and Baseline Report

As the first step in the development of this Roadmap, CalHEAT performed a California Truck Inventory Study to better understand the various types of trucks used in California, their relative populations, and how they are used. The analysis included nearly 1.5 million commercial medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks, grouped by weight and application , to establish a baseline inventory and determine fuel use and potential for efficiency and emissions improvements.



### CalHEAT Technolo gy Roadmap Summary and Recommendations

CalHEAT has identified 66 action items in the R oadmap to help mitigate emissions or improve efficiency. These clearly defined, achi evable “stepping stones” provide a pathway through successive stages of technology development and adoption across multiple technology categories and vehicle platforms. The action items focus on 13 technology strategies grouped broadly under electrification and engine or driveline efficiency. Ca lHEAT collabora ted in the development of this Roadmap with the S tate’s Air Resources Board, Energy Commission, Air Quality Management Districts, the U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and nationally

- recognized medium

- and heavy

- duty truck associations, ma nufacturers, and experts. With implemen tation of the 66 action items, t he Research and Market Transformation Roadmap projects a reduction in 2050 of more than 40 Million Metric Tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions per yea r compared to existing technology, referred to hereafter as “Business as Usual

. ” Truck

- related p etroleum use is projected to decrease from 3. 6 billion gallons per year in 2012 to 1.5 billion gallons per year in 2050, a decrease of 58%
, or more than 2 billi on gallons per year , compared to Business as U sual. N itrou s oxide emissions are projected to decrease by 73% from 2 49 ,000 metric tons/ year in 2012 to 66 ,000 metric tons/year by 2050, accomplished through increases in mileage per gallon and from adoption of NOx reduction technologies.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

3



# CHAPTER 1 : Introduction and Summary
California Policy Context

Medium

- and heavy

- duty vehicles are critical to California’s economy yet they are a major concern in relation to petroleum use and carbon dioxide emission s

. These vehicles contribute 9% of California greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and consume 20 % of the total fuels used in California fleets 1

. GHG from trucks incre ased by 77 % from 1990

- 2006, a growth rate three times greater in medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks than light

- duty vehicles during that period

. The California Energy Commission predicts a 42% increase in the use of diesel fuel by 2030 2 . Diesel is a primary fuel for medi um

- and heavy

- duty vehicles. T he U.S. Department of Energy ( DOE ) predicts that the perc entage of transportation GHG s that come from freight trucks will continue to grow, estimating a (national) shift from 1 7.4% in 2007 to 20.7% in 2030. 3



### AB 32

– The California Global Warming Solutions Act The State of California has passed regulations that establish emission reduction targets

. The primary driver is AB 32

– The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006

. AB 32 was signed into law with the goal of re ducing greenhouse gas emissions to year 1990 levels by 2020
, and to meet more stringent ongoing envi ronmental policies through 2050, as shown in Figure 1 , page 4 )

. The regulations require a reduction of nearly 16% from the projected 2020 levels if no changes occurred, referred to as “Business as Usual
, ” and a reduction of 6 % from 2010 levels. 4 Another aspect of AB 32 includes the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, w hich is intend ed to reduce carbon intensity of transportation fuels by at least 10% by 2020, leading to a reduction of 15 Million M etric T ons of CO 2 equivalents (MMTC O 2 e) by 2020. R ecommended reductions relevant to trucks ident ified in the AB 32 Scoping Plan are shown i n Table 1 , page 4

.

1 California DOT, 2008 California Motor Vehicle Stock, Travel and Fuel Forecast , 2008.

2 http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/32000/32700/32779/DOT_Climate_Change_Report_

- _April_2010_

- _Volume_1_and_2.pdf

3 U.S. Department of Transportation, Transportation’s Role in Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
, 2010

.

4 California Air Resource Board
, AB 32 Cli mate Change Scoping Plan
, December 2008.

< http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/scopingplandocument.htm >Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

4 Figure 1 : California Greenhouse Gas Reduction Goals (Mobile and Stationary Sources)

CO 2 equivalent e mission reduction targets mandated by AB 32

– The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 with the goal of reducing 2020 greenh ouse gas emissions to 1990 levels and to meet more stringent ongoing environmental policies through 2050.

California Air Resources Board Climate Change Scoping Plan

Table 1 : AB 32 Scoping Plan Reduction Measures Relevant to Trucks

Recommended Reduction Measures Relevant to Trucks Reductions Counted Toward 2020 Target (MMTCO 2 e )

Low Carbon Fuel Standard

– Reduces carbon intensity of transportation fuels by at least 10% by 2020 15

Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction 0.9

Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Vehicle Hybridization 0.5

Goods Mov ement, Ship Electrification at P orts, System

- wide Efficiency Improvements 3.7

AB 32 Scoping Pl an measures related to C O 2 e emissions from transportation , with reduction targets by 2020. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard reduction targets figure of 15MMTCO 2 e includes passenger cars as well as trucks. The Medi um
- and Heavy

- Duty Vehicle Green h ouse Gas Emission Reduction and Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Vehicle Hybridization measures are specific to trucks. The reductions shown for Goods Movement, Ship Electrification at Ports and System

- wide Efficiency Improvements include reductions from both truck s and ships.

AB 32 Scoping Plan and CalHEAT Vehicle and Technologies Characterization and Baseline ReportDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

5



### Other California Regulations
In addition to AB 32, t here are a number of overlapping State and Federal regulations aim ed at decreasing emissions of greenhouse gas es and particulate matter, improving air

- quality, in creasing bio fuel use, decreasing petroleum use and more

.

At the S tate level, the primary relevant regulations affecting medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks include:

 AB 1007, in response to which the California Energy Commission (CEC) prepare d a state alternative fuel plan in 2007 5

. The plan established goals for alternative fuels penetration rates of 9% by 2012, 11% by 2017, and 26% by 2022

.

 AB 2076, in response to which the Energy Commiss ion and the California Air Resources Board prepared and adopted a joint agency report, Reducing California’s Petroleum Dependence . Included in this report are recommendations to increase the use of alternative fuels to 20 % of on

- road transportation fuel use by 2020 and 30 % by 2030 6

.

 Statewide T ruck and Bus Regulations, established to reduce emissions of diesel particulate matter (PM), oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and other criteria pollutants, and greenhouse gases from in

- use diesel

- fueled vehicles 7

.

 Diesel Risk Reduction Plan, intended to r educe the public’s risk exposu re to diesel particulate matt er by 80 perc ent by 2020 from 2000 levels 8

.

 E xecutive O rder B

- 16

- 2012 establishes the goal of reducing CO 2 e from the transportation sector in 2050 to 80% less than 1990 levels. The EO further orders the state to establish benchmarks to achieve widespread use of zero

- emission vehicles for public transportation and freight transport by 2020.

5 State Alternative Fuels Plan, December 2007, CEC

- 60 0

- 2007

- 011

- CMF

6 Reducing California’s Petroleum Dependence, California Energy Commission and Air Resources Boards, joint agency report, August 200, publication #P600

- 03

- 005.

7 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008/truckbus08/revfro.pdf

8 Emissions and Health Benefits of Regulation for In

- Use Off

- Road Diesel Vehicles, June 2010 http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/ordiesel/documents/OFRDDIESELhealthFS.pdfDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

6



### Federal Regulations
F ederal regulations from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) include fuel economy and carbon emission requirements that will be applied to medium

- and heavy

duty trucks starting in 2014. 9 , 10 Additionally, Phase 2 NHTSA regulations are likely to be implemented as early as 2019, building upon Phase 1 and incorporating new regulations to encourage use of new cost

- effective technologies and more aggressive fuel reduction standards. 11 This legislati on will have an enormous effect on programs in California. Not only will it set new standards for trucks here, but the cost and expense of making trucks that meet the new standards may impact manufacture r s in very significant ways, which may mean that they have fewer resources th at can be devoted to California

- speci fic programs. Understanding the impact of this regulation and how it will affect development of new truck technologies was a significant factor in CalHEAT’s effort to build an accurate model and R oadmap for the California fleet.
Federal ozone regulations will affect much of California. New rules will drop exposure limits to .060

- .070 ppm over 8 hours, phased in over 20 years beginning in 2010. 12 The current limit is .075
ppm, 13 but background and o ther sources leave very little room for truck emissions. The South Coast Air Quality Management District estimates that changes to meet the new lower ozone levels will require a redu ction in oxides of nitrogen (NOx) of 88

- 91% by 2030. 14 Much ground level oz one is created by a chemical reaction between NOx and volatile organic compounds in the presence of sunlight. Since trucks are significant producer s of NOx, it is likely that future ozone regulations will require further restriction on truck NOx production levels.

The Renewable Fuels Standard mandates that the American economy will be using 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel per year in its transpo rtation fuel supply by 2022, with 16 billion gallons coming from advanced cellulosic biofuels that also reduce GHG by at least 60% relative to gasoline. 15 Significant challenges to improvements in air quality, especially in S outhern California and the Cent ral Valley
, are related to goods movement. In S o u thern California, traffic congestion , including that associated with the ports
, and the need to reduc e ozone and NOx levels
, are driving force s for elect rification of these vehicles to achieve zero and near zero emissions

. The

9 http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel

- economy

10 http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/cafe/CAFE_2014

- 18_Trucks_FactSheet

- v1.pdf

11 HD GHG Standards for HTUF , CALSTART, Sept. 17, 2012.

12 http://www.epa.gov/glo/fr/20100119.pdf

13 http://www.aqmd.gov/legal/legalaut.html

14 Presentation to CALSTART S taff, 2010

15 USDA, A USDA Regional Roadmap to M eeting the Biofuels G oals of the R enewable F uels S tandard by 2022 , 2010.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

7

Central Valley, managed by the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District
, is facing a
p articulate m atter problem cause d by the significant number of C lass 8 tract ors and over

- the

road line

- haul trucks that commute from southern to nor thern California on the Interstate 5 corridor. As trucks are significant contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and particulate matter, the AB 32 Scoping P lan outline d speci fic areas with reduction goals applicable to medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks, as shown in Table 1 , page 4

. Although the S tate outlined reductions were

necessa ry to help meet AB 32 goals, there was still much detail needed to determine h ow these segment reductions would be met, and to identify gaps and barriers both in market adoption and technology development that stand between the present and these goals.

To address this need, the California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Tru ck Research Center ( CalHEAT ) was established by the CEC within its Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program in 2010 to perform research into planning, commercializing and demonstrating truck technologies for efficient medium

- and heavy

- duty vehicles. The r ole of the research center during a three

- year program is to coordinate the development of an overall Research and M arket Transformation Roadmap for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Trucks and facilitate the plan implementation. The strategie s and pathways outlined in the Roadmap are intended to deliver clear actionable s teps to help meet the 2020 goals for California in petroleum reduction, carbon reduction, and air quality standards, and set up a framework , roadmap and timeline for longer

term goals

. CalHEAT has collaborated in the development of this roadmap with the state’s Air R esources Board, Energy Commission, Air Quality Management Districts, th e U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and nationally

- recognized medium

- and heavy

- duty truck associations, manufacturers, and experts.



## C EC Guidance: What i s the Roadmap?

The purpose of the R oadmap is to lay out an action plan for research, development and market transformation in medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks and goods movement to deliver clear actionable steps to meet or exceed the 2020 goals for California in petroleum reduction, carbon reduc tion, an d air quality standards. The R oadmap also set s up a framework and timeline to address longer

- term goals for carbon red uction and serves as an example that can be applied to other regions in transforming the heavy

- duty truck sector. To do so, CalHEAT staff and members have examine d varied technologies and strategies that can help meet these goals, and have look ed closely at the necessary market and technological gaps that need to be addressed to speed the impl ementation of needed changes. Their efforts to thoughtfully define pathways and a series o f achievable actions to develop and adopt successive next steps across multiple technology ca tegories and vehicle platforms are what set this Roadmap apart from othe rs that define goals without specifics on how to achieve them.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

8



### CalHEAT Roadmap Goals The roadmap outlines specific, actionable steps on the identified technology pathways, with both technology and market milestones, including performance metrics and t imeframes along those pathways

. Achieving these steps will contribute to the effort to reach California’s mand ated environmental policy goals.

CO 2 e reductions from trucks are mandated by AB 32 and California EO B

- 16

- 2012, shown in Table 2 , below , to reduce emis sion levels from 3 5.7 MMT in 201 2 to 1990 levels of 29MMT/year by 2020, and further reduce them to 5.8MMT by 2050, a level approximately one

- tenth of the projection under a business as usual scenario.

Table 2 : California Goals for Truck

- Related CO 2 e Emissions in MMT by 2050

Year 1990 2012 2020 2050

BAU 35.7 40.7 59.7

AB 32 and

E O B

- 16

- 2012 29.0 35.7 29.0 5.8

Carbon d ioxide equivalents in MMT for 1990 and 2012, with projections for 2050, under “Business as Usual” or exis ting technology and vehicle use, and the truck

- related reduction s mandated by California AB 32 and Executive Order B

- 16

- 2012, to reduce CO 2 e to 1990 levels by 2020, with much more stringent reductions by 2050.

California Air Resources Board Climate Change Scoping Plan 16 and California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for
1990 17 California’s legislative target, under AB 2076
, is to reduce petroleum use 15% from 2003 levels by 2020.

_ Additionally, AB 1007 establishes goals for alternative fuel penetration rates of 9% by 2012, 11% by 2017, and 26% by 2022

. AB 2076 also include s recommendations to increase use of alternative fuels for on

- road transportation fuel use by 20% by 2020 and 30% by 2030. A Statewide Truck and Bus Regulation also mandates reduced emissions of di esel particulate matter, oxides of nitrogen, greenhouse gases and other pollutants from diesel

- fueled vehicles . A Diesel Risk Reduction Plan is intended to reduce the public’s risk exposure to diesel particulate matter by 80 percent by 2020 from 2000 level s



### . New f ederal regulations for fuel economy that take effect in 2014 for medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks will also drive emissions reductions and fuel efficiency improvements.

16 California Air Resource Board, AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan , December 2008.

17 California Greenhouse Gas Inventory , 1990, page 10, http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/1990level/1990level.htmDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

9

During the initial term of CalHEAT’s CEC

- PIER agreement, the research center has focused on the following three goals:

 Develop ment of the research R oadmap described in this report to advance science and technology f or medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks,

 R esearch and data collec tion on advanced Class 8 trucks, plug

- in trucks, and alter native fuel , high

- efficiency hybrid trucks, and

 T echnology transfer activities geared to end

- users, manufacturers, suppliers and organizations suited to combining technical and commercial capabilities.

Technologies that address one area of concern may h ave a positive, neutral or negative impact on other areas of concern, so all the regulations noted in the preceding policy section were considered during the dev elopment of this Roadmap. The goal of the R oad map is to find solutions that provide co

- benefits : solution pathways that meet and address the overlaps in all these varying regulations and goals, while also addressing market realities.



## State of the Industry by CalHEAT Classification

As the first step in the development of this Roadmap, CalHEAT performed a California Truck Inventory Study 18 to better understand the various types of trucks used in California, their relative populations, and how they are used. As the State looks to technologies with the ability to reduce petroleum consumption or emi ssions , it is imper a tive to understand that specific technologies may have widely varying impacts depending on a truck’s characteristics and how it is used. For example, a box truck used for heavy urban cycles may benefit greatly from hybridization or elec trification, whereas a truck used to drive between Los Angeles and San Francisco may benefit more from aerodynamic improvements and light

- weighting. The analysis include d nearly 1.5 million trucks, ranging in size from Class 2B to Class 8. This number is based on California registration figures for commercial trucks in the weight category 2B and above, via the Polk database. 19 The vehicle classes included in the inventory are shown in Figure 2 below, grouped both by weight and use. Class 2B pickup trucks and vans registered to individuals were eliminated under the assumption that most, if not all, were non

- commercial vehicles.

18 Jennings, Geoff, and Brotherton, Tom. (CalHEAT). California Truck Inventory and Impact Study, June, 2012. http://www.calstart.org /Projects/CalHEAT/Presentations

- and

- Publications.aspx

19 https://www.polk.com/knowledge/reports CalHEAT worked with Polk to create a custom dataset from their database, which co vers registered vehicles in CA.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

10 Figure 2 : Six Truck Categories Based on Technology Applicability

Truck classifications

, by weight and application

, in the 2010 CalHEAT Truck Inventory Study.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

11

For the purposes of CalHEAT’s R oadmap data, it was apparent that the weight classes were not sufficient to evaluate the impact of technology. With significant input from the CalHEAT Technology Advisory Group and the CalHEAT Advisory Council, six categories wer e developed. The intent behind the formation of their categories was to group trucks that are used in similar ways, such that it could be assumed that there may be similar impacts from technologies. A Class 4 truck in heavy urban use might see a different percentage improvement from hybridization than a Class 6 truck in similar use would achieve. However, that Class 4 urban truck would be more similar to a Class 6 urban truck than a Class 4 truck primarily used for long distance freeway driving in how it is affected by a given technology.

Table 3 , below
, shows the 2010 California truck population by application and the contribution to CO 2 e emissions both in MMTCO 2 e per year and on a percentage basis. Figure 3 , page 12 , shows relative C O 2 e emissions by truck category and miles travelled. Relative NOx emissions, which contribute to the development of ozone, are shown by truck category, truck population and m iles traveled in Figure 4 , page 13

.

Table 3 : Truck Categories, 2010 Populations and CO 2 e Emissions

Vehicle Catego r y Truck

Population % Population Average VMT CO 2 e

(MMT/yr) %CO 2 e

Tractors

- OTR 175,000 12% 85,000 12.9 38%

Tractors

– Short Haul/Regional 111,000 8% 55,000 6.3 18%

Class 3

– 8 Work

- Urban 253,000 17% 25,000 3.6 11%

Class 3

– 8 Work

– Rural/Intracity 295,000 20% 35,000 6.1 18%

Class 3

– 8 Work

– Work Site 77,000 5% 13,000 0.8 2%

Class 2B /3 vans/pickups 531,000 36% 21,000 4.2 12%

Unknown 15,000 1% 8,192 0.1 0%

Total 1,457,000 100% 34,255 34.0 100%

California truck population by weight class and application, along with average vehicle miles traveled, CO 2 e quivalent emissions in MMT/y ea r, the percentage of vehicles by category, and percentage contribution to total truck CO 2 e emissions.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center calculationsDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

12

Figure 3 : Truck CO 2 e, Average Vehicle Miles Traveled and Population by Truck Category

The California truck populati on analyzed in the 2010 CalHEAT Truck Inventory and Impact Study, shown by CO 2 e emissions, truck category and relative population, and annual vehicle miles travelled

. The size of each ball represents the CO 2 e emissions for the truck category.

Cal ifornia Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center calculations , and data from Polk Knowledge BaseDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

13 Figure 4 : Relative NOx by Truck Category

T he six truck categories in the CalHEAT study shown by truck population, annual vehicle miles travelled and percentage contribution to total truck nitrogen oxide emissions. The size of each ball represents the NOx emissions for the truck category.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center calculations


### Tr uck Fuel Use
The medium

- and heavy

- duty vehicle market uses more diesel than gasoline. This is not becau se there are more diesel trucks on the road ; in fact there are more gasoline vehicles by total number. However, because the heaviest trucks use the most fuel, and are nearly 100% diesel, total diesel fuel use is higher. As one moves up the weight classes, the percentage of vehicles goes from primarily gas on the light duty end to nearly 100% diesel in the heaviest Class 8 segment. The CEC reports approxi mately 15 billion gallons of gasoline used in CA in 2008, mostly in light

- duty passenger cars and light trucks

. This amount is projected to decline annually through 2020. According to the same report, diesel fuel use, in contrast, is estimated at 3.6 billi on gallons, and is expected to increase by 1.5% annually during the same period In 2010, t rucks account ed for 20 % of the petroleum fuels (gasoline and diesel combined) used in California, or a total of approximately 3.5 billion gallons of which 60% was diesel.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

14 Figure 5 : Relative Baseline Truck Petroleum Use , 2010

The six truck categories in the CalHEAT study shown by truck population, annual vehicle miles travelled and their relative use of petroleum . The size of each ball re presents the percentage of fuel used by trucks in that category

. California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center calculations



## Technology Roadmap Summary Results

The technology strategies listed below were those identified by CalHEAT staff, its Advisory Council
, and Technology Working Groups as the most feasible ways to improve efficiency and reduce emissions in MDV and HDV. The seven [only six in list on next page...] strategies grouped under Electrification and six strategies relate d to Engine & Driveline comprise the thirteen strategies with 66 specific action s in this Roadmap. The technology strategies and related actions are described in Chapter 2, with supporting information on the actions shown in Appendix B

. The six strategies grouped under chassis, body
, and roa dway systems are also important and will contribute to reduction of fuel use and efficiency improvements

. However, they are strategies that are already receiving reasonable attention by the industry

. As a result,Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

15

they are not included in specific ac tion items recommended in this R oadmap. Additionally, investments in infrastructure, clean fuels, and other complementary needs and strategies are not included in this Roadmap.



### Technology Strategies Electrification

 Hybrid E lectric

 Electrified A uxiliaries E

- Trucks

 Electrified P ower T ake

- off ( E PTO)

 Plug

- in Hybrid Electric

 Electrified Corridor

 Alternative Fuel Hybrid s Engine and Driveline

 Hydraulic H ybrid

 Optimized Alternative Fuel Engines

 Waste Heat Recovery

 Engine Optimization

 Alternative P ower P lants and C ombustion C ycles



###  Transmission and D riveline I mprovements Chassis, Body, and Roadway Systems

 Light weighting

 Aerodynamics

 Lower R olling R esistance

 Intelligent V ehicle T echnologies, e.g. F orecasting, A dapting

 Corrid ors and P latooning

 Longer, H eavier S ingle T rucks



### Investment
The projected investment required for the 66 action items included in this R oadmap between 2013 and 2020 totals $ 43 4 ,700,000

. These investments continue the ongoing momentum towards California’s environmental goals and act as a launch point for cost effective commercial productDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

16

introductions. The focus of these CalHEAT investments are to assure the development and pilot demonstration of technologies that culminate in providing the fl eets with a return on investment of two to four years by 2020. The CalHEAT investment analysis scenario also assumes the following:

 Aggressive new state and federal regulations by 20 20 that mot ivate manufacturers to produce, and fleets to purchase, large numbers of advanced technology vehicles. These include requirements that drive N O x emission reductions by up to 90% as well as Green House G as reductions similar in magnitude to those put in place for the light duty vehicle market under CAFE rules

.

 Si gnificant parallel investment must be made in:

o vehicle fueling infrastructure

o cleaner and renewable fuels

o a dvanced technology vehicle component manufacturing and workforce training

.

 Economies of scale significantly drive down vehicle technology costs as production volumes increase

.

 Fleets accept new technologies as vehicle payback period approaches two years

. Further, these investment projections do not include tra nsformation of California’s light

- duty vehicles, off

- road equipment, marine vessels and locomotive fleets

. Significant additional investments and/or regulations to accelerate development and deployment of advanced technology vehicles and equipment could be needed for the South Coast and San Joaquin Valley Air Basins to meet the federal eight

- hour ozone standard as required by 2023.

I ncentives were developed to jumpstart new technologies, to support fleet adoption and overcome perceived fleet risks. The deployment incentives proposed here are to help build initial volumes to launch point s , not to fully fund fleet turnover. Additional incentive investment would likely be needed to reach larger fleet adoption in the long run. Moreover, t he
t otal investment need is highly dependent on the specific investment strategy. CalHEAT focuses on early stage R&D in addition to deployment, in order to drive down technology costs and move past the need for purchase incentives. However, California is curre ntly investing almost exclusively in late stage demonstrations and early deployments. A continued focus on late

- stage investments would slow technology advancement and increase the amount needed for purchase incentives.

The CalHEAT investment analysis sce nario assumes very aggressive fuel economy standards to be set by EPA/NHTSA under phase two of the Greenhouse Gas initiative for heavy duty vehicles. As an example an aggressive f uel economy standard for over the road Class 8 Tractors was projected at a 100% improvement

. It is anticipated that the standards would be in place by 2020 and would find support by California for early adoption by 2018. In this manner the suppliers will likely self

- invest in the commercialization of cost effective technologies. WithoutDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

17

aggressive standards of at least a 50% increase, or delays in these standards
, additional investment in incentives would be required to dr ive market adoption and acceptance

. Investment for the major categories Electrification and Engine and Driveline
, is shown in “
Figure 6 ” for two three

- year periods from 2013

- 2016 and 201 7

- 2020. Grouped by action
, 68 % of the projected investment needed to achieve the emission and efficiency targets would be in development a nd demonstrations , and 32% would be in deployments and incentives. By strategy, Electrification

- related actions comprise 46% of the projected investment, while 54% would be for Engine & Driveline improvements. Chassis, Body, and Road way Systems improvemen ts have not been in included in this Roadmap, in either the investments shown or as part of the 66 action items because many advances in these areas are already underway by truck manufacturers. In addition these investment do not include any new unidentifi ed actions that are likely to become apparent up to and beyond 2020 Further detail showing projected investment required by specific strategy to achieve the 66 action items is shown in Figure 7 , page 17 and Table 4 , page 18

.

Figure 6 : Investment in Actions, 2013

- 202 0

Projected investment by 2020 needed to address the 66 action items identified i n the CalHEAT R oadmap. Figure 7 : Investment Portfolio by StrategyDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

18

Technology strategies identified by CalHEAT for medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks to achieve emissions reductions and efficiency improvement objectives by 2020 , by strategy, showing percentage of emphasis.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center calculations

Table 4 : Investment Portfolio by Strategy, in Millions
Technology $ Million Percentage

Alternative Power Plant s and Combustion Cycles $60.5 14%

Optimized Alternative Fuel Engine s $57.0 13%
Optimized Engines $ 47.0 1 1 %
Hybrid Electric $ 45.4 1 0 %
Hydraulic Hybrid $ 45.4 1 0 %
Plug

- in Elec tric Hybrid $ 43.4 10 %

E

- Trucks $ 41.5 10 %
Alternative Fuel Hybrid s $ 37.9 9 %
Waste Heat Recovery $ 28.0 6 %

Electri fied Corridor $ 1 9 .5 4%

Electric Power Take

- off $ 5 .1 1%Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

19

Electri fied Auxiliaries $ 5.6 1%

Total $ 434.7 100%

Projected investment required to accomplish the technology strategies identified by CalHEAT in the Roadmap for medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks to achieve emissions reductions and efficiency improvement objectives by 2020, shown by millions of dollars and relative percentage, by technology strategy.
California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center calculations


### Results
The Market and Transformation R oadmap projects a reduction in emissions through advanced truck technologies by 2050 of more than 40 MMTCO 2 e emissions compared to existing technology, or “Business as Usual ”

. These projected results are the expected outcome of implementation of the 66 act ion items i n the R oadmap. Table 5 , below
, summarizes feasibility by CalHEAT truck category of the 13 technology st rategies grouped broadly under Electrification and Engine and Driveline E fficiency. Solid circles represent technology strategies anticipated to make noticeable contributions in the corresponding truck category by 2020, half circles represent technology strategies expected to be implementable after 2020 with noticeable results, and the empty circles indicate technology st rategies not applicable to the truck category or not expected to offer significant benefits.

Table 5 : Promising Technology Pathways by Truck Category

T he 13 technology strategies deemed most feasible by the CalHEAT research are sh own in this chart

. Solid cir cles represent the technologies in the R oadmap that are expected to contribute to noticeable C O 2 e reductions by 2020 . H alf circles represent technologies expected to be implementable after 2020 with noticeable results. The empty circles indic ate technologies not expected to offer significant results in that truck category

. California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Center ResearchDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

20

The t echnology e valuation g roupings below were the initial technology pathways considered to have the greatest potential for reducing emissions and fuel use, and led to the selection of the 13
t echnology s trategies identified in the Roadmap. These e valuation g roups have been used in some of the long

- term projections, including the Technology Adoption Charts shown in Category , page 27 an d Figure 14 : Technology Adoption all Truck Categories
, page 28

. Technology Evaluation Grouping Baseline Waste Heat Recovery Engine O ptimization Transmission and Driveline I mprovements Light

- weighting Aerodynamics Lower Rolling R esistance Intelligent Vehicle Technologies, e.g. Forecasting and A dapting Corridors and P latooning Longer, Heavier Single T rucks

New Combustion Alternative Power Plants and C ombusti on C ycles

Fuel Cells A lternative Power Plants/Alternative F uels

Hydraulic Hydraulic H ybrid

HEV Hybrid E lectric Electrified A uxiliaries Electrified Power T ake

- off ( E PTO)

xEV E

- Trucks Plug

- in H ybrid E lectric Electrified CorridorsDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

21

C O 2 e Reductio n from the CalHEAT Roadmap Through implementation of the 66 action items identified in this Roadmap, a reduction of approximately 5 MMTCO 2 e can be achieved by 2020 from the “Business as Usual” projected leve l without these changes, and a reduction of over 40 MMTCO 2 e could be achieved by 2050

. Figure 8 , below , shows the impact by CalHEAT vehicle category compared to “Business as Usual

. ” The Roadmap reductions are based on technology improvements to increase mileage or reduce fuel consumption, including increased adoption of hybrids and E

- Trucks . The model is based on a 25% adoption rate of biofuels by 2050. The descending line shows the targeted reduction called for by AB 32 and EO B

- 16

- 2013. The gap between the projected reduction and the Roadmap reductions could be met by a higher rate of adoption of biofuels.

Figure 8 : CO 2 e Reduction from Roadmap

The combined impact of the 66 A ct ion s included in the CalHEA T Roadmap as projected to reduce CO 2 equivalent emissions by 2050. Reduction is shown for each of the six CalHEAT t ruck categories defined in the R oadmap by size and application. The ascending l ine for “Business as Usual” shows projected emissions without the Roadmap Actions

. The dashed line shows the reduction goals set by AB 32 and EO B

- 16

- 2012.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck ResearchDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

22

Fuel

- Related Reductions Use of biofuels and decarbonization of electricity and hydrogen used in fuel cells are expected
to account for a portion of the projected C O 2 reduction from the Roadmap actions , as shown in Figure 9 , below

. Increased use of diesel biofuel is projected in the Roadmap as one of the ways to reduce carbon and petroleum

- bas ed fuels. Although most gasoline sold in California is currently 10% ethanol, only a very small percentage of today’s diesel fuel includes biodiesel. The CalHEAT model is based on a n assumption of increase d use of biodiesel to 5% by 2020
, which is expected to be achieved by blending biodiesel with petroleum

- based diesel. The model assumes an increase to 20% biodiesel by 2035 . These assumptions were developed in part on the Air Resources Board Advanced Biofuel Market Report 2011 which de tails expected increases in availability of biodiesel through 2015. 20 Biofuels give off approximately the same amount of C O 2 as petroleum based fuels during combustion

. However, they reduce the net
amount of carbon in the air because the plants from which the biofuels are derived use CO 2 as the carbon source for the complex oil molecules in which the plant stores energy.

Electricity decarbonization is another way to reduce carbon impact, by changing the source of energy used to generate power to more re newable sources. The fuel curve assumptions used in the model are based on 30% renewable sources of energy for power generation by 2020 , based on targets established in 2006 by AB 32. The fuel curves in the Roadmap also assume an increase to 95% renewabl e sources of energy for generation of electricity by 2050 , based on a published model used to analyze the potential for electricity decarbonization

. 21

H ydrogen decarbonization , a way to extract hydrogen in a usable form from renewable sources
, is expected to become cost

- effective in the future as an energy source in fuel cells. As a result, it is projected to make a contribution in carbon reduction beginning in 2020, and continu e through 2050

. The Roadmap model assumes that 33% of hydrogen wil l be from solar

- generated electrolysis or renewable natural gas through 2035. After 2035, the curve follows that used for electricity. For additional information on assumptions used and how the Roadmap model was developed , please see Appendix A , page 65

.

20 California Air Resources Board, Advanced Biofuel Market Report 2011, Meeting the California LCFS. http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/workgroups/advisorypanel/20110825_e2_report.pdf

21 Williams, James H.; DeBenedictis, Andrew; Ghanadan, Rebecca; Mahone, Amber; Moore, Jack, Morrow, William R., III; Price, Snuller; and Torn, Margaret S. 2011. The Technology Path to Deep Greenhouse Gas Emissions Cuts b y 2050: The Pivotal Role of Electricit y. Science

, April 20, 2012.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

23 Figure 9 : Fuel

- related CO 2 Reduction Assumptions

Increased use of biofuels and decarbonization achieved by using renewable energy sources will contribute to the CO 2 e reductions projected by the CalHEAT Roadmap

. Significant reductions can be achieved through electricity decarbonization , by using clean or renewable energy sources for electric power , and hydrogen decarbonization, a process that removes carbon while creating hydrogen for use in fuel cells.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research calculations

The Roadmap projections for CO 2 e and petroleum use are based in part on biofuel adoption, assuming a moderate adoption rate of 25% by 2050. At this level of biofuel adoption, petroleum use decreases from 3.5 billion gallons per year across all truck categorie s to 1. 5 billion gallons per year in 2050, as shown in the chart on the left in Figure 10 , below

. C ompared to 2012 levels, this would result in a 6.9% reduction in petroleum used by trucks in California by 2020, a 41 % reduction by 2035
, and a 58 % reduction by 2050. The rate of adoption of biofuels will be dependent on how fast they ramp to a competitively priced commercial scale, but if the adoption rate is higher, much greater reductions in petroleum use and CO 2 e can be achieved.
Figure 10 : Impact of Biofuel Adoption on Petroleum Reduction shows reduction curve s for petroleu m of 25% adoption by 2050 on the left and 95% biofuel adoption on the right

. In the 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 % CO 2 Reduction from Fuel Type

Year Diesel Biofuel Addition
Hydrogen Decarbonization
Electricity DecarbonizationDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

24

high adoption rate scenario , petroleum use decreases from a total of 3.5 billion gallons per year across all truck categories in 2012 to 0.098 billion (98 mi llion) gallons per year in 2050

. T his scenario results in a 20% reduction in petroleum use by 2020, a 66% reduction by 2035
, and a 97% reduction by 2050 , compared to 2012 levels

.

Figure 10 : Impact of Biofuel Adoption on Petroleum Reduction

The CalHEAT Roadmap assumes a 25% adoption rate for biofuels by 2050, which is projected to result in a reduction of petroleum

- based fuels from 3. 6 billion gallons/year in 2012 to 1.5 billion gallons/year in 2050 , as shown in the chart on the left. A higher r ate of adoption of biofuel can further reduce petroleum requirements, as illustrated in the chart on the right

. California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Center calculations

Impact of Biofuel Adoption on CO 2 e Reduction The impact on CO 2 e emissions f rom a transition to biofuels is shown in Figure 11 , below

. The chart on the left shows the curves used for the projections in this Ro admap, using a 25% biofuel adoption rate, which results in a decrease of CO 2 e from 3 6 MMT in 2012 to ap proximately 16 MMT/ year in 2050. C ompared to 2012 levels, the reductions are 4.9% by 2020, 33% by 2035, and 55% by 2050. As with petroleum use, CO 2 e emiss ions under a high er adoption rate of biofuels could be much lower

. In the comparative curve on the right side of Figure 11 , which is based on a 95% biofuel adoption rate, CO 2 e could be reduced to 4.9 MMT in 2050 , with the largest reductions coming from tractors, in both the short

- haul /regional and OTR categories. C ompared to 2012 lev els, this could result in an 86% reduction of CO 2 e in 2050.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

25 Figure 11 : Biofuel Related Impact on CO 2 e Reduction

The CalHEAT Roadmap assumes a 25% adoption rate for biofuels by 2050, which would result in a reduction of CO 2 e f rom 3 6 MMT/year in 2012 to 16MMT /year in 2050 , as shown in the chart on the left. A higher rate of adoption of biofuel can further reduce CO 2 e , as shown in the example on the right, which

assumes a 95% adoption rate by 2050

. A t a 95% adoption rate

, a reduction to 4.9 MMT/year of CO 2 e
c ould be achieved across all truck categories , which would reach the California target levels defined for 2050.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Center calculations

NOx Reduction The Roadmap projects a reduction in NOx from 249,000 MT/year in 2012 to 6 7 ,0 00 MT/year by 2050, as shown in Figure 12 , below

. O n a percentage basis, the reductions are 4% by 2020, 5 1% by 2035 and 73 % by 2050, and are expected to be achieved through increases in miles per gallon, beginnin g in 2012, and from adoption of NOx reduction technologies beginning in 2020. Under the assumptions used, NOx reduction does not vary with the biofuel content.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

26 Figure 12 : Projected NOx Reductions

CalHEAT Roadmap projections result in a reduction of NOx, a greenhouse gas that is a precursor to ozone, from 249 ,000 metric tons per year in 2012 to 6 7
, 0 00 metric tons per year in 2050. The highest reductions will result from short

- haul/regional and over

- the

- road tractors.

Californi a Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Center calculations



### Technology Adoption Projected timelines for technology adoption and the impact by number of vehicles is sh own in Category
, page 27

, by CalHEAT truck category and i n Figure 14 , page 28 , for all six truck categories combined. Baseline te chnologies include waste heat recovery ; engine optimization; transmission and driveline improvements ; light

- weighting ; aerodynamics ; lower r olling resistance ; intelligent vehicle technologies such as forecasting and adapting ; corridors and platooning ; and longer, heavier single trucks. The other evaluation groups are New Combustion; Fuel Cells; Hydraulic Hybrids; Hybrid Electric Vehicles ( HEV ) , which incl udes hybrid

- electric trucks, electrified auxiliaries and power take

- off; and xEV which includes E

Trucks with full electric powertrains, and plug

- in hybrid electric vehicles ; and Electr i fied Corridors, which provide external power to electric p owertrain s for ZEV Corridors. By 2020, more than 1.7 million trucks are expected to have adopted some of the recommended technologies, and by 2050, projected adoption of some of the Roadmap technologies will affect

a pproximately 2.4 million trucks, as show n in Figure 14

.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

27 Figure 13 : Technology Adoption by Truck Category

Projected adoption of CalHEAT Roadmap Action Items by Technology Group and Truck Category, shown by number of vehicles affected from 2010 through 205 0.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck ResearchDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

28 Figure 14 : Technology Adoption all Truck Categories

Projected adoption of CalHEAT Roadmap Action Items by Technology Group for all CalHEAT Truck Categories combined, shown by number of vehicles affected, 2010 through 2050. By 2020, the Roadmap action items could result in efficiency and emission improvements in approximately 1.7 million trucks, and by 2050, this impact could i ncrease to 2.4 million trucks

. California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

29



# CHAPTER 2 : Technology Solutions and Action Roadmaps

From the information gathered in its initial Inventory of the California Truck Fleet, and the Forums held w ith CalH EAT Advisory Council and Technical Advisory Group members, various t echnology p athways were identified as a starting point for discussion and analysis as the Research and Market Transformation Roadmap for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Trucks , as described in the Technology Evaluation Grouping , page 20

. From these pathways, 13 t echnolog y s trategies were selected as those most likely to provide achievable opportunities to reduce petroleum use and carbon emissions , and increase efficiency. They are shown in shown in Figure 17 , Summary Roadmap Timelines, page 31

. A ctionable steps with milestones and timelines for technol ogy research, development, demonstration and market introduction were identified for each of the strategies. The overall Roadmap covering the 13 technology strategies includes 66 action items. Each of these technology strategies is addressed in a separate section of this chapter, beginning with Hybrid Electric on page 33

.



## Introduction to the Roadmap

The CalHEAT Roadmap uses five types of actions to accelerate the development and commercial ization of technology solutions, detailed in Figure 15 , below

. “Studies and Standards ” cover business case or feasibility research prior to development of initial prototypes.

“ R&D ”
, “ Pilot Demonstrations ” and “ Pre

- Commercial D emonstrations ” are actions that cover the development and pre

- mar ket stages of bringing new technology to market. “ Deployment Support and Incentive s” for market

- ready technologies provide regulatory or financial support to encourage adoption

.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

30 Figure 15 : CalHEAT Technology Actions

CalHEAT uses five types of actions to accelerate technology solutions in the market

. California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center

To convey the timelines associated with each a ction, s ummary t imelines are used throughout the Roadmap. A s shown in Figure 16 , below, b lue arrows are used for the four a ctions covering pre

- market activity, and green arrows are used for deployment support and financial incentives to support market

- ready technologies

. The development actions or development stage are embedded in the arrow.

Figure 16 : Summary Timeline

Summary timelines are used in the summary R oadmap timeline s and in the 13 t echnology and action roadmaps that group goals and actions by technology strategy to show the development stages, actions and the period of time projected for each.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

31

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center An overall s ummary timeline for the development stages of the Roadmap, by technology strategy , is shown in Figure 17 , below

. The 66 actions, identified by number and the type of action, from study or standard through deployment , are grouped by technology strategy in Figure 18 , page 32

.

Figure 17 : Summary Timeline for CalHEAT Roadmap Technology Strategies

Summary roadmap timeline for 13 technologies identified in the CalHEAT Research and Market Transformation Roadmap as promising strategies to contribute to both reduction of carbon and decreased use of petroleum by more than 70% by 20 5 0 from 2 012 compared to “Business as Usual .”

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

32 Figure 18 : Sixty

- six Actions by Technology Strategy

The 66 actions to reduce petroleum, emissions or improve truck efficiency are grouped by technology strategy and identified by action category, from studies and standards through deployment. Refer to Table 6 , Appendix B, page 70
, for a numerical list, timeline and description.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

33



## Hybrid Electric

Hybridization allows significant increases in vehicle efficiency by reducing fuel consumption. Hybrid vehicles use two distinct power sources to move the vehicle. In a typical medium

- or heavy

- duty hybrid e lectric truck, an internal combustion en gine (ICE) fueled by gasoline or diesel powers the vehicle when sufficient electrical power is not available. During braking, descending a hill, or other times when excess kinetic energy is available, t he hybrid system captures and stores it . This stored e nergy can then be used to help power the vehicle with electricity, thus reduc ing the amount of fuel required.

Further electric hybrid truck improvements to achieve higher fuel economy ; optimize , downsize and integrate the engine ; increase energy storage ; and improve ROI are summarized in four technology/action stages in Figure 19 , below

. The technology improvements for each stage, described i n the upper series of boxes, can be achieved through the corresponding a ctions shown below them

. Over the four stages shown in the roadmap the ultimate goal will be to achieve a two

- to

- four year ROI. The key strategy to accomplish this will be an evolution of improved levels of system and chassis integration complemented by improvements in energy storage costs and performance.
Characteristics of hybrid trucks that we re commercially available in 2012 are shown as Stage 1 technology. They provide a 20% improvement in fuel economy over conventional trucks, but may not have engine off at idle or electrified auxiliaries. Stage 2 include s an economic goal of payback in 5 y ears without incentives. T echnical characteristics include engine off at idle, electrified auxiliaries, improved integrat ion, fuel economy gain of 30

- 40% , and CA on

- board diagnostic (OBD) compliance. Related actions include efforts to overcome California O BD issues and support development of an SAE standard for OBD interfaces (J1939)
, a study on battery packs and interface controls (shared with E

- Trucks), pre

- commercial demonstration of Stage 2 technology, and deployment incentives for 1,000 Stage 2 hybrids drivelines when they become commercially available. Stage 3 hybrid electric advances, targeted for 2014

- 2016, call for larger, lower

- cost electric motors, greater integration , and optimized engine systems. To achieve these objectives, greater cooperation among the engine, drivetrain and platform manufacturers is needed. Stage 3 actions include R&D prototype projects and pilot demonstrations of hybrid

- specific opt imized and downsized engines

. Stage 4 advances call for a two

- to

- four

- year ROI and the emergenc e of more electric or mild hybrid electric over

- the

- road (OTR) trucks as enhanced performance from larger energy storage capacity and decreased ROI makes payback feasible for OTR tractors. A S tage 4 Roadmap action includes pre

- commercial demonstration fund ing for a more

- electric OTR truck.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

34 Figure 19 : Hybrid Electric Technology and Action Roadmap

F our stages of technology development have been defined to advance hybrid electric trucks through 2020, achieving increased fuel economy through features such as engine off at idle, electri fied auxiliaries

, hybrid

- optimized and downsized engines for greater efficiency, and increased energy storage. The

a ctions ne ed ed to achieve th em are shown below the arrows of the summary timeline

. California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

35



## Electrified Auxiliaries

Auxiliary loads or accessories, such as air conditioning, alternator s, power steering, power brakes, the engine water pump, air compressor, power

- steering pump, and cooling fans can represent up to 9% of the energy used in a truck. In many cases, the energy they require can be reduced by converting them to electric power. E l ectrically

- powered accessories such as the a ir compressor or power steering operate only when needed , but these accessories impose a parasitic demand all the time when they are engine driven. In other cases, such as the cooling fans or the engine water p ump, electric power allows the auxiliary load to run at speeds independent of the engine speed , which can reduce power consumption. 22 The use of a hybrid system, thermo

- electrics
, or an electric turbocompound provides a source of electrical energy that can be used to drive auxiliaries that are engine

- driven on today’s vehicles. Electrified accessories are a critical enabling technology for E

- trucks, Plug

- In Hybrid Trucks, idle off for Hyb rids and the further electrification of Class 8 Over

- the

- Road Tractors. Electrifying components is essential in many emerging truck systems because of the efficiency benefit that can be gained. This is true even on otherwise conventional powertrains, but b ecomes especially important with hybrid powertrains, and critical when considering the ability for a hybrid to operate in electric

- only or engine

- off mode s . Without electrified power steering and brakes, the vehicles cannot operate in these modes.

The CalHEAT T echnology and Actions Roadmap for Electrified Auxili a ries is shown in Figure 20 , page 36

. Stage 1 development was already underway in 2012

. The objective of converting auxiliary load s to electric power is to reduce fuel used by HEV or PHEV trucks operating in idle mode just to power accessories

. T echnical characteristics of the Stage 1 electrified auxiliaries commercially available i n 2012 are that they are based on off

- the

- shelf industrial motors and DC

- to

- DC converters
, and typically include pumps, po wer steering, fans and compressor s. Stage 2 , from 2014 to 2017, targets are economical implementation of integrated DC

- to

- DC and DC

- to

- AC electronics to lower costs, impr ove functionality, simplify integration
, and provide commonality across truck classes and platforms. One of the b arriers to adoption of such accessories is non

- standard voltages across vehicle platforms, so one Roadmap a ction includes development of standards for voltage variants and J1939 signal controls

. Other a ctions include R&D to develop purpose

- designed electronics that can operate in a shared archit ecture for DC

to

- DC converters
, such as auxili ary drives, power steering
, and pumps integrated in to vehicles. Stage 3 goals are to achieve purpose

- designed pumps and compressors operating with Stage 2 electronics to improve efficiency and achieve a two

- to

- three

- year ROI for components on conventional Line Haul and other Class 7

- 8 tractors. Pilot demon strations for validation of electrified auxiliaries in Class 7

- 8 tractors and Line

- Hau l trucks are projected for 2017 to 2019.

22 National Academy of Sciences site visit to Daimler/Detroit Diesel, April 7, 2009.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

36 Figure 20 : Electrified Auxiliaries Te chnology and Action Roadmap

Three stages of technology development for electric

- powered accessories are shown above. The a ctions for Stage 1 we re already underway by truck manufacturers in 2012 and are being deployed. The a ctions for Stage 2 and Stage 3 development focus on voltage s tandards and purpose

- designed electronics, with validation of electrified auxiliary loads in line

- haul trucks planned for Stage 3, 2018

- 2019.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

37



## E

- Trucks

There is a distinct category of z ero

- emission trucks with electric motors and powertrains, referred to as E

- Trucks, which do not include a combustion engine. Their environmental footprint is primarily defined by the source of the electricity

. C lean sources have a large environmental benefit, and even “dirty” sources of elect ricity tend to show a net “well

- to

wheels” benefit for electric vehicles. Electric motors are also efficient and able to produce maximum torque, giving EVs strong driving charac teristics, particularly in stop

- and

- g o or urban driving situations. The torque characterist ics of electric motors are well

- suited for moving heavy loads, as evidenced by their long use in freight trains, and suggest that the upper limits of their power capabilities will not be tested in truck s. Electric motors also offer the ability to operate with very low noise, an advantage in certain applications. Currently, EVs have some disadvantages over conventional vehicles, primarily in cost, weight and range. EV components are relatively expensive, and storing electricity using currently available technology is expensive, bulky, and heavy. The California Energy Commission estimates the curre nt incremental cost for a fully

- electric medium

- or heavy

- duty vehicle to be between $50,000 and $100,000. 23

. Reduction of petroleum dependence is a major objective of the U.S. Department of Defense and it has been a significant supporter of advancing alternative powertrain trucks. As of 2011, initial E

- Trucks capable of silent operation were available in Classes 3

- 8, primarily for worksite and urban delivery applications. The CalHEAT Roadmap for E

- Trucks , shown in Figure 21 , below
, ide ntifies three technology stages. C urrently available commercial trucks are shown as Stage 1, without accompanying

a ctions. Stage 2
, targeted for 2013

- 2017, bu ilds off Stage 1 to improve R OI. This will be accomplished through improved integra tion of the elec tric driveline
, optimization of system design to reduce use of expensive components such as copper connectors and wiring
, development of standards for battery packs in multiple sizes
, an d fast charging. Stage 2 assumes a $450/kW

- hr battery pack cost. An additional objective for Stage 2 is expansion of applications into drayage trucks. Related actions in Stage 2 includ e deployment incentives to help reduce projected ROI to five years; pre

- commercial demonstrations of Stage 2 E

- Trucks ; development of energy storage standards for pack

- level interfaces through SAE
, IEEE, or regulations ; a study on best applications for fast charging ; and a pilot demonstration of a Smart Charging System.
Stage 3 technology goals, targeted for 2018

- 2020, increas e performance to a range of 150 miles and reduce cost for the battery pack to $350/kW

- hr . Technical characteristi cs for Stage 3 include larger rapid cha rging energy storage systems capable of storing greater than 20kW, and electric driveline cost reduction, which is expected to allow an option for cost

- effective use of smaller batteries. Another technical objective is development of a secondary market for batteries.

23 California Energy Commission, 2009 Integrated Energy Policy Report
, December 2009, http://www.energy.ca.gov/2009_energypolicy/index.htmlDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

38

Related Stage 3 a ctions include pre

- commercial demonstrations of Stage 3 E

- Trucks, with longer ranges and fast charging, and deployment incentives for Stage 3 E

- Trucks.

Figure 21 : E

- Truck Technology and Action Roadmap

T hree stages of development have been defined for E

- Trucks

. Stage 1 defines technology available in 2012. Stage 2, with development from 2013 to 201 5 and deployment continuing through 2017, targets improved ROI through cost reduction and greater integration, along with s tandardization of energy storage, and smart charging systems. Stage 3 developments begin in 2015, work ing toward greater energy storage capacity, longer ranges

, and fast charging for E

- Trucks late in the decade.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

39



## Electrified Power Take

- off

A portion of work truck emissions come from the engine powering worksite equipment, such as a boom, tools, or other accessories not linked to the truck’s propulsion system. Use of power
t ake

- off systems to power these tools with electricity instead of liquid fuel when the engine is not running can significantly reduce emissions and fuel consumption. The Roadmap defines two stages of development for Electrified Power Take

- off, shown in Figure 22 , page 40

. Stage 1 defines existing technology, which include Class 4

- 5 trouble trucks and Class 6

- 7 line trucks with battery

- electric storage for boom operation and the ability to provide AC and heating when the engine is off. The Roadmap action for S tage 1 is continuation of deployment incentives currently in place. Stage 2 calls for weight reduction and lower system cost to support a 5

- year ROI, integration of fast charging for trouble trucks, commonality across boom manufacturers ’ products, and electric operation of on

- board AC and heating systems, includ ing fans and ducts, to eliminate the need for duplicate systems for engine

- off operation. Additional performance improvements may include potential for export power and niche crane applications. Stage 2 actions include pre

- commercial demonstrations and dep loyment incentives.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

40 Figure 22 : Electrified Power Take

- off Technology and Action Roadmap

Electrified Power Take

- off provides a battery system to power trouble trucks

, and the boom s of line trucks when the engine is off, to reduce the need for the engine to run only to power worksite activities. Stage 1 covers existing technology, for which deployment incentives are already in place. Stage 2 will work toward a faster ROI, integration of fast charging in trouble truck s , operation of the chassis maker’s HVAC to eliminate duplicate systems, the potential for export power

, and additional niche crane applications.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

41



## Plug

- in Hybrids

Plug

- in hybrids are s imilar to regular hybrid electric trucks, but have the ability to recharge using external electric power, and typically feature a larger battery pack and powertrain system that potentially allow some amount of operation in electric

- only mode. This can vary from the ability to “creep” while waiting in a line, to driving considerable distances in electric mode. Outside of these situations, the larger battery pack can allow the hybrid powertrain to maximize driving efficiency through capture of more braking en ergy and greater use of electricity to offset combustion fuels. The CalHEAT Roadmap identifies two stages for Plug

- i n Hybrid Electric Technology, as shown in Figure 23 , page 4 2

. The economic goal for Stage 1
, from 2010 through 2015, is lifetime payback of the incr emental cost of the vehicle, compared to a conventional truck
, through reduce d fuel costs. Stage 1 p erfo rmance goals include a 50% decrease in petroleum consumption, demonstration of zero

- emission driving capability, noise reduc tion , and reduced use of conventional powertrain idle at work sites, increasing productivity , reducing emissions and fuel consumptio n, and allowing expanded hours of operation.
Stage 1 technical characteristics include incorporation of the required elements from Stage 2 HEVs, with features such as engine off at idle, electric accessories, improved integration
, and lighter weight, as sh own in Figure 19 : Hybrid Electric Technology and Action Roadmap
, page 33

. Additionally, larger , cost

- effective motors, and CA

- compliant o n

- board diagno stics are specified. The first targeted application is utility trucks ; a second applicat ion in drayage has been identified for dual

- mode use with range

- extenders, which may also support a pathway for

zero

- emissions goods movement. Stage 1 a ctions include pre

- commer cial demonstration of goods move ment drayage trucks, a p lu g

- in hybrid utility work truck (already planned by the U.S. DOE), pre

- commercial demonstrations of Class 2B and 3 trucks, a study to identify appropriate markets and applications for PHETs, and depl oyment in c entives for the first 500 trucks when Stage 1 PHETs are commercially available. Stage 2 PHET, 2016 to 2020, has an economic goal of a five

- to

- eight

- year ROI, with performance goals including the ability to export power, greater than 50% petroleum reduction compared to conventional combustion engine vehicles, and a zero

- emission driving varia nt available. Technical characteristics may include improved integration and HEV plug

- in optimization, lower costs, improved range, cost

- effective electric acc essories , and larger, more cost

- effective electric motors

. Stage 2 PHETs are e xpected to be commercially available in C lass 2B and 3 from auto makers during the last half of the decade.
Stage 2 a ctions include a study to develop an economic model that cap tures externalities for a ZEV Corridor and deployment incentives for Stage 2 PHET drayage trucks.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

42 Figure 23 : Plug

- in Hybrid Technology and Action Roadmap

Plug

- in electric hybrids have the potential to reduce petroleum use by 50 % or more, and have application in short

- range utility trucks and in drayage. Two stages of development have been defined for PHET, with Stage 1, 2010 through 2015, including pre

- commercial and pilot demonstrations of goods movement drayage trucks, utility work trucks and Class 2b

- 3 trucks. A study is recommended to identify appropriate markets and applications for PHETs, with cumulative deployment incentive s of $3,000 ,000 for the first 500 Stage 1 PHETs when they become commercially available. Stage 2, 201 5 to 2 020 , targets improved ROI through cost reduction and greater integration, and improved performance with longer ranges.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

43



## Electrified Corridor

Various str ategies have been investigate d to reduce traffic congestion and related fuel consumption 24

. Intelligent vehicle technologies can take a vehicle’s position into account, along with data about the roads, traffic
, and more, to alter routes, speeds, and in the case of hybrids, adjust the a mount of battery power being used versus the engine. Among the more advanced and complicated strategies to implement are dedicated truck corridors or lanes, where trucks can save fuel and reduce emissions by being kept separate from passenger car traffic. These corridors have the potential to provide power for electrification, further increasing their benefits. Bus lanes have demonstrated higher average travel speeds which
, particularly in urban

areas , ha ve the potential to significantly increase fuel efficiency for trucks. The Roadmap for Electrified Corridors, shown in Figure 24 , below , identifies areas of development related to external electric p ower for power pickup devices in on

- road yard hostlers and electrified corri dors in Stage 1, and integration of a power pickup device into dual

mode hybrids and range

- extended drayage trucks in Stage 2. In Stage 1, the t echnol ogy goal is to integrate a power p ickup device into electric on

- road yard hostlers. The addition of the electric power pi ckup device on an electric truck is intended to allow the truck to operate using electricity with zero emissions along the corridor

. Related Stage 1 actions involve a c orridor s tudy on various roadway power systems and efforts
to garner regional and statewide consensus on a standard for a power pickup device. Additionally, a pre

- commercial demonstration of road connections for on

- road yard hostlers is identified in the Roadmap , along with deployment incentives to outfit electric tr ucks with the pickup device. The trucks will be required to operate in accordance with guidelines established under SCAQMD investments for ZEV Corridors near dock rail facilities. In Stage 2, efforts to integrate p ower p ickup devices into electric vehicle s will expand into dual

mode hybrids and range

- e x tended drayage trucks. Actions identified include pre

- commercial demonstrations and deployment incentives to operate trucks in accordance with SCAQMD in ZEV Corridors on the CA47/103 /I

- 710 and CA 60.

24 National Academy of Sciences report, Technologies and Approaches to Reducing the Fuel Consumption of Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Vehicles , August 2010, Figure 4

- 1Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

44 Figure 24 : Electrified Corridor Technology and Action Roadmap

The Roadmap for Electrified Corridors involves technology developments and related actions to support integration of electric power pickup devices into on

- road electric yard hostlers, and a research study on roadway power systems to support development of a standard power system for a power pickup device.

California Hybrid, Efficient an d Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

45



## Alternative Fuel Hybrids

Low

- carbon alternative fuels including biodiesel and natural gas (NG) can offer significant carbon savings, even when used in an otherwise fairly conventional vehicle. There is further potential fo r carbon reduction through use of renewable natural gas generated from agricultural feedstocks, wastewater treatment plants
, and biowaste.

The combination of a hybrid powertrain that reduces fuel consumption with an alternative fuel that cuts carbon per u nit of fuel creates a multiplier effect and generates much less carbon overall

. Hybrid drive trains in certain applications are estimated to have as much as a 50% improvement compared to a standard diesel unit. Currently, there are hybrid

- alt ernative fuel vehicles available for demonstration and commercial operation (primarily bio

- diesel hybrids and NG hybrid buses and refuse vehicles), but the weig ht, cost, and complexity of these systems has prevented their greater adoption. Further information will be available in a companion CalHEAT report, Barriers and Opportunities in Alternatively Fueled Hybrids 25

. Three stages in the Roadmap have been defined for Alternative Fuel Hybrids, as shown in Figu re 25 , page 46

. Stage 1, 2012

- 2013, focuses on advances in B5 to B20 biodiesel hybrid trucks and buses ( which use fuel contain ing 5% and 20% biodiesel, respectively ) to achieve 22

- 38% CO 2 e reduction, along with a significant petroleum reduction. The Stage 1 a ction is to encourage

a broader selection of B20

- certified engines through an outreach effort to the industry. In Stage 2, the focus is on NG hybrid trucks from 2013 through 2017, with an economic goal of a three

- to

- five

- year payback. This ROI is based on a combination of fuel savings and productivi ty gains of more stops per hour for refuse trucks enabled by hybrid technology with faster acceleration

. These trucks also realize maintenance saving s from a reduction in brake replacement

. Performance goals include a 27

- 54% reduction in CO 2 , 100% petroleum reduction, and increased low

- speed torque in hybrid system s to compensate for lower

- torque NG engines. Technical characteristics may inclu d e right

- sized NG tanks and battery or hydraulic storage for a NG hybrid refuse truck, and achieving a pre

- commercial range

- extended HEV drayage truck with high electrification of accessories. Actions specified in conjunction with these technology goals include pilot demon stration and evaluation of NG hybrid refuse trucks, a pre

- commercial demonstration of new platforms for NG hybrid drayage trucks meeting ZEV Corridor requirements, deployment incentives for 200 NG hybrid refuse trucks, and R&D for smaller, lighter NG tanks designed for hybrid electric trucks. In Stage 3, the focus remains on NG hybrid trucks from 2017 to 2020. An economic goal of a three

- to

- four

- year payback for a refuse truck has been defined, combined with performance

25 Dr. Lawrence Wnuk, CalHEAT, Barriers and Opportunities in Alternatively Fueled Hybrids
, Publica tion number: CEC

- XXX

- 2013

- XXX

.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

46

goals of further efficiency, durabil ity and reliability improvements, an 80% reduction in NOx compared to 2010, and development of a n NG range

- extended drayage truck capable of meeting zero

- e mission operations for ZEV corridors

. Actions corresponding to these technology goals include deploym ent incentives for 100 ZEV Corridor NG hybrid trucks, and a pilot demonstration of NG hybrid refuse trucks with reduced NOx emission. In addition, the Roadmap calls for a study to identify the potential of other alternative fuels in hybrids including cellu losic ethanol, methanol and dimethyl ether (DME).

Figu re 25 : Alternative Fuel Hybrid Technology and Action Roadmap

The Roadmap for Alternative Fuel Hybrids, which combine s the advantages of electric hybrid capability with low carbon fuels, focuses on biodiesel hybrids in Stage 1, 2012 to 2013. In Stages 2 and 3, emphasis is on natural gas hybrids with improved performance and extended range during the remainder of the peri od to 2020. A study of other alternative fuels in Stage 3 is included in the Roadmap to increase understanding of the potential for cellulosic ethanol, methanol and dimethyl ether as hybrid fuels.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research C enterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

47



## Hydraulic Hybrids

Hybrids come in many forms, and have already made inroads in certain segments of the truck industry. The fundamental theory behind hybridization, regardless of type, is that the storage of energy reduces fuel consumption. Hybrids typically combine some form of internal combustion engine with an energy storage device and are able to recapture energy and power the vehicle or some of its systems with it. The energy storage system in an electric hybrid involves a batt ery pack and electric motors, while , in the case of hydraulic hybrids, it uses a hydraulic tank (accumulator) and hydraulic motors. The accumulator store s hydraulic pressure, typically by using fluids to compress a gas

- filled balloon inside a pressure tank. When hydrau lic power is needed, the pressure is released, driving a hydraulic motor.
The second primary distinction among hybrids is the architecture. Series hybrids have drive wheels that are driven exclusively by the electric or hydraulic motor, and the internal

c ombustion engine serves to keep the system charged, but has no direct mechanical link to the drive wheels. In a parallel hybrid, both the electric (hydraulic) motor and the internal combustion engine are linked mechanically to the drive wheel, typically th rough a shared transmission. Power split, or s eries

- p arallel hybrids use a system, like a planetary gear, to allow the system to adjust the power ratio coming from the ICE or the electric/hydraulic power source. This gives the vehicle the ability to operat e from 100% electric/hydraulic power to 100% ICE, depending on the power needs of the vehicle.

Parallel or dual

- mode hybrid architectures are used in the three s tages defined in this Roadmap for Hydraulic Hybrids, shown in Figure 26 , page 48 . Stage 1 covers hydraulic hybrid refuse trucks with parallel hybrid architectures, comm ercially available in 2012

. They feature an economic payback of five years without incen tives in refuse applications. Performance improvements of 10

- 25% fuel reduction from parallel hybrid architecture s have been demonstrated, along with a 4x to 5x improve ment in brake life resulting from use of a regenerative brake system

. The hydraulic accumulator also captures kinetic energy to increase torque and enable the vehicle to accelerate much faster, leading to improved productivity in terms of number of stops p ossible per day

. Stage 2 development, which begins in 2014, includes additional technolog ical development of

s eries, e nhanced p arallel and d ual

- m ode, or power

- split, hybrid architectures and increased fuel economy improvement in the 35% to 100% range , compared to conventional trucks. Performance characteristics i n the full series architecture include no mechanical connection between the engine and wheels. The dual

- mode series hydraulic hybrid will operate in dual

mode powered by both the hydraulic sys tem and the ICE at low sp eeds and switch to mechanical transmission at hig hway speeds, powered by the ICE. T he parallel architecture is expected to improve transmission efficiency and system integration. Related a ctions in Stage 2 include R&D for advanced, lightweight accumulator desig ns; pilot demonstrations in parcel, beverage delivery, buses and yard hostlers; pre

- commercial demonstrations of Stage 2 hydraulic hybrids in refuse trucks ; and deployment incentives when Stage 2 trucks are commercially availa ble.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

48

Stage 3 technology developments call for a three

- year payback without incentives, performance goals of 50

- 100% fuel economy improvement compared to conventional vehicles, significantly longer brake life
, and the potential to build a cost

- effective, high

- mileage vehicle in smaller sizes down to Class 2b. Technical capabilities include advanced s eries architecture with high

efficiency pump, motors and controls; advanced higher density energy storage; an integrated d ual

- m ode t ransmission hybrid with digital hydraulic components ; a f ree p iston e ngine with

s eries configurations ; and digital pumps, mo tors and pump

- motors that can be used for parallel or series architectures. Actions for Stage 3 include R&D for the f ree p iston e ngine, pre

commercial demonstrations of digital hydraulic components and Class 2b vehicles, and deployment incentives for Stage 3 products in Class 2b vehicles.

Figure 26 : Hydraulic Hybrid Technology and Action Roadmap

The Hydraulic Hybr id Technology and Action Roadmap defines a series of achievable stepping stones to improve efficiency. Improvements in hybrid architectures are expected to increase fuel economy improvements from 10

- 25% in Stage 1 to 50

- 100% in Stage 3, and expand applicat ions from primarily refuse trucks to multiple truck categories down to Class 2b by the end of the decade.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

49



## Optimized Alternative Fuel Engines

To improve performance, reduce emissions
, and op timize the efficiency of engines using alternative fuels, various technologies have been investigated. While engines that burn natural gas and other alternative fuels can be cleaner than conventional diesel engines , reduce emissions of GHG s , and contribute to mandated goals to reduce petroleum use, the initial spark

- ignited engines developed to burn NG have been less efficient and provide lower torque than diesel engines. To offset this deficiency, h igh pressure direct injection (HPDI) is one approach that has been developed to enable NG

- burning engines to approach diesel efficiency and torque. Other beneficial technologies to achieve significantly lower emissions and greater power using natural gas include a lternative combustion modes such as homogenous ch arge compression ignition (HCCI)

. HCCI has desirable char acteristics, such as low engine

- out emission s combined with good fuel consumption, but can be difficult to control across all engine loads and in transient operation. HCCI helps reduce both NOx and p articulate m atter (PM) emissions , although like other alternative combustion modes , it typically achieve s lower thermal efficiency than conventional diesel combustion. However, conventional diesel combustion suffers thermal efficiency degradation at low en gine

- out NOx levels, so the alternative combusti on modes become more attractive as allowable NOx levels decrease during the forecast period. To help achieve the mandated reductions in NOx, PM and petroleum use, the CalHEAT Roadmap for Optimized Alternativ e Fuel Engine s, shown in Figure 27 , page 50 , focuses on both performance improvements to approach conven tional diesel engine efficiency and techniques to reduce emissions. Three Stages have been defined for NG engine optimization in the Roadma p. Research to adapt ethanol

- optimized engine technologies for use in Cla ss 2b

- 3 trucks
, to enable them to burn fuel with a higher percentage of biofuel
, is also included as one of the Roadmap

a ctions. Stage 1 involves deployment support for recently developed NG

- burning engines featuring HP D I with a diesel pilot for greater ef ficiency and improve d torque, and stoichiometric spark

ignited cooled Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR)

. Stage 2 involves per formance and efficiency improvements ; less costly, lighter
, and more compact storage tanks ; and use of variable valve actuation with cylinder deactivation. Targeted for development in 2012

- 2014, with deployment following from 2014

- 2017, Stage 2 will also involve expansion of optimized NG engines into a wider range of applications, including Classes 2b and 3

- 8, with a greater range of en gine size options. Actions in the Roadmap to support these advances include R&D projects to develop additional eng ine sizes and less costly h eavy

- h eavy d uty 1.5 liter engines, plus pre

- commercial and pilot demos.
Stage 3 performance goals call for decrease d NOx emissions to 0.02g/bhp

- h , a reduction of 90% from 2008 levels, with efficiency approaching that of conventional diesel engines. Technological improvements may include further downsizing with improved turbocharging, optimized exhaust heat recovery, ho mogen ous charge compression ignition, a camless engine and betterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

50

methane catalysts. Related a ctions include R&D for advanced engine efficiencies and improved methane catalysts, and pre

- commercial demonstration of decreased NOx emissions.

Figure 27 : Optimized Alternative Fuel Engine Technology and Action Roadmap

The three stages defined in the CalHEAT Roadmap for Alternative Fuel Engine Optimization focus primarily on natural gas

- burning engines to achieve performance i mprovements that increase torque and engine efficiency to levels approaching that of conventional diesel engines, while incorporating advanced emission reduction techniques such as HCCI, improved methane catalysts and optimized exhaust heat recovery to ach ieve very low NOx emissions. Stage 3 also calls for R&D into ethanol

- optimized engines for use in Class 2b

- 3 trucks.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

51



## Waste Heat Recovery

Recovering waste heat, through the use of thermoelectr ic devices, low

- grade energy recovery devices such as those using the Rankine cycle, small turbines or other techniques, allows a portion of the energy normally wasted by the engine to be converted back into useful energy. If the thermal energy is recaptur ed and used to charge batteries, run accessories, or perform similar tasks, overall vehicle efficiency can be dramatically improved. Captured and stored heat can also be used in conjunction with catalytic converters to ensure complete combustion an d fewer emissions, and possibly reduce the size and cost of after

- treatment systems. An energy audit of a typical diesel engine in a Class 8 line haul truck 26 revealed that just 42% of the fuel energy consumed actually goes to perform useful work such as vehicle propulsion. This 42% is consumed by drivetrain losses, rolling resistance, aerodynamic drag, and auxiliary loads such as the alternator, air compressor , and power steering pump. Energy lost as engine heat accounts for 26% of the fuel consumed and exhaust heat accounts for another 24%. Finding ways to recapture the waste heat is an important part of reducing vehicle fuel consumption. Turbocompound system s add a second exhaust turbine downstream of the engine’s primary turbocharger to extract additional energy from the exhaust flow. Rather than compressing the intake air like the primary turbo, the turbocompound exhaust turbine converts a portion of the

en ergy in the exhaust flow to useful energy. This conversion can provide either mechanical (rotational) or electrical energy back to the vehicle’s powertrain. This regenerated energy lowers the fuel

- derived energy demand on the engine, thus reducing the fuel consumption. In a mechanical turbocompound system, the exhaust turbine is connected to the engine’s crankshaft through gearing and a fluid coupling to regenerate a portion of the exhaust flow energy back into the powertrain. In addition, the brake power o utput of the engine is also increased with mechanical turbocompounding
, thus creating the potential for engine downsizing that can further reduce fuel consumption in the vehicle. An increase in power output of roughly 10% is not unusual. This would corresp ond to a roughly 5% decrease in fuel consumption. The fuel consumption is smaller than the power increase due to higher pumping losses from the higher exhaust backpressure 27

. A turbocompound system provides the greatest benefit at full load

. The improvement i s much less

– or even zero

– at light loads. Thus, these systems are best suited for vehicles that consume most of their fuel at fairly high loads. Examples include line

- haul trucks and vocation vehicles such as refuse trucks.
Some of the advantages of mechanical turbocompound system s include high power density (more power for a given displacement) and reduced fuel consumption in highly

- loaded vehicle applications. A potential reduction in fuel consumption of 3% can be achieved in long

- haul

26 National Academy of Sciences

, p. 5

- 60

.

27 Anthony Grezler, Volvo Powertrain Corporation, Diesel Turbo

- compound Technology, ICCT/NESCCAF Workshop presentation, February 20, 2008, slide 5.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

52

applications, although there can be a minimal or negative impact with light loads. Since exhaust manifold pressure is increased above inta ke manifold pressure, higher EGR flow can be achieved more easily to facilitate low NOx emissions.
Some of the challenges facing br oad acceptance of turbocompounding are that the gear train, fluid coupling, and power turbine add weight, complexity (reliability concern), and cost. 28 Exhaust energy decreases with cooled EGR due to energy extracted into the cooling system, resulting in le ss energy available to the power turbine. Space requirements further constrain packaging of EGR and turbochargers and add complexity in design, control, and service. Additional cooling of exhaust reduces the effectiveness of exhaust after treatment systems

. These systems may require more active regeneration for the particulate filter, and may r educe the time when NOx systems are effective , including those based on Low NOx Ammonia (LNA) applications, selective catalytic reduction ( SCR ), or Lean NOx Catalysts (LNC). In the CalHEAT Roadmap for Waste Heat Recovery, shown in Figure 28 , page 53 , Stage 1 performance goals were identified for turbocompounding using mechanical recove ry systems. At least two engine manufacturers have mechanical turbocompound systems in production today, so no a ctions were included for Stage 1. Stage 2 identifies technology improvements projected for 2015

- 2019, which will include blowers for vocational trucks, organic Rankin e cycles, electric turbocompounding for OTR trucks, thermoelectric systems, and both electrical and mechanical recovery. An increase in electrical waste heat recovery is projected going forward. Two accompanying a ctions for Stage 2 in clude R&D to apply thermoelectric designs in medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks, and p ilot and p re

- commercial demonstrations of w aste h eat

r ecovery in v ocational and OTR truck s

.

28 Anthony Grezler, Volvo Powertrain Corporation, Diesel Turbo

- compound Technology
, ICCT/NESCCAF Workshop presentation, February 20, 2008, slide 6.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

53 Figure 28 : Waste Heat Recovery Technology and Action Roadmap

Waste Heat Recovery offers the potential to recapture engine and exhaust heat to help power the vehicle. Mechanical turbocompounding systems are currently in production. CalHEAT Roadmap actions for this technology strategy begin in Stage 2, projected for 2015

- 2019, and are related to R&D and p ilot and p re
commercial demonstrations of thermoelectric waste heat recovery.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

54



## Engine Optimization

Increasing efficiency and dec reasing energy losses in truck engines are critical elements in the effort to reduce truck fleet fuel consumption . Optimized engines are one of the technology strategies to achieve this. Roughly 60% of the chemica l ener gy of the fuel used in a truck diesel engine is lost in the engine, through heat losses or low combustion efficiency 29 . Gasoline engines are even less efficient at converting the fuel they consume into usable power to operate the vehicle. In 2006, the 21st Century Truck Partnership 30 (21C TP) outlined goals to increase the energy efficiency of the engine system for class 7

- 8 trucks from 42% to 50% by 2010 and 55% by 2013

. To build upon the energy efficiency improvements from the 21CTP, in January 2010, the DOE awarded $115 million for three projects under the Super truck program

. The Supertruck projects are intended to improve fuel efficiency of heavy

- duty Class 8 long

- ha ul trucks and will incorporate a wide range of technologies resulting from the 21C TP program over the past decade 31

. The CalHEAT Roadmap defines three technology stages for Engine Optimization, as shown in Figure 29 , page 53

. In St ag e 1 , 2012 to 2013, the technology

- related goals from existing industry projects have been incorporated into the Roadmap, without accompanying actions. Performance goals , driven by Nat ional Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) legislation, are to achieve a 47% brake thermal efficiency (BTE) improvement, on a level road at 65 miles per hour, compared to the baseline conventional diesel vehicle s and engine s. T echnologies used to achieve this include engine boosting, downspeedi ng to 1000

- 1200 RPM (which requires faster transmission gear shifting)
, and other technologies required to meet Federal EPA/NHTSA Phase 1 rules for commercial vehicles. The Stage 2 Engine Optimization Roadma p, 2014 to 2017, identifies a performance goal of 50% BTE corresponding to the DOE Supertruck project developments. Actions for Stage 2 include a pilot demonstration of a 50% BTE Class 8 truck, incorporating all needed technologies to achieve up to a 1.5 t ruck efficiency improvement over the baseline vehicle and engine performance. Stage 3 builds upon Stage 2, and targets a 55% BTE DOE Supertruck, incorporating advanced technologies that may lead to a 2 00% more fuel efficient Class 8 OTR truck, with significant NOx reduction and advanced exhaust heat recovery advances described in the Waste Heat Recovery section, above. Actions for Stage 3 include R&D to promote NOx reduction technologies, pilot demonstrati on of a 55% BTE Class 8 truck with 2 00% fuel efficiency improvement , and pilot demonstration of an OTR truck with three to ten times lower NOx.

29 National Academy of Sciences , Figure 4

- 1.

30 National Academy of Sciences, p. 55

- 56.

31 Committee to Review t he 21st Century Truck Partnership, Phase 2, National Research Council. SuperTruck Program. Review of the 21st Century Truck Partnership, Second Report . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2012.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

55 Figure 29 : Engine Optimization Technology and Action Roadmap

The CalHEAT Roadmap defines three stages for Engine Optimization

, start ing with technologies already defined in the DOE Supertruck program to achieve 47% Baseline Efficiency in 2012 to 2013. Stages 2 and 3 leverage the Supertruck program for California, and include performance goals of 50% BTE in Stage 2 and 55% in Stage 3. Stage 2 a ctions in this Roadmap for Cal i fornia include a pilot demonstration of the 50% BTE Class 8 Truck and deployment incentives likely to begin in 2016 for early fleet deployments for the firs t 200 OTR trucks. Stage 3 a ctions include R&D programs for NOx reduction and pilot demonstrations of both a 55% BTE Class 8 OTR truck and an OTR truck with 3x to 10x lower NOx.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

56



## Alternative Power Plants and Combustion Cycles

Other CalHEAT research into opportunities to reduce petroleum consumption and GHG emission included fuel cells, alternative engine architectures and combustion technologies, along with turbines used as generators for ele ctric drivelines. These technologies enable development of z ero

- e mission and n ear

- z ero

- e mission vehicles. Near

- z ero

- e mission developments reduce NOx emissions approximately 90% from 2010 emissions for trucks.

The Alternative Power Plant and Combustion Cycle Technology and Action Roadmap, shown in Figure 30 

### , below
, covers technology developments in various areas including fuel cells in trucks, turbines, camless en gines, o pposed p iston and f ree p iston engines, and homogenous charge compression ignition (HCCI), which is an alternative combustion mode.

Fuel cells are a zero

- emission power source that have shown promise as premium power generators in the 5

- 10 kW range but have not yet reached the packaging size, weight
, and cost range needed for widespread acceptance for on

- board power in trucks

. As the starting point for further development, Stage 1 describes fuel cell and station a ry turbine technology available commercially in 2012 for use in transit buses

. The Federal Transit Authority has been supporti ng R&D and deployment funding for fuel cell transit buses, with the primary objective of reducing fuel cell cost and footprint and increasing reliability. Stage 2 developments, targeted for 2015

- 2018, show initial deployments of fuel cells and turbines in trucks as range extenders, with a parallel hybrid electric driveline used in conjunction with the turbine. These developments are supported by Roadmap a ctions for pre

- commercial and pilot demonstrations. Alternative engine technology developments targeted for this s tage include camless, o pposed p iston, f ree p iston , and HCCI engines. Roadmap a ctions define R&D and pilot demonstrations, and deployment incentives for low NOx engines. Stage 3 developments define further stepping stones for each of the Stage 2 technologies, with goals for 2018

- 2020 including cost

- effective fuel cells, reduced NOx levels of 0.02g/bhp

- h in turbines, commercial production of camless engines capable of burni ng NG to achieve NOx levels of 0.02g/bhp

- h, and demonstrations of HCCI, o pposed p iston and f ree p iston engines.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

57

Figure 30 : Alternative Power Plant and Combustion Cycle Technology and Action Roadmap

The CalHEAT Roadmap for Alternative Power Plants and Combustion Cycles defines existing fuel cell and stationary turbine technology for electric drivelines used in transit business in Stage 1, and defines a path for incorporating these technologies into trucks in Stage 2. Other t echnologies covered in this Roadmap include alternative engine architectures including camless, o pposed p iston, f ree p iston and HCCI engines as avenues to achieve low NOx emissions before 2020.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

58



## Transmission /Driveline Impro ve ments

The 21 st Century Truck Partnership improvements in engine efficiency , discussed above in the Engine Optimization section, page 54 , did not look at total powertrain system efficiency but instead focused on changes to the engine itself. A rich area identified in this Roadmap for additional improvement is fully

- optimized powertrains, in which the entire powertrain is sized, calibrated and operated as a unit to achieve highest system efficiency. Potential i mprovements in powertrain system efficiency are likely to be achieved through advances in engine hardware and calibration, emissions control system s , accessories, and trans mission s

. Two Stages have been defined for t ransmission and d riveline improvement i n this Roadmap as shown in Figure 31 , page 59

. Stage 1 covers deployment of improvements that are part of the DOE Supertruck program, 2012 through 2016, which have an economic goal of a one

- to

- two

year pay back in OTR trucks. This will be achieved through performance improvements resulting in a 1

- 2% reduction in fuel use. The technology to do so uses faster shifting transmissions needed to support downspeeding to 1100 RPM , and may involve use of Automat ed Manual Transmissions. The related a ctions are included in the Engine Optimization Technology and Action Roadmap, Figure 29 , page 55

. Stage 2 calls for a 5% reduction in fuel for OTR trucks, and is likely to be achieved through further downspeeding to 1000 RPM and a shift to Automated Manual Transmissions. Research and demonstrations for Stage 2 are scheduled for 2012 to 2016, with deployment from 2016 through 2020.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

59 Figure 31 : Transmission/Driveline Technology and Action Roadmap

The Transmission/Driveline Roadmap focuses on improvements in powertrain system efficiency to be achieved through faster shifting transmissions needed to support lower RPM engines, greater powertrain integration and calibration, and shift to Automat ed Manual or Automatic Transmissions throughout the period to 2020.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

60



# CHAPTER 3 : Conclusions

With the development of this CalHEAT Research and Market Transformation Roadmap for Medium

and Heavy

- Duty Trucks , CalHEAT has now nearly completed the goals established for its initial three years of operation. Analysis of the CalHEAT Action Plan shows that implem e n t ation of the 66 action it ems would result in a 73 % reduction in CO 2 e by 2050, and 75 % reduction in petroleum use, compared to projected “Business as Usual” levels with out these changes.

For CO 2 e , the projec ted reduction would be 44MMT /year in 2050 , from a BAU level of 60MMT to 16MMT with implementation of the Roadmap action items . For comparison, the 2012 level is 36MMT /year

. For petroleum
, the projected reduction would be 4.5 billion gallons per year in 2050 compared to a projected BAU use of 5 .9 billion gallons , to 1.5 gallons/year. For comparison, truck

- related 2012 petroleum consumption is 3.6 billion gallons/ year

. These projections are based on the assumption of a moderate 25% adoption rate for biofuels. The “ B usiness as U sual” projections used for comparison assume use of existing technology and practices, adjusted for anticipated growth in number of vehicles and vehicle miles travelled. There is potential for significantly greater reductions of CO 2 e and petroleum with a higher adoption ra te of biofuels

. Over the same period, NOx emissions are projected to decrease 7 3 %, or 1 8 0 M T /year, from 249 ,000 MT/year in 2012 to 6 7,000 MT/year in 2050. This transformation Roadmap for California outlines specific actions to drive down climate and criteria emissions and fuel use in the medium

- and heavy

- duty truck and goods movement
sectors. Nineteen strategies in thre e pathways, as shown in Figure 32 below, were identified as having the potential to achieve significant energy and environmental benefits to meet State policy goals.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

61 Figure 32 : Technology Pathways

Nineteen technology strategies were identified by CalHEAT as pathways to enable reductions in carbon and criteria emissions and fuel use in trucks. The Electrification and Engine & Driveline Efficiency pathways are the focus of the 66 actions in the R oadmap. The technology strategies shown u nder Chassis, Body and Roadway Systems are already planned by manufacturers or transportation authorities.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research Center

The 13 technology strategies shown above, under Electrification and Engine & Driveli ne Efficiencies, were selected as the focus of the CalHEAT Roadmap. Those listed under Chassis, Body and Roadway Systems are receiving reasonable attention by the industry and industry stakeholders and as such are not a focus of the present CalHEAT Action plan. Within these 13 strategies, 66 actions have been identified, with target dates and milestones for th e period from 2012 through 2020. Appendix B , page 65, includes a summary of the actions by technology strategy, followed by a numerical list with des criptions, and Appendix C, beginning on page 74 , summari z es them by action category : Studies and Standards, Development, Pilot Demonstrations, Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations and Deployment Support and Incentives. As a first step toward developing the Roadmap during this three

- year project, CalHEAT established the CalHEAT Truck Research Ce nter in Pasadena and recruited its Advisory Council , Steering Committee , and Technical Advisory Group , which consist of qualified professionals from the truck and utility industries and a diverse range of regional, State, and Federal government agencies

. CalHEAT also conducted Phase I research to characterize the California truck population by size, use, and emissions, and prepared a baseline report of available technology and pathways for improvement. Phase II research identified gaps along the pathways and barriers to progress, and developed a decision

- making tool to identify the most efficient choices to meet the State’s goals. Phase III was the development of the RoadmapDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

62

that comprises this report. Additional research and demonstration projects were a lso conducted for advanced Class 8 trucks, plug

- in parcel delivery trucks and alternative f uel hybrid technologies. As a result of this process, CalHEAT has also become a key consensus point for industry and the public sector to meet and reach agreement on the key action steps and investments needed to transform medium

- and heavy

- duty trucks in the state.



## Priority Actions

Critical to the implementation of these sixty

- six Roadmap actions is funding

. Next steps would be to prioritize and act on the sixty

- si x step action plan, initiate critical action items that relate to more efficient d rive l ine s in Class 8 Over

- the

- Road Tractors which represent a projected 4 0 % of CO 2 e emissions from trucks in 2050 , and provide technical assistance to fleets and policy make rs in order to accelerate the adoption of clean and efficient technologies.
The process would involve develop ment of criteria for priority ratings , along with implement ation of the action items by catalyzing, facilitating, or administering related projects.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

63



## Recommendations for Next Steps

The CalHEAT Advisory Council has recommended additional research to support implementation and update of the roadmap. This would include upd ating the Roadmap and related model with adoption rates and an improved inventory analysis on natural gas trucks. There is also an ongoing need to track and search for new breakthrough technologies and incorporate these breakthroughs into the Roadmap.

Fur ther research on c lean and e fficient d riveline t echnologies would include more focused investigation of the Class 8 Truck population in the state, and within regions of the state, on their points of origin as well as the corridors they use, both in and out of California. Development of a plan is recommended to leverage federal funding on advanced and clean

- fuel buses in order to expedite the entry of these technologies in to California’s truck market. Additional recommendations include projects and partner ships to continue development of advanced and efficient Class 8 Over

- the

- Road Trucks, as Class 8 tractors are the largest contributor of CO 2 e in the medium

- and heavy

- duty truck market. This activity could build off CALSTART’s High

- Efficiency Truck Users F orum’s (HTUF) Class 8 Working Group findings to develop and demonstrate the following suggested projects or programs:

a. A more electrified Over

- the

- Road Truck b. Advanced and highly

- efficient combustion technologies and fuel cell solutions

c. Three hundred percent greater vehicle efficiencies leveraging driveline improvements, engine efficiencies
, and improved vehicle aerodynamics and rolling resistance d. Technical assistance to fleets, dealers
, and maintenance shops to assure a better understanding of early market adoption issues and provide help understanding the business case. Technical assistance would also be provided to s tate and regional agencies to support development of future investment s and policies
, and to industry suppliers in order to help them prioritize and understand the technologies and need for development and innovation.

Strategies related to c lean and e fficient d riveline s in Class 8 OTR trucks could address as much

as 8 milli on annual metric tons of CO 2 e by 2050. Recommendations include more specific research to identify the major state and regional corridors, the key destinations of the out

- of

state registered vehicles
, and the in

- state registered usage of Class 8 OTR trucks. Additional research could focus on the market barriers and benefits from zero

- emission truck corridors extending from the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach thr o u gh the Central Valley to the Ports of Stockton and Oakland. Additional work with industry s takeholders could identify ongoing n ear

- z ero

- e missions technologies and help establish near

- term voluntary standards. These standards are critical to achieving an 85% reduction of NOx in the South Coast region

. The Advisory Council also recommends formula tion of a plan to leverage large investments by the Federal Transit Administration in clean and efficient bus technology and expeditiouslyDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

64

transition these developments to ZEV and NZEV trucks. This plan could potentially accelerate the early adoption of He avy Trucks that are ZEV and NZEV by 2 to 3 years, resulting in a more significant adoption rate by 2050.
Finally, next steps could also include additional research on new focus areas that could lead to significant reductions in carbon, criteria emissions, or fuel use that were not necessarily a focus of the initial CalHEAT work. These include biofuel availability and efforts to reduce the growth of vehicle miles travelled by California trucks.

Research and action recommendations to increase use of renewabl e diesel, bio

- diesel, renewable natural gas, and/or ethanol in heavy long distance trucks is considered critical, as use of renewable fuels could have a significant impact on the CO 2 e emissions projected by the roadmap for 2050 , as shown in Figure 11 : Biofuel Related Impact on CO 2 e Reduction , page 25

. Finding additional ways to reduce the projected g rowth of VMT in California could also have a significant impact , as increases in VMT contribute to 40% growth in the business as usual projections for CO 2 e

. The objective related to VMT research is to identify roadway systems and policy approaches that could reduce VMT with little or no impact on commerce. Suggested research projects in these areas include:

a. Biofuel Availability and Projections for M edium

- and Heavy

- Duty Vehicles: Update forecasts for potential production of renewable natural gas, renewable diesel and bio

diesel. Increased availability of these biofuels could have an impact as great as 12MMTCO 2 e reduction by 2050.

b. Best Policies, Techn ologies and Practices in Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): State predictions for VMT growth are significant and can easily contribute up to 25 million metric tons of CO 2 e per year by 2050. The projections are based on conventional technologies and reg ulations. There are opportunities to increase the payload per truck through us e of double trailers, and consider use of regulations to maximize the payload in each truck to avoid less than full loads. Additional opportunities include platooning of trucks, expansion of truck corridors, and driverless vehicles.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

65 

# APPENDIX A: Methodology and Sources

Resources

The CalHEAT Advisory Council and Steering Committee listed on page ii of the Research and Market Transformation Roadmap for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Truck s ( CEC

- XXX

- XXXX

- 2013) assisted and reviewed materials developed in the Roadmap and action plan. The CalHEAT Technical Advisory Group listed on page iii of the Roadmap reviewed technical strategies and results

.
T wo outside consulting firms were utilized as additional resources. Ricardo plc ( www.ricardo.com )
, a global engineering and innovation consultancy with expertise in the

a utomotive market, analyzed CO 2 benefits and adoption rates for technologies. ZMassociates Environmental Consultants ( www.zmassociates.com ) calculated petroleum, CO 2 e, and NOx reductions
, and assembled the report

.



## California Truck Inventory and Impact Study

As the first step in the development of this Roadmap, CalHEAT performed a California Truck Inventory and Impact Study 32 to better understand the various types of trucks used in California, their relative populations, and how they are used. The baseline inv entory , acquired through Polk, consist ed of commercial C lass 2b thr o u gh Class 8 v ehicles registered through the California Department of Motor Vehicles. Data was taken from 2009 registrations consisting of about 1.5 million commercial medium

- and heavy

- du ty trucks, grouped by weight and application, to est ablish a baseline inventory, fuel use
, and emissions, to be used to evaluate the potential for efficiency and emissions improvements.

A CalHEAT

- specific system of reclassifying the vehicles into six categories by a combination of weight and duty cycles was devised. In order to do this correctly
, a Technical Advisory Group was created consisting of nationally

- recognized medium

- and heavy

- duty truck associations, manufacturers, and experts. Af ter the six Cal HEAT t ruck categories were defined
, a logic table was developed to automatically reclassify the 1.5 million t ruck s into breakout populations for each of the categories

.

32 Jennings, Geoff, and Brotherton, Tom. (CalHEAT). June, 2012.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

66

The next step was to create a baseline emissions inventory
, broken out by the six truck categories. This was done by performing secondary research on the average VMT , fuel consumption, and emissions per mile for each of the truck categories to define the average fuel
used and NOx and C O 2 e emission levels. These averages were then multiplied by the vehicle populations derived in the truck population inventory to develop baseline fuel consumption, CO 2 e and NOx levels as shown in Figure 3 : Truck CO 2 e, Average Vehicle Miles Traveled and Population by Truck Category , page 12 , and Figure 4 : Relative NOx by Truck Category , page 13

.



## Vehicle Technologies

Vehicle Technology Pathways Technology strategies were initially proposed for the action plan based on CALSTART’s experience on its High

- Efficiency Truck Users Forum (H TUF) Program. The initial advisory council meetings focused on developing consensus on which t echnology strategies to pursue in the Roadmap and action plan.


### Gap Analysis This phase of the Roadmap focused on research to identify gaps along technology pathwa ys, the status of market penetration and barriers that may be holding back progress. Initial interviews were established with a variety of technology advisory committee members and
with Ricardo a utomotive consult ants. Ricardo was selected as a consultant to CalHEAT for the purpose of vetting the industry feedback received

.

Initially CalHEAT was able to determine near term gap s and in what timeframe a given technology strategy may be able to have some significant impact on the CO 2 profile for California, c lassified by each of the six truck categories. These are illustrated under Table 5 : Promising Technology Pathways by Truck Category , page 19 , using Harvey balls to identify technologies that are expected to make a significant re duction in CO 2 before 2020, vs. those not expected to be implemented until after 2020, or not make a significant contribution in CO 2 reduction at all

. 

### Petroleum, CO 2 

### e, and NOx Reduction Analysis To project likely CO 2 e , NOx, and petroleum reductions, a look

- up t able and model was developed for a near term generation and a future long term generation of each t ruck category, and correlated to the 13 technology strategies.

A straw man action plan and R oadmap for the generations of each technology was dev eloped, culminating in a long

- term commercial product that could ultimately provide a 2

- to

- 4 yearDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

67

return on investment. The initial R oadmap was developed based on industry interviews and CALSTART knowledge of electrification technologies from the HTUF Prog ram. A corresponding action plan for each technology strategy was developed providing actions along
with their cost to culminate in a mature, cost

- effective technology offering.

The set of straw man Roadmap and action plans were submitted to the full T ech nology A dvisory Group for review . Nearly 90% of the Technical Advisory Group members provided detailed responses in their areas of expertise. Additional interviews were performed in areas that the CalHEAT staff considered to be incomplete
, and then the Roa dmap and action plan was generated.

The results of the Roadmap technologies combined with the model resulted in the projected reductions of petroleum, CO 2 e , and NOx, discussed in the Results section of Chapter 1, under Truck Fuel Use, page 13 , through the Fuel

- Related Reductions section, which begins on page 22

.

The EMissions FACtor (EMFAC) model was used for projecting increases in vehicle populations and VMT. EMFAC categories were mapped to the CalHEAT categories in order to project the increase in each CalHEAT category. As EMFAC only provided data to 2035, the data were extrapolated to 2050 using the period 2020 to 2035 , where it was expected effects from the recession would be minimal

.

Assumptions for NOx calculations discuss ed in the Results section and shown in Figure 12 : Projected NOx Reductions , page 26 , are that NOx emissions decrease with a decrease in fuel consumption due to higher effi ciencies, but are not affected by use of biofuels or decarbonization. NOx reduction technologies will be adopted beginning in 2020.


### Adoption Analysis The CalHEAT staff, with the assistance of Ricardo
, develop ed a model which used the CalHEAT categories developed for the emissions reduction model, added unique vehicle technology adoption rates for each truck technology and category
, and then rolled up t he result of the C O 2 reduction over time to obtain projections for 2020
, 2035 and 2050. The adoption rates were generated b y review ing recent Class 8 Truck Adoption rates provide d by the North America n Council for Freight Efficiency ( NACFE ) and some general automotive adoption rate

curves

.

The model was ultimately used to ge nerate the adoption curves shown in Category Figure 13 : Technology Adoption by Truck Category
, page 27 , and Figure 14 : Technology Adoption all Truck Categories , page 28

.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

68 

# APPENDIX B: Sixty

- six Actions by Technology Strateg y

In this Appendix, the 66 Roadmap actions to reduce petroleum, CO 2 e, and NOx, or improve truck efficiency are grouped by technology strategy and identified by action categor y, such as studies and standard s through deployment , in Figure 33 , page 69

. A numerical list with descriptions of each action follows in Table 6 , page 70

.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

69 Figure 33 : Sixty

- Six Actions by Technology Strategy

The 66 actions to reduce petroleum, CO 2 e , and NOx, or improve truck efficiency are grouped by technology strategy and identified by action category, from studies and standards through deployment. Refer to Table 6 , below, for a numerical list, timeline and description.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

70 Table 6 : Sixty

- six Actions in CalHEAT Roadmap

# Technology

Strategy Action Category Year(s) Description

1 Hybrid Electric Studies and Standards 2013 Industry assistance to overcome California OBD issues.

2 Electrified Auxiliaries Studies and

Standards 2013 Formulate and expedite adoption of standards such as voltage variants and J1939 signal controls. 3 a

3b E

- Trucks Studies and Standards 2013

2013 Develop energy storage standards (pack level interfaces) to encourage greater selection and competition through SAE or IEEE or regulation. Study best Applications for fast charging for increase truck and battery utilization 4 Plug

- in Hybrids Studies and Standards 2013 Identify appropriate markets and truck platforms that have a potential business case. 5 Electric Corridor Studies and Standards 2013 Assess various roadway power systems and garner regional and statewide consensus on a standard for a pickup device. 6 AF Hybrid Studies and Standards 2013 Perform outreach to encourage an increase and broader selection of B20

- certified engines. 7 Electrified Auxiliaries Development 2013

- 14 Develop more purposely

- designed electronics (but ideally shared architecture, DC

- DC converters, auxiliary drives, power steering, pumps) that can be integrated into vehicles. 8 Electrified Auxiliaries Development 2013

- 14 Develop a power distribution box/supplier s to allow for commonality across OEMs an enabler for cost reduction. 9 AF Hybrid Development 2013

- 14 Develop smaller & lighter CNG tanks designed for HE trucks. 10 Hydraulic Hybrid Development 2013

- 14 Develop a light

- weight advanced accumulator s

. 11 Optimized AF Engine Development 2013 Develop additional smaller engine sizes for efficiency and performance improvements (especially low

- end torque). 12 Optimized AF Engine Development 2013 Develop lower cost HHD NG solution s (Heavy

- Heavy 1.5 liter engine).

13 Waste Heat Recovery Development 2013

- 14 Develop/apply thermoelectric designs to M

- HD applications.

14 Engine Optimization Development 2013

- 14 Develop engine s and system s to provide 50% reduced NOx.

15 Alt Power Plants and Combustion Cycles Development 2013 FTA providing development funding for fuel cell transit buses, with the primary objective of reducing fuel cell cost, reducing footprint, increasing reliability. 16 Alt Power Plants and Combustion Cycles Development 2013

- 14 Develop one or two new advanced engine designs such as camless, opposed piston or HCCI.

17 Alt Power Plants and Combustion Cycles Development 2013

- 14 Develop a purposely

- designed turbine for vehicles.

18 E

- Trucks Pilot Demonstrations 2013

- 14 Pilot demo s of smart charging systems.

19 Hydraulic Hybrid Pilot Demonstrations 2013

- 14 Pilot demos of stage 2 in Parcel, Beverage Delivery, Buses and Yard Hostlers

. 20 Optimized AF Engine Pilot

Demonstrations 2013

- 14 Pilot demos of special CNG tanks with newer lighter materials.

21 Hybrid Electric Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2013

- 14 Demo s of next stage 2 hybrid drivelines incorporating improved design and integration and a preference for ARB OBD compliance, as well as electrified auxiliaries 22 Plug

- in Hybrids Studies and Standards 2014 Formulate a drayage truck economic model that captures externalities for ZEV Corridor. Sixty

- six actions identified in the CalHEAT Research & Market Transformation Roadmap for Medium

- and Heavy

Duty Trucks are listed above by action number, technology strategy, action category, and years in which action is planned, with a description. The table continues on the next two pages.Draft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

71

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

72 Table 6 : Sixty

- six Actions in CalHEAT Roadmap (Cont inued, page 2 of 3)

# Technology Strategy Action Category Year(s) Description

23 Hybrid Electric Development 2014

- 15 Develop prototypes for optimized and downsized engines to be used in hybrid systems.

24 Optimized AF Engine Development 2014

- 15 Develop advanced engine efficiency strategies and improved methane catalysts.

25 AF Hybrid Pilot Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Pilot demos to evaluate/benchmark various NG/hybrid refuse trucks.

26 Waste Heat Recovery Pilot Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Pilot demo s of waste heat recovery in a vocational and line

- haul truck.

27 Alt Power Plants and Combustion Cycles Pilot Demonstrations 2014

- 2016 Pilot demos of camless, opposed piston , free piston or HCCI engines in trucks.

28 E

- Trucks Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Demos of improved integration, lower

- cost stage 2 E

- Trucks for ZEV Corridor applications & goods movement.

29 Electric Power Take

off Pre

- Commercial

Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Demos of next

- gen lower

- cost state 2 systems.

30 Plug

- in Hybrids Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Demos of good movement and drayage trucks.

31 Plug

- in Hybrids Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2014

- 15 DOE SCAQMD utility trucks (ARRA Funded).

32 Plug

- in Hybrids Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Demos of stage 1 in Class 2b trucks.

33 Electric Corridor Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Demo s of preferred on

- road connection device for electric or PHET yard hostlers.

34 AF Hybrid Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Demo s of new platforms of NG/hybrid drayage truck meeting ZEV Corridor requirements.

35 Hydraulic Hybrid Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2014 Demo s of series, enhanced parallel and/or dual

- mode (power split) stage 2 hybrids in refuse trucks.

36 Optimized AF Engine Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2014

- 15 Demos of lower en gine sizes and new lower cost 15 liter engines to broaden number of platforms.

37 Hybrid Electric Deployment Support and Incentives 2014 Support for 1000 stage 2 hybrids when they become commercially available.

38 Hydraulic Hybrid Deployment Support and Incentives 2014

- 15 Support for the first 100 stage 2 vehicles when they become commercially available.

39 Optimized AF Engine Deployment Incentives 2014

- 15 Support for 1000 stage 2 trucks.

40 AF Hybrid Studies and Standards 2015 Understand potential for cellulosic ethanol, methanol and DME as hybrid and optimized engine fuels.

41 Hydraulic Hybrid Development 2015 Free Piston engine development.

42 Hybrid Electric Pilot Demonstrations 2015

- 16 Pilot demo s of optimized and downsized engine/s to be used in hybrid systems.
43 Electrified Auxiliaries Pilot Demonstrations 2015

- 16 Pilot demo s for validation of electrified auxiliaries in Class 7

- 8 (non

hybrid) tractors, line

- haul trucks and other trucks.

44 Engine Optimization Pilot Demonstrations 2015

- 16 Pilot demos of 50% brake thermal efficiency engines leveraging DOE program and also incorporating all relevant technologies to achieve up to 1.5x truck efficiency improvement.

Actions 23 through 44 in the CalHEAT Research and Market Transformation Roadmap for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Trucks are listed above by action number, technology strategy, action category, and years in which the action is planned, with a description. The table continues on the next page.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

73 Table 6 : Sixty

- six Actions in CalHEAT Roadmap (Continued, page 3 of 3)

# Technology Strategy Action Category Year(s) Description

45 E

- Trucks Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2015

- 16 Demos of significantly lower cost stage 3 E

- Trucks, including longer ranges & fast charging.

46 Hydraulic Hybrid Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2015

- 16 Demo s of ultra

- high efficiency stage 3 technology using digital hydraulic components into a Class 2b and one other larger truck platform. 47 Waste Heat Recovery Pre

- Commercial

Demonstrations 2015

- 2017 Demo s of waste heat recovery in vocational and line

- haul truck s

.

48 Alt Power Plants and Combustion Cycles Pre

- Commercial

Demonstrations 2015

- 2017 Demos of camless, opposed Piston, free piston or HCCI engines in trucks. 49 a

49b E

- Trucks Deployment Support and Incentives 2015

- 16

2018

- 20 Support for 1000 stage 2 trucks to reduce ROI to 5 years (assuming

daily driving of 80% of energy storage capacity). Support for Stage 3 Trucks to accelerate adoption 50 Electric Power Take

off Deployment Support

and Incentives 2015

- 17 Support for next

- gen, stage 2 lower cost EPTO deployments

51 Plug

- in Hybrids Deployment Support and Incentives 2015

- 17 Support for 500 stage 1 PHETs when they become commercially available.

52 AF Hybrid Deployment Support and Incentives 2015

- 17 Support for 200 NG hybrid refuse trucks.

53 AF Hybrid Pilot Demonstrations 2016

- 17 Pilot demos of NG/hybrid refuse trucks with downsized engines and/or 80% less NOx.

54 Electric Corridor Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2016

- 17 Demos of dual

- mode hybrid and range

- extended electric drayage trucks to broaden manufacturers offerings and truck types. 55 Optimized AF Engine Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2016

- 17 Demo s of 80% decreased NOx (NZEV).

56 Electric Corridor Deployment Support and Incentives 2016

- 17 Support for stage 2 PHET Class 7 & 8 drayage trucks (focus on Electric Corridor). 57 Alt Power Plants and Combustion Cycles Deployment Support

and Incentives 2016

- 18 Stage 2 tech support for 100 drayage truck buy

- downs and introduce performance

- based incentives for 200 low NOx higher efficiency line

haul trucks. 58 Engine Optimization Pilot Demonstrations 2017

- 18 Pilot demos of 55% brake thermal efficiency engines also incorporating all relevant technologies to achieve 2x truck efficiency improvement and 50% lower NOx 59 Hydraulic Hybrid Deployment Support and Incentives 2017

- 19 Support for first 300 vehicles in Class 2b when they become commercially available.

60 Optimized AF Engine Deployment Support and Incentives 2017

- 20 Introduce performance

- based incentives for 200 NZEV/higher

efficiency trucks. 61 Engine Optimization Deployment Support and Incentives 2017

- 20 Introduce performance

- based incentives for early fleet deployments in California (1.5x efficiency conventional and 50% lower NOx) for first 200 OTR trucks. 62 Hybrid Electric Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2018

- 19 Demo s of the more electric OTR hybrid truck.

63 Electric Corridor Deployment Support and Incentives 2018

- 20 Support for dual

- mode hybrid and range

- extended electric drayage.

64 AF Hybrid Deployment Support and Incentives 2018

- 20 Support for 100NG hybrid drayage trucks for ZEV Corridor.

65 Alt Power Plants and Combustion Cycles Deployment Support

and Incentives 2018

- 20 Support for fuel cell

- and turbine

- powered trucks and stage three technology trucks using performance based incentives 66 Engine Optimization Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations 2019

- 2020 Demo of 55% brake thermal efficiency engine incorporating all relevant technologies to achieve 2x truck efficiency improvement and 50% lower NOx. Actions 45 through 66 in the CalHEAT Research and Market Transformation Roadmap for Medium

- and Heavy

- Duty Trucks are listed above by action number, technology strategy, action category, and years in which the action is planned, with a description.

Califo rnia Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

74 

# APPENDIX C : Sixty

- six Actions by Timeline and Action Category

The sixty

- six actions in the Research and Market Transformation Roadmap for Medium

- and Heavy

Duty Trucks are summarized by action cat egory and technology strategy in the five tables included in thi s Appendix, which cover Studies and Standards, Development, Pilot Demonstrations, Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations, and Deployment Support and Incentives.

Table 7 : Studies and Standards Action Summary



### Studies and Standards
Includes business case studies, technology feasibility studies, complex modeling, and

simulations. Also includes the creation of standards.
Technology 2013 2014 2015
Hybrid

Electric 1. Industry assistance to understand

California OBD Requirements

Electrified Accessories 2. Formulate and expedite adoption of

standards such as voltage variants and J1939 signal controls

E

- Trucks 3 a Develop energy storage standards

(pack level interfaces) to encourage greater selection and competition through SAE or IEEE, or regulation

3b Study best Applications for fast charging for increase truck and battery utilization

Plug

- in Hybrids 4. Identify appropriate markets and

truck platforms that have a potential business case 22

. Formulate a drayage truck economic model that captures externalities for ZEV corridor

Electric Corridor 5. Asses s various roadway power

systems and garner regional and statewide consensus on a standard for a pickup device
AF/Hybrid 6. Perform outreach to encourage an

increase and broader selection of B20

- certified engines 40

. Understand potential for Cellulosic Ethanol, Methanol and DME as Hybrid and Optimized Engine Fuels

Studies and Standards planned in the CalHE AT Roadmap, shown by technology strategy and year.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

75 Table 8 : Development Action Summary



### Development
Development of a component, subsystem or complex drivetrain system
Technology 2013 2014 2015 2016
Hybrid

- Electric 23

. Develop prototypes for optimized and downsized engines to be used in hybrid systems

Electri fi ed Accessories 7. Develop more purposely

- designed electronics (but ideally shared architecture, DC

- DC converters, auxiliary drives, power steering, pumps) that can be integrated into vehicles.

8. Develop power d istribution box/supplier s to allow for commonality across OEMs. (This is an enabler to further cost reduction

. )
AF Hybrid 9. Develop smaller & lighter CNG tanks designed for HE trucks
Hydraulic Hybrid 10. Develop a light

- weight advanced accumulator s 41. Free Piston Engine Development s Optimized AF Engine 11. Develop additional smaller engine sizes for efficiency and performance improvements (especially low

- end torque) 24

. Develop advanced engine efficiency strategies and improved methane catalysts

12. Develop lower cost HHD NG solutions ( Heavy

– Heavy 15 liter engines)

Waste Heat Recovery 13. Develop/apply thermoelectric design s to M

- HD applications
Engine Optimization 14. Develop engine s and system s to provide 50% reduced NOx

Alternative Power Plants and Combustion Cycles 15. FTA providing development funding for fuel cell transit buses, to reduce fuel cell cost, reducing footprint, increasing reliability

16. Develop new advanced e ngine

designs such as camless, Opposed P iston , free piston and HCCI Engine s
17. Develop purposely

- devised turbine s for vehicles

Development projects outlined in the CalHEAT Roadmap, shown by technology strategy and year.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

76 Table 9 : Pilot Demonstration Action Summary



### Pilot Demo nstrations

A pilot demonstration is the full integration of a component, subsystem or complex drivetrain into1 to 5 trucks to evaluate performance.
Technology 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Hybrid Electric 42

. Pilot demo s of optimized and downsized engine/s to be used in hybrid systems

Electrified Auxiliaries 43

. Pilot demo s for validation of electrified auxiliaries in Class 7

- 8 (non

- hybrid) tractors, line haul trucks and other trucks

E

- Trucks 18

. Pilot demo s of smart

charging systems
AF Hybrid 25

. Pilot demos to evaluate/benchmark various NG/hybrid refuse trucks 53

. Pilot demos of NG/hybrid refuse trucks with downsized engines and/or 80% less NOx
Hydraulic Hybrid 19

. Pilot demos of stage 2 in

Parcel ,Beverage Delivery, Buses and Yard Hostlers
Optimized Alternative Fuel Engines 20

. Pilot demos of special CNG

tanks with newer lighter materials

Waste Heat Recovery 26

. Pilot demo s of waste heat recovery in a vocational and line

- haul truck s Engine Optimization 44

. Pilot demos of 50% break thermal efficiency engines leveraging DOE program and also incorporating all relevant technologies to achieve up to 1.5x truck efficiency improvement 58

. Pilot demos of 55% break thermal efficiency engines also incorporating all relevant technologies to achieve 2x truck efficiency improvement and 50% lower NOx

Alt Power Plants and Combustion Cycles 27

. Pilot demos of Camless, Opposed Piston , free piston or HCCI engines in trucks

Pilot demonstrations planned in the CalHEAT Roadmap, shown by technology strategy and year.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

77 Table 10 : Pre

- Commercial Demonstration Action Summary



### Pre

- Commercial Demonstrations

Pre

- c ommercial demonstrations involve 1 to 50 trucks to evaluate performance in the field.

Further refinement precedes commercial production.
Technology 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Hybrid Electric 21

. Demo s of next S tage 2 hybrid drivelines with improved design and integration

, and ARB OBD compliance and electrified accessories 62

. Demo s of the more electric OTR hybrid truck

E

- Trucks 28

. Demos of improved integra tion

- lower cost S tage 2 E

Trucks, for ZEV Corridor applications & goods movement

45

. Demos of lower cost S tage 3 E

- Trucks, including longer ranges & fast charging

Electric Power Take

- off 29

. Demos of next

- gen lower

- cost S tage 2 systems Plug

- in Hybrid Electric 30

. Demos of goods movement and drayage trucks

31

. DOE SCAQMD utility trucks (ARRA Funded)

32

. Demos of S tage 1 in Class 2b trucks

Electric Corridor 33

. Demo of preferred on

- road connection device for electric or PHET yard hostlers 54

. Demos of dual

- mode hybrid and range

- extended electric drayage trucks to broaden mfrs offerings and truck types AF Hybrid 34

. Demo s of new platforms of NG/hybrid drayage truck meeting ZEV Corridor requirements Hydraulic Hybrid 35

. Demo s of Series, Enhanced Parallel and/or Dual Mode (Power Split) Stage 2 Hybrids in refuse trucks 46

. Demo s of ultra

- high

efficiency S tage 3 technology using digital hydraulic components into a Class 2b and other larger truck platform s

Optimized AF Engine 36

. Demos of lower engine sizes and new lower cost 15 liter engine s to broaden number of platforms 55

. Demo s of 80% decreased NOx (NZEV)

Waste Heat Recovery 47

. Demo s of waste heat recovery in vocational and line

- haul truck s Engine Optimization 6 6

. Demo of 55% brake thermal efficiency engine with technologies to achieve 2x truck efficiency improvement and 50% lower NOx Alt Power Plant / Combustion Cycles 48

. Demos of c amless, Opposed Piston, free pistons and HCCI engines in trucks

P re
- commercial demonstrations in the CalHEAT Roadmap, shown by technology strategy and year.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

78 Table 11 : Deployment Support and Incentives Action Summary



### Deployment Support and Incentives
Policy and Regulatory Support and Financial Incentives for early deployment of commercial products in the marketplace
Technology 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Hybrid Electric 37 . Support for 1

, 000 S tage 2 hybrids starting when they become commercially available

E

- Trucks 49 A .Support for 1000 S tage 2 trucks to reduce ROI to 5 years (assuming daily driving of 80% of energy storage capacity 49 B Support for Stage 3 Trucks to accelerate adoption

Electric Power Take

off 50

. Support for next

- gen S tage 2 lower cost EPTO deployments

Plug

- in Hybrid 51

. Support for the first 500 S tage one PHETs when they become commercially available

Electric Corridor 56

. Support for Stage 2 PHET Class 7 & 8 drayage trucks (focus on Electric Corridor) 6 3

. Support for dual

- mode hybrid and range
- extended electric drayage

AF Hybrid 52

. Support for 200 NG hybrid refuse trucks 6 4

. Support for 100 NG hybrid drayage trucks for ZEV Corridor
Hydraulic Hybrid 38 . Support for the first 100 Stage 2 vehicles when they become commercially available 59. Support for first 300 vehicles in Class 2b when they become commercially available
Optimized AF Engine 39

. Support for 1000 Stage 2 trucks 60

. Introduce performance

- based incentives for 200 NZEV/higher

- efficiency trucks
Engine Optimization 61

. Introduce performance

- based incentives for early fleet deployments in California (1.5X efficiency conventional and 50% lower NOx) for first 200 OTR trucks

Alternative Engines and Combustion Cycles 57

. Stage 2 tech support for 100 drayage truck buy

- downs and introduce performance

- based incentives for 200 low NOx higher efficiency line

- haul trucks

6 5

. Support for fuel cell

- and turbine

powered trucks and stage three technology trucks using performance based incentives
Deployment incentives and support planned in the CalHEAT Roadmap, shown by technology strategy and year.

California Hybrid, Efficient and Advanced Truck Research CenterDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

79



# APPENDIX D : Glossary

AB Assembly Bill
AQMD Air Quality Management District

ARB Air Resources Board

BTE B rake Thermal Efficiency

CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency

CEC California Energy Commission

CO 2 e Carbon dioxide equivalents

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

DOT U.S. Department of Transportation

EMFAC EMissions FACtor, a computer model for quantification of pollutants from on

- road sources

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EPTO Electrified Power Take

- off

HDV Heavy

- duty vehicle

HEV Hybrid E A E lectric Vehicle g/bhp

- h G rams/brake horse power per hour

GHG Greenhouse g as

LNA Low NOx Ammonia application

LNC Lean NOx Catalysts

MDV Medium

- duty vehicle

MMT Million Metric Tons

MMTCO 2 e Million Metric Tons of CO 2 Equivalent Emissions

NACFE North American Council for Freight Efficiency

NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

NO x Oxides of NitrogenDraft Publication Rev # 7 Dated 6

- 14

- 2013

80

OBD On

- board Diagnostics

OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer

PHET Plug

- in Hybrid Electric Truck

PIER Public Interest Energy Research

PM Particulate matter

PTO Power Take

- off

ROI Return on Investment

RPM Revolutions per Minute

SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction Supertruck Under its Supertruck program, the DOE has funded demonstration projects of Class 8 long

- haul trucks that incorporate a wide range of technologies developed under the 21st Century Truck P artnership, with the objective of creating highly efficient and clean

- burning diesel

powered trucks with 50% or greater vehicle freight efficiency and brake thermal efficiency.

xEV Fully Electric Vehicle

ZEV Corridor Zero

- emission Corridor