WORKING GROUP PRESENTATION FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY.

DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE BECAUSE RESULTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.

June 4, 2021

MEMORANDUM FOR: Angelina LaRose

Assistant Administrator for Energy Analysis

FROM: Jim Diefenderfer

Director, Office of Long-Term Energy Modeling

SUBJECT: Summary of AEO2022 Transportation Working Group held on Thursday, 

May 27, 2021

This memorandum summarizes our presentation and discussion at the Annual Energy Outlook 2022

(AEO2022) Transportation Working Group meeting. The Transportation Working Group presentation 

summarized AEO2021 Reference case transportation projections. It also highlighted the planned 

historical transportation data and modeling updates for the Transportation Demand Module (TDM) for

the AEO2022 Reference case, as set up in our National Energy Modeling System (NEMS). After the 

presentation, meeting participants commented on additional model and data topics. The presentation 

for this meeting is available in a separate document on our website.

Model Updates (AEO2022)

Highlights from the presentation primarily relate to planned updates. These updates include 

• Model improvements to incorporate a new battery model for light- and heavy-duty vehicles, 

including a dynamic relationship between battery size, pack size, and vehicle weight

• Anticipated policy changes

• Aviation model updates

• Historical data updates across all of the transportation modes

We presented planned updates on five model areas:

• Light Duty—Light-duty vehicle stock data update, new battery model integration, regional sales 

and stock distribution revision, pending policy changes under consideration

• Heavy Duty—Regional travel and stock data update, new electric vehicle (EV) powertrain, and 

battery model integration

• Public transit—Bus and passenger rail travel update, travel demand equation re-estimation, 

transit bus fuel choice update

• Air—Historical data update, model assumptions update, demand projection re-estimation

• Other—Freight rail and domestic marine shipping update
WORKING GROUP PRESENTATION FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY.

DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE BECAUSE RESULTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.

Discussion

During the discussion, participants’ questions primarily focused on previous AEO projections, electric 

vehicles, and potential policy changes.

Previous projections

Attendees asked, given electric vehicle (EV) production announcements from many of the major 

automakers, if we were surprised to see that gasoline vehicles are projected to make up such a large 

portion of the light-duty fleet in 2050. Participants also asked what data and assumptions we used for 

AEO projections. We responded that automakers announced their EV sales intentions recently, after 

AEO2021 was finalized. We will consider the recent announcements for AEO2022, but projections of EV 

sales will be closely tied to advancements in battery research and development, performance 

improvement, chemistries, design, and packaging and how those factors will affect cost. We also 

explained that we do not model revolutionary change in battery cost and performance, so the potential 

impact that lithium sulfur or solid state batteries might have on EV sales is not currently reflected in the 

model. In addition, pending policies to create incentives to build infrastructure and to boost EV sales will 

affect the growth rate in sales.

Participants asked for more information about the regional differences in scrappage, vehicle miles 

traveled (VMT) by age, sales, and stock for light-duty vehicles. We responded that we obtain vehicle 

registration data every year. A few years ago we began analyzing the annual change in vehicle 

registrations at the state and zip code levels and observed increases in vehicle stocks for older vehicles 

in some regions. We also observed significant differences in the distribution of vehicle registrations by 

vehicle age, average annual travel, and average annual travel by vehicle vintage. We plan to add this 

detail to the model to better capture the energy impacts associated with vehicle sales, stocks, and 

travel.

Specific to the coal outlook, participants commented that coal is the largest bulk material carried by rail. 

We confirmed that coal shipments do account for a significant portion of rail travel, and the projections 

of rail ton-miles reflects the change in future U.S. coal demand. Growth that occurs beyond 2025 

reflects rail shipments associated with a projected growth in industrial sector output by region,

assuming rail does not lose market share in the industries it currently serves.

A participant asked about our projection for population growth given reports on declining birth-rate 

trends. We answered that population projections in the AEO reflect U.S. Census Bureau projections.

High and low macro cases provide sensitivity cases to the rate of population growth. The transportation 

model uses detailed projections of population growth by age cohort and gender; the rate of population 

growth does affect projected growth in energy demand.

Participants asked for the location of Class 2b vehicle efficiency, travel, and energy use reported in the 

AEO. We responded that sales, stocks, travel, and energy consumption are reported in the fleet tables 

and include both household and fleet vehicles. Class 2b new vehicle fuel economy and stock fuel 

economy is reported in Table 7.
WORKING GROUP PRESENTATION FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY.

DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE BECAUSE RESULTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.

Electric vehicles and potential policy changes

A participant asked if annual EV VMT displaces conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle 

travel at a one-to-one ratio. We affirmed and explained the model assumes that EV travel is the same as 

comparable ICE vehicles. Some recent studies have shown that, on average, EVs are driven less than half 

as much as comparable ICE vehicles, which could be due to the travel behavior characteristics of initial 

EV buyers. We would expect this factor to change as EVs become a viable alternative for a greater 

number of consumers. A participant asked a follow-up question about the consequences of EV uptake 

on gasoline demand and prices. We responded that the impacts are fairly small.

Participants asked what impact electrification would have on supply chain minerals such as lithium and 

cobalt. We stated we are not aware of any groups in EIA that are specifically analyzing demand for 

materials critical to support EV battery and powertrain production, or if future supply constraints could

affect the cost of those minerals and, as a result, battery prices. 

Regarding vehicle electrification, a participant asked if a California-sponsored order for more EV, plug-in 

electric vehicles (PHEV) or fuel cell vehicles by 2035 would apply to states that have not adopted ICE 

bans. We answered that states have not yet specified proposed policies related to ICE bans. Once those 

policies are enacted, we will include them in the model and will also research California’s ICE ban to 

better understand how or if that ban will be tied the ZEV program and if other states that adopt 

California’s light-duty vehicle emission regulations are affected.

Participants asked whether or not the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and EIA are 

collaborating. We confirmed that the transportation group coordinates with EPA on fuel economy data 

and regulations. We are unaware of EPA tracking state and local EV polices. If EPA has information or 

data that can be shared, we would appreciate the opportunity to collaborate on this issue.
WORKING GROUP PRESENTATION FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY.

DO NOT QUOTE OR CITE BECAUSE RESULTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.

Attendees

Guests (Webex/phone)

Megan Beardsley U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Daniel Bizer-Cox U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Naveen Dasari Rhodium Group

Michael Freels Oregon Department of Energy

David Gohlke Argonne National Laboratory

Michael Hartrick Alliance For Automotive Innovation

Darek Imadi OnLocation, Inc

Raphael Isaac Energetics

Bryan Just American Petroleum Institute

Ken Katz U.S. Department of Transportation

Ben King Rhodium Group

Jim Kliesch Honda

Hannah Kolus Rhodium Group

Alice Lee Honda

Amanda Levin Natural Resources Defense Council

Tiffany Mo U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Eric O'rear Rhodium Group

Thomas Perrot Energetics

Hannah Pitt Rhodium Group

Kara Podkaminer U.S. Department of Energy

Cassie Powers National Association of State Energy Officials

Christopher Ramig U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Alfredo Rivera Rhodium Group

Hideharu Takemoto Honda

Clayton Vernon Sunoco

Jacob Ward U.S. Department of Energy

Jarrett Whistance University of Missouri

Frances Wood OnLocation, Inc

Arthur Yip National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Yan Zhou Argonne National Laboratory

EIA attendees (Webex/phone) 

Erin Boedecker Perry Lindstrom Nicholas Skarzynski

Caroline Campbell John Maples Manussawee Sukunta

Jim Diefenderfer Elizabeth May Russ Tarver

Michael Dwyer Kyle Morley Thomas White

Kathryn Dyl Kelly Perl

Mindi Farber-Deanda James Preciado

Mala Kline Mark Schipper