Diesel Trucks & Buses in India

8/10/2019 Diesel Trucks & Buses in India

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/diesel-trucks-buses-in-india 1/99

Str ict ly Con fident ial

Final Report – Market Survey for Fuel Consumption norms for Diesel Trucks & Buses in India 0

Market Survey leading toFuel Consumption norms

for

Diesel (Engine Driven)

Trucks & Buses in India

Draft Report

2012

ICRA Management Consulting Services LimitedIMaCS

December 2012

Petroleum Conservation Research Association

Market Survey leading to Fuel

Consumption norms for

Diesel (Engine Driven) Trucks & Buses inIndia

Final Report

2013

ICRA Management Consulting Services LimitedIMaCS

March 2013





Disclaimer:- This report and the analysis herein is strictly for the use and benefit of Petroleum

Conservation Research Association (PCRA) and shall not be relied upon by any other person. This

report and the analysis herein are based on data and information collected by ICRA Management

Consulting Services Limited (IMaCS) from sources believed to be reliable and authentic. While all

reasonable care has been taken by IMaCS to ensure that the information and analysis contained herein

is not untrue or misleading, neither IMaCS nor its Directors shall be responsible for any losses, direct,indirect, incidental or consequential that any user of this report may incur by acting on the basis of this

report or its contents. IMaCS makes no representations or warranties in relation to the accuracy or

completeness of the information contained in the report. IMaCS’ analysis in this report is based on

information that is currently available and may be liable to change. This report and the analysis herein

should not be construed to be a credit rating assigned by ICRA Limited for any securities of any entity.

Other than as expressly stated in this report, we express no opinion on any other issue. Our

analysis/advice/recommendations should not be construed as legal advice on any issue.





TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 8

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 15

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................ 15

1.2 Scope of work ..................................................................................................................................... 16

1.3 L imi tations of our study ........................................................................................................ ............. 16

2 MARKET OVERVIEW OF TRUCKS AND BUSES IN INDIA .................................................... 18

2.1 Market segmentation .......................................................... .............................................................. .. 18

2.2 Market size and Vehicle park ....................................................... ...................................................... 21

2.3 Futur e vehicle projections ................................................................................................................. 26

2.4 Diesel consumpti on ............................................................................................................................ 28

3 OVERVIEW OF GLOBAL FUEL CONSUMPTION STANDARDS ............................................. 31

3.1 Introduction ............................................................. ................................................................. .......... 31

3.2 I nternational benchmarks for fuel consumption standards for Heavy Duty Vehi cles (HDVs) ....... 33

3.2.1 United States ............................................................ ................................................................. .......... 33

3.2.2 Japan .................................................................................................................................................. 40

3.2.3 Canada .......................................................... ................................................................. ..................... 47

3.2.4 European Union (EU) ........................................................ .............................................................. .. 54

3.3 I ssues and challenges faced in Implementation of H DV regulations .............................................. 57

3.3.1 Un ited States: ..................................................................................................................................... 57

3.3.2 Canada .......................................................... ................................................................. ..................... 58

4 FRAMEWORK FOR DEFINING STANDARDS FOR DIESEL (ENGINE DRIVEN) TRUCKS AND

BUSES IN INDIA ........................................................................................................................ 60

4.1 Fuel consumption roadmap vision .................................................................................................... 60

4.2 Approaches for defi ning fuel consumption standards ...................................................................... 61

4.2.1 Attr ibutes for Attr ibute-based continuous curve approach ............................................................. .. 63

4.2.2 Categori es for Attr ibu te-based continuous curve approach (with categories) ................................. 65

4.2.3 Testing procedures and Test cycles for measur ing fuel consumpti on .............................................. 65

4.3 Key Technology areas for improvement in f uel consumpti on .......................................................... 68

4.4 Developing Fuel consumption standards for I ndia ................................................................ ........... 70





4.4.1 Vehicl e standards ............................................................................................................................... 71

4.4.2 Engine standards ................................................................ .............................................................. .. 74

4.5 Estimati on increase in f uel consumption by 2020, 2025 ................................................................... 77

4.5.1 Case I : Cur rent f uel economy scenari o ............................................................ ................................ 77

4.5.2 Case II : Fuel consumption standards regime ................................................................................ .. 79

4.5.3 Estimated diesel consumpti on in I ndia (trucks and buses) ............................................................. .. 81

4.5.4 Estimation of F uel savings ................................................................................................................ 81

4.6 Implementation roadmap - Draf t time schedule for implementation of the program ...................... 83

5 OVERVIEW OF TESTING FACILITIES IN INDIA.................................................................. 85

5.1 Introduction ............................................................. ................................................................. .......... 85

5.2 Automotive Research Association of I ndia (ARAI ) .......................................................................... 85 5.3 National Au tomotive Testing and R&D Inf rastructure Project (NATRiP) ...................................... 87

5.4 Vehicl e Research & Development Establishment (VRDE) ............................................................. .. 91

ANNEXURE I: ILLUSTRATIVE SPECIFICATIONS OF DIESEL ENGINES FOR TRUCKS AND BUSES

IN INDIA .................................................................................................................................... 96





LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: Segmentation of trucks / goods carriers by Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) or MM ................... 19

Table 2.2: Segmentation of buses by Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) or MM............................................... 20

Table 2.3: Estimated diesel consumption by trucks and buses in India (2011-12) ...................................... 30

Table 3.1: Fuel consumption and Emission standards for Light Duty Vehicles (LDVs) ............................. 31

Table 3.2: Testing and simulation options for measurement of vehicle fuel economy ................................ 33

Table 3.3: Vehicle Weight Classes Defined by US Department of Transportation ..................................... 34

Table 3.4: US CAFE Standards – For Light trucks ..................................................................................... 35

Table 3.5: US CAFE Standards – for Class 2b – 8 Vocational Vehicles ........................................................ 37

Table 3.6: US CAFE Standards – for Class 7 – 8 Combination Vehicles ...................................................... 37

Table 3.7: US CAFE MY 2017 Combination Tractor Standards ................................................................ 38

Table 3.8: MY 2017 Combination Tractor Standards ................................................................................. 38 Table 3.9: MY 2017 Combination Tractor Standards ................................................................................. 40

Table 3.10: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Mini Cargo Vehicles ............................................................. 41

Table 3.11: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Light Cargo Vehicles, GVW ≤ 1.7 t ...................................... 42

Table 3.12: 2015 Fuel Efficiency targets for diesel Medium Cargo Vehicles (1.7 t < GVW ≤ 3.5t) ............ 42

Table 3.13: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Heavy-Duty Transit Buses .................................................... 43

Table 3.14: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Heavy-Duty General (Non-Transit) Buses ........................... 43

Table 3.15: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Heavy-Duty Trucks (Excluding Tractors) ........................... 43

Table 3.16: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Heavy-Duty Tractors ............................................................ 44

Table 3.17: Driving Distance Proportion by Driving Mode ......................................................................... 45

Table 3.18: Fuel efficiency improvements in Freight Vehicles .................................................................... 46

Table 3.19: Fuel efficiency improvements in Passenger vehicles (Riding capacity > 11 persons) ............... 46 Table 3.20: Tax incentives on fuel-efficient and low-emissions vehicles ...................................................... 47

Table 3.21: Data for LDV and HDV (2011) ................................................................................................. 48

Table 3.22: For 2014 to 2017 model years .................................................................................................... 50

Table 3.23: For 2014 to 2018 model years .................................................................................................... 50

Table 3.24: CO2 Emission Standards for vocational vehicles ..................................................................... 51

Table 3.25: Vocational vehicles CO2 Emission Standards for compression-ignition engine (diesel) .......... 51

Table 3.26: Combination tractors CO2 Emission Standards ...................................................................... 51

Table 3.27: Combination tractors CO2 Emission Standards for engines (in g/BHP-hr) ............................ 52

Table 3.28: EU Emission Standards for Light Commercial Vehicles .......................................................... 54

Table 4.1: Pros and Cons of approaches to the way standards are defined ................................................ 62

Table 4.2: Comparison of attributes for Attribute-based continuous curve approach ............................... 64

Table 4.3: Categories for Attribute-based continuous curve approach ...................................................... 65

Table 4.4: Testing options for measurement of vehicle fuel economy ......................................................... 67

Table 4.5: Truck fuel economy improvement technology matrix ................................................................ 68

Table 4.6: Key Technology Areas for improvement in fuel consumption using off-the-shelf technologies

and technologies that will be available in the 2015-2020 timeframe ................................................... 70

Table 4.7: Targeted fuel economy improvement in 2020, 2025 (for illustrative purpose only) ................... 72

Table 4.8: Estimated annual diesel consumption by “New trucks” purchased from 2015-16 onwards

during 2015-16 and 2024-25 (under Current fuel efficiency scenario) ................................................ 77

Table 4.9: Estimated annual diesel consumption by “New buses” purchased from 2015-16 onwards

during 2015-16 and 2024-25 (under Current fuel efficiency scenario) ................................................ 78 Table 4.10: Targeted fuel economy improvement in 2020, 2025 (for illustrative purpose only) ................. 79





Table 4.11: Estimated annual diesel consumption by “New trucks” purchased from 2015-16 onwards

during 2015-16 and 2024-25 (under Fuel consumption standards regime) ......................................... 80

Table 4.12: Estimated annual diesel consumption by “New buses” purchased from 2015-16 onwards

during 2015-16 and 2024-25 (under Fuel consumption standards regime) ......................................... 80

Table 4.13: Estimated Fuel savings from the proposed program ................................................................ 82

Table 5.1: ARAI Testing facilities ................................................................................................................ 86 Table 5.2: List of NATRiP testing centers ................................................................................................... 87

Table 5.3: Details of testing facilities at iCAT, Manesar ............................................................................. 87

Table 5.4: Proposed testing facilities at Global Automotive Research Center, Chennai ............................ 89

Table 5.5: Proposed testing facilities at National Automotive Test Tracks, Indore .................................... 90

Table 5.6: Proposed facilities at NIAIMT, Silchar....................................................................................... 91

Table 5.7: Proposed testing facilities at National Center for Vehicle research and Safety, Rae Bareli ...... 91

Table 5.8: List of testing facilities at VRDE ................................................................................................. 92

Table 5.9: Details of testing tracks at VRDE ............................................................................................... 93





LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Segmentation of Indian Automobile Industry ........................................................................... 18

Figure 2.2: Domestic Market Share for Indian Automotive Industry (2011-12) ......................................... 18

Figure 2.3: Annual sales of Buses and Trucks in India................................................................................ 21

Figure 2.4: Annual sales of Trucks in India ................................................................................................. 21

Figure 2.5: Annual sales of Buses in India ................................................................................................... 22

Figure 2.6: Commercial vehicle sales break-up (2011-12) ........................................................................... 22

Figure 2.7: Trucks – Changing sales mix (by weight categories) ................................................................. 23

Figure 2.8: Buses - Sales mix ........................................................................................................................ 23

Figure 2.9: Number of registered buses and goods vehicles in India (Cumulative) .................................... 24

Figure 2.10: Trucks Vehicle parc (by weight category) (as of March 31, 2012) .......................................... 24

Figure 2.11: Buses Vehicle parc (by weight category) (as of March 31, 2012) ............................................ 25

Figure 2.12: Trucks – Fleet break-up by age (as of March 31, 2012) .......................................................... 25 Figure 2.13: Buses – Fleet break-up by age (as of March 31, 2012) ............................................................ 25

Figure 2.14: Projected growth in sale of buses in India till 2025 ................................................................. 26

Figure 2.15: Projected sales mix of buses in 2019-20 and 2024-25 .............................................................. 27

Figure 2.16: Projected growth of trucks in India till 2025 ........................................................................... 27

Figure 2.17: Projected sales mix of trucks in 2019-20 and 2024-2025 ......................................................... 28

Figure 2.18: Consumption of HSDO in India (in 000’ tonnes) .................................................................... 29

Figure 2.19: Diesel consumption mix in India.............................................................................................. 29

Figure 3.1: HDV policy timelines across the globe ...................................................................................... 32

Figure 3.2: EPA CO2 Target Standards and NHTSA Fuel Consumption Target Standards for Diesel HD

Pickups and Vans ................................................................................................................................. 36

Figure 3.3: Overview of Simulation method ................................................................................................ 44 Figure 3.4: Regulated category of vehicles in Canada ................................................................................. 48

Figure 4.1: Baseline fuel consumption data for trucks (for illustrative purpose only) ................................ 71

Figure 4.2: Baseline fuel consumption data for buses (for illustrative purpose only) ................................. 72

Figure 4.3: Fuel consumption targets for trucks 2020, 2025 (for illustrative purpose only) ....................... 73

Figure 4.4: Fuel consumption targets for buses 2020, 2025 (for illustrative purpose only) ........................ 74

Figure 4.5: Baseline Engine efficiency data (for illustrative purpose only) ................................................. 75

Figure 4.6: Engine efficiency targets 2020 (for illustrative purpose only) ................................................... 76

Figure 4.7: Estimated increase in diesel consumption by trucks and buses in India .................................. 81





This page has been intentionally left blank.





EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Background

India is the fifth largest commercial vehicle manufacturer and one of the fastest growing commercial vehicle

markets in the world. Annual sales of trucks in India has grown from 111,485 trucks in 2001-02 to 682,300

trucks in 2011-12 at a Compounded Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of around 20 per cent while that of buses

has remained relatively flat, increasing from 89,812 buses in 2001-02 to 98,763 buses in 2011-12, growing

at a CAGR of around 1 per cent. An estimated 1.34 million buses and 4.17 million trucks are plying on the

roads in India. Rapid growth in number of trucks and buses in India during the last decade has significantly

increased diesel consumption in India. In 2011-12, India’s total diesel consumption stood at about 64.74

million tonnes; road transport accounted for about 64 per cent of diesel consumption, of which trucks and

buses consumed around 77 per cent diesel (trucks consuming 24.03 million tonnes and buses consuming

around 7.77 million tonnes). In future, truck sales is estimated to grow at around 8.9 per cent y-o-y between

2012-13 and 2024-45 from 0.80 million in 2012-13 to 2.23 million in 2024-25. Over the same period, bus

sales is expected to grow at a CAGR of 5.7 per cent to increase from 0.11 million in 2012-13 to 0.21 million

in 2024-25. The estimated diesel consumption by trucks and buses in India is expected to increase

from around 31.8 million tonne in 2011-12 to around 104.7 million tonne in 2024-25, thereby

registering a CAGR of 9.6%. Considering India’s dependence on imports of crude oil, it becomes

imperative for India to take steps to reduce diesel consumption by trucks and buses over medium to

long-term. However, fuel economy of trucks and buses has almost remained stagnant over the last five

years. Change in emission regime from BS III to BS IV in some of the cities of the country has made

the job of balancing emissions and fuel economy tougher for bus and truck manufacturers.

In this context, Petroleum Conservation Research Association (PCRA) has embarked upon the

process of preparation of Fuel Efficiency program for Diesel (Engine Driven) Trucks & Buses in

India. In this context, PCRA had mandated ICRA Management Consulting Services Limited (IMaCS)

to prepare a Report on market survey leading to fuel consumption norms for diesel (engine driven)

trucks & buses in India. We have prepared this report covering the findings of our exercise for

development of Fuel Consumption norms for Diesel Trucks & Buses in India.

Global fuel consumption standards for Heavy Duty Vehicles

With limited oil reserves, the Governments around the world have taken cognisance of the situation,

with several countries in the process of setting standards for regulating the fuel consumption by

Heavy-Duty vehicles (HDVs). HDVs have a relatively short history of fuel consumption regulations.





Establishing fuel efficiency norms for HDVs is significantly more challenging due to their diversity in

terms of vehicle size, configurations and usage patterns. Because of these challenges, HDV fuel

efficiency standards have just begun to be proposed and adopted in some of the major vehicle markets

in the world. Japan was the first country, which introduced such standards in 2005, providing a

roadmap for improvement in fuel efficiency of HDVs up to 2015. The US has finalized HDV fuel

efficiency standards in 2011, which begin with model year 2014, and increase in stringency through

2018. Canada has aligned its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission standards with the US HDV fuel

efficiency standards. Europe and China are in the process of designing HDV efficiency standards.

With increasing focus on the fuel efficiency/GHG emissions of M&HCV across the globe, a number

of countries are expected to introduce regulatory norms in the coming years.

An important consideration in designing and implementation of norms for HDV vehicles is defining

of duty cycle and testing conditions. Testing of HDV vehicles requires additional forethought given

the diversity of size and applications of the vehicles. Computer simulation of the whole truck

(typically in combination with engine testing on a bench dynamometer) seems to be the favoured

option by the Governments across the globe due to ease of implementation, accuracy of results and

cost-effectiveness. China is planning to use chassis dynamometer testing for main HDV vehicle

families and computer simulation for variants.

Testing and simulation options for measurement of vehicle fuel economy

S No Type of test Parts simulated Cost of testCountries considering fuel

consumption norms for HDVs

(1) On-road None Low None

(2) Computer

simulationAll Low US, EU, Japan, China

(3) Engine

dynamometer

Road and non-engine

componentsHigh US, EU, Japan

(4) Chassis

dynamometerRoad Very High China

Source: IEA – “Technology Roadmap - Fuel Economy of Road Vehicles”

Framework for defining standards for diesel (engine-driven) trucks and buses in India

India currently has standards to reduce air pollutants from motor vehicles; however, there are no

standards to reduce fuel consumption of motor vehicles in India. Efforts are already underway for

development of fuel consumption standards for passenger vehicles in India. Though passenger

vehicles in India are smaller in size and consume less fuel than their western counterparts, the Indian

commercial vehicles (trucks and buses) often consume more fuel.





In order to develop the framework for defining standards for diesel (engine driven) trucks and buses,

it is imperative to define a long-term objective or vision for setting up these standards and various

stakeholders shall jointly agree upon a Fuel Consumption Roadmap vision. For instance,

“To reduce fuel consumption per kilometre by 12 per cent to 20 per cent in new diesel (engine driven)

trucks and buses in India by 2020, and by 30 per cent to 50 per cent by 2025, in order to significantly

reduce diesel consumption, compared with a baseline projection.”

Fuel consumption standards are mainly set as fuel consumption targets based on the average of the

total fleet of vehicles sold (corporate average fuel economy). Fleet average fuel economy standards

provide flexibility to manufacturers to achieve the target across sales mix rather than with each

individual vehicle sold. Both Japan and the United States have adopted Attribute-based target HDV

standards based on vehicle categories. Attribute-based target values are estimated as a continuousfunction of vehicle attributes i.e. corporate averaging across all categories of vehicles for each

manufacturer, where the target varies depending on the average weight or size of the vehicles sold by

a manufacturer. For trucks and buses, gross vehicle weight (GVW) and payload are more appropriate

attributes than vehicle weight for developing fuel consumption standards.

The attribute-based continuous curve approach (with separate standards for trucks and buses) is

the best option in the first phase of implementation of the standards for India. This approach will

provide enough flexibility for manufacturers without being unfair or cost ineffective to any

manufacturer, while ensuring that the target is achieved. Instead of targeting fuel consumption

reduction across all vehicle categories (i.e. across various GVW categories), the manufacturers can

focus on reducing fuel consumption based on a target value determined as the average of the attribute

(vehicle weight or footprint or others) of the vehicles that it sells, weighted by the sales of each model

using a continuous curve standard. Thereafter, in the second phase of fuel consumption standards,

attribute-based continuous curve approach can be implemented for various sub-categories of vehicles.

Accordingly, we have considered phase-in approach with two set of targets, one for the year 2019-20

(first phase) to be achieved between 2015-16 to 2019-20 and other for 2024-25 (second phase), to be

achieved between 2020-21 to 2024-25. These targets could focus on reducing fuel consumption in line

with Fuel Consumption Roadmap vision, say, by 12 to 20 per cent in new diesel (engine driven)

trucks and buses by 2019-20, and by 30 to 50 per cent by 2024-25, across various vehicle categories

defined by GVW of the vehicles, compared with a baseline projection. The targets for 2019-20 are

relatively less stringent and are primarily based on improvements in engine technology. The targets

increase in stringency after 2019-20 since additional suite of technologies would be considered for

achieving the target standards for 2024-25. In both the phases, yearly improvements at 15-20-40-60-

100 per cent across five years as compared to baseline data have been considered.





One of the pre-requisites for development of fuel consumption standards is collection of baseline data

for various models of buses and trucks under pre-defined test conditions. In India, the fuel economy

details of various vehicle models of trucks and buses are neither disclosed by the manufacturers nor

collected by testing agencies like ARAI. Therefore, setting up fuel consumption standards for trucks

and buses will require testing of various available models of buses and trucks prior to setting up the

standards. Moreover, test cycles will have to be standardised for various categories for which

standards are to be developed. As it is easier to establish test-cycles for engine testing, engine

standards for fuel consumption by trucks and buses could be developed and implemented in the first

phase, followed by vehicle standards for fuel consumption in subsequent phases.

In this report, we have illustrated the framework for fuel consumption standards (both for vehicle and

engine fuel consumption standards) based on baseline data gathered from end-users of trucks and

buses. Since the baseline data should be collected under pre-defined test conditions, the baseline data

used by us should be further refined by elaborate testing of different categories of trucks and buses.

Our illustrations for vehicle and engine fuel consumption standards in this report are limited by

availability of fuel efficiency data for trucks and buses in India. For our illustrations, we have defined

fuel consumption in Litre per 100-km for vehicle standards and fuel efficiency as km/l for engine

standards. The detailed framework for fuel consumption standards is provided in Section 4 of this

report.

Estimation of Fuel savings1

Under the current fuel economy scenario, the diesel consumption by trucks and buses in India is

expected to increase from around 31.8 million tonne in 2011-12 to around 104.7 million tonne in

2024-25, thereby registering a CAGR of 9.6%. Trucks will continue to account for major share of

diesel consumption with their share increasing from around 76% in 2011-12 to around 87% in 2024-

25. Total diesel consumption by buses is expected to increase from 7.8 million tonne in 2012-12 to

13.7 million tonne in 2024-25.

In contrast, under fuel consumption standards regime, the estimated diesel consumption by trucks and

buses in India will increase from around 31.8 million tonne in 2011-12 to around 91.4 million tonne in

2024-25, thereby registering a CAGR of 8.5%. Trucks will continue to account for major share of

diesel consumption with their share increasing from around 76% in 2011-12 to around 86% in 2024-

25. Total diesel consumption by buses is expected to increase from 7.8 million tonne in 2012-12 to


1 For estimation of diesel consumption in value terms, we have assumed the price of diesel as Rs 47 per litre

until 2025 (approximately equivalent to current diesel retail price in Delhi)





Based on the two scenarios - Current fuel efficiency scenario and Fuel consumption standards regime,

cumulative fuel savings due to the proposed program is estimated to be around 46.57 million tonne

(around Rs 2,630 billion in value terms) over the ten year period 2015-16 to 2024-25. Fuel savings

due to trucks contribute around 90 per cent of the savings under the proposed program. It should be

noted that the benefits from the proposed program will be derived primarily over medium to long term

(as vehicles on-road, purchased during duel consumptions norms regime achieve a sizeable share in

overall vehicle parc). The quantum of fuel savings will increase from 0.14 million tonne in 2015-16 to


Implementation roadmap - Draft time schedule for implementation of the program

The Implementation roadmap is summarised as follows:-

I Planning Phase 1 Year

a)

Development of a framework for fuel consumption standards, finalise strategy

for testing of fuel efficiency of trucks and buses under standard test conditions,

development of test cycles, setting up of testing infrastructure for testing of

trucks and buses to collect fuel efficiency data under standard test cycles, design

of fuel consumption standards and finalisation of implementation plan and

policy measures for implementation

II Consultation Phase 6 months

j)

Consultation with various stakeholders on policies framed and schedule of

implementation of fuel consumption standards and finalisation of fuel

consumption standards and finalisation of implementation plan and policy

measures for implementation

III Implementation Phase 6 months

Decide fuel economy certification process and compliance monitoring

mechanisms and conduct vehicle testing and monitoring as per strategiesdeveloped for implementation

Targeted enforcement of fuel consumption standards:- 2015-16

Since lack of availability of standardised data is the biggest challenge for development of fuel

consumption norms in India, therefore, the focus in initial phase i.e. the planning phase of the

Implementation roadmap should be on developing the fuel consumption framework and the testing

strategy for testing of diesel (engine) driven trucks and buses. This phase will involve defining the test





cycle and standard test conditions under which fuel economy data would be recorded. This phase will

also involve defining the policy measures for implementing the fuel consumption standards. In the

second phase i.e. the Consultation phase, focus shall be on bringing various stakeholders on board to

hold discussions on policies and schedule of implementation of fuel consumption standards and build

consensus across various stakeholders. Based on the feedback and concerns of various stakeholders,

the fuel consumption standards and policy measures for implementing the fuel consumption standards

shall be finalised. The Implementation phase will involve vehicle testing as per defined standards and

establishing a monitoring framework for the program.





THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK .





1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Petroleum conservation Research Association (PCRA), established in 1978, is a non-profit registered

society (Society’s Registration Act 1860) under the ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, Govt. of

India, with a mission of efficient energy utilization & environment protection leading to conservation

and improvement in quality of life. PCRA’s mission is efficient utilization of fuel and energy and

environment protection leading to improvement in quality of life. Its mandate is to reduce the energy

intensity in various sectors of the economy leading to reduction in GHG emission.

PCRA is working in close coordination with Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) for formulation of

Standards leading to Efficiency Labels for appliances that use petroleum products as fuel.

Accordingly, it has been proposed to initially initiate work for developing fuel conservation norms for

the following equipment:

LPG Stoves

Diesel Generating sets up to 1250 kVA

Diesel Engine operated Agricultural pump

Diesel Engine driven Trucks and Buses

PCRA has proposed to initiate development of fuel consumption norms for Diesel (Engine Driven)

Trucks and Buses to facilitate consumers with the necessary data for making informed purchases.

Moreover, fuel efficiency performance standards for these vehicles will help in reducing diesel

consumption of India and will help buyers in making prudent, fuel-efficient purchases.

For this purpose, PCRA is embarking on the process of preparation of Fuel Efficiency program for

Diesel (Engine Driven) Trucks & Buses in India. The objective of the project is to

Transform the manufacture and sale of Diesel (Engine driven) Trucks & Buses to higher

levels of fuel efficiency, thereby achieving economic benefits and improving environmental

sustainability in the long run

Facilitate the buyers in making fuel-efficient purchase of these commercial vehicles

It is in this context that PCRA has mandated ICRA Management Consulting Services Limited

(IMaCS) to prepare a Status Report based on market survey leading to fuel consumption norms for

diesel (engine driven) trucks & buses in India. The primary objective of this project is to build upon





existing initiatives in India and other countries to promote cost-effective adoption and

implementation of fuel consumption standards for Diesel (Engine driven) Trucks & Buses.

We have prepared this Final Report covering the findings of the market survey and supplementary

secondary research for development of Fuel Consumption norms for Diesel Trucks & Buses in India,

incorporating the feedback received from PCRA.

1.2 Scope of work

The Scope of Work of the engagement as mentioned in the tender document was as follows:

1. Preparation of Status Report on fuel consumption Performance Standards for Diesel (Engine

driven) Trucks & Buses in India based on a detailed market survey. The Status report will

encompass, but not be limited to the following issues:

a. The Market Overview of these vehicles in India

b. Fuel Consumption pattern of these vehicles in India

c. Estimated Growth Potential of these vehicles

d. Identification of Benchmarks in terms of fuel consumption

e. Estimated projection of increase in fuel consumption by 2020, 2025.

f. Fuel Savings projections due to proposed programme

g.

To compare the similar international initiatives to understand the different approaches

followed by countries like USA, Europe, China, Australia and Japan

h. Identification of Testing Standards & Facilities in India for these areas

i. Applicable Indian and International Standards and codes

j. Identification of All Stake holders

k. Minimum Fuel Consumption Performance Standards and criteria (fuel consumption

thresholds)

l. Identify the Issues & Challenges in implementation

m. Develop a draft time schedule for implementation of this program

1.3 Limitations of our study

This Final Report is based on the market survey findings, review of various documents available in

public domain and discussions with various stakeholders, including clarifications, opinions,

representations, information and statements made by personnel of various stakeholder organisations

on fuel consumption norms for diesel (engine driven) trucks & buses in India, during the course of





discussions held with them. Accordingly, the findings and conclusions in this report is limited to the

following:

a. Public information – data, estimates, industry and statistical information contained in this report

have been obtained from various sources considered reliable by us. However, we independently

did not verify such information and make no representation as to the accuracy or completeness of

such information obtained from or provided by such sources.

b. While preparing this Report, in addition to the documents and information provided to us by

various stakeholders, we have also relied on oral and written responses to our queries as received

from the stakeholders. We have not independently verified the accuracy or correctness of such

information or the veracity of such documents and presumed the authenticity of such documents

and information provided to us;

c. Neither the professionals who worked on this engagement nor IMaCS have any present or

contemplated future interest / personal interest with respect to the parties involved, or any other

interest that might prevent us from performing an unbiased assessment. Our compensation is not

contingent on an action or event resulting from the analyses, opinions, or conclusions in, or the

use of, this report.

d. IMaCS does not assume any liability, financial or otherwise, for any loss or injury that the user of

the views and comments in this report may experience in any transaction. Although reasonable

care has been taken to ensure that any information herein is true, such information is provided 'as-

is' without any warranty of any kind and IMaCS, in particular, makes no representation or

warranty, express or implied, to the accuracy, authenticity, timeliness or completeness of any such

information.





2 MARKET OVERVIEW OF TRUCKS AND BUSES IN INDIA

2.1

Market segmentation

The Indian Automotive industry is one the largest and fastest growing industries in the world. The industry

is divided into four segments: Passenger vehicles, Commercial vehicles, Three-wheelers and Two wheelers.

Figure 2.1: Segmentation of Indian Automobile Industry

In 2011-12, around 17.38 million vehicles were sold in the domestic market, with two wheelers accounting

for more than 77 per cent of sales, while commercial vehicles accounting for around 4.7 per cent of the

sales. Annual sales of trucks and buses were 682,300 and 98,763, respectively, with estimated vehicle park

of 4,173,844 trucks and 1,344,870 buses (as on March 31, 2012).

Figure 2.2: Domestic Market Share for Indian Automotive Industry (2011-12)

Source: SIAM

AutoIndustry

PassengerVehicles

Passenger Cars

Utility Vehicles

Multi-purposeVehicles

Commercial Vehicles

Lightcommercial

vehicles

Medium andheavy

commercialvehicles

Three-wheelers

Passengercarriers

Goods carriers

Two-wheelers

Mopeds

Scooters

Motorcycles

Electric two-wheelers

Passenger Vehicles

15.1%

Commercial

Vehicles

4.7%

Three Wheelers

3.0%

Two Wheelers

77.3%





Commercial vehicles are classified into following categories:-

Light Commercial Vehicles (LCVs) (Gross Vehicle Weight <7.5 tonne) and

Medium & Heavy Commercial vehicles (M&HCVs) (Gross Vehicle Weight >7.5 tonne)

For the purpose of our study, we have aligned our classification of vehicles as per SIAM weight categories2.

Segmentation of buses and trucks as per SIAM classification, major applications of vehicles and the key

players in each category are given below:

Table 2.1: Segmentation of trucks / goods carriers by Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) or MM3

Vehicle Categories Application Key Players

Light Commercial Vehicles (LCVs)

3.5≤ MM Intra-city goodstransportation

Tata Motors

Force Motors

Mahindra & Mahindra

Hindustan motors

Piaggio Vehicles

3.5<MM≤5

Inter-city and intra-city

goods transportation (Daily

deliver load - milk and fruit

crates, vegetables, bottled

water)

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

Mahindra & Mahindra

Force Motors

SML Isuzu

5<MM≤7.5 Inter-city and intra-citygoods transportation

Tata Motors

Force Motors

Mahindra Navistar

VE CVs – Eicher

Medium & Heavy Commercial Vehicles (M&HCVs)

7.5<MM≤10 Parcel & courier, intercity

logistics, agri-perishables

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

Mahindra & Mahindra

VE CVs - Eicher

10<MM≤12 Parcel & courier, intercity

logistics, agri-perishables

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

Mahindra & Mahindra

VE CVs – Eicher

12<MM≤16.2 Intra-city distribution,

market load, construction

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

Mahindra & Mahindra

VE CVs – Eicher

2 SIAM classifies and collects data for commercial vehicles by sub-dividing them into finer weight categories.

3 Maximum Mass (MM) or Gross Vehicle Weight is the vehicle rating based on the combined weight of the

vehicle and its load.





Vehicle Categories Application Key Players

16.2<MM≤25

Market load, construction,

bulkers, minerals, tankers,

Stone , marble , re-fuellers

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

Mahindra & Mahindra

VE CVs – Eicher

25<MM

Auto carriers, Market load,

cement, tankers, parcel &

white goods, construction,

bulkers, minerals, tankers

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

Mahindra & Mahindra

VE CVs – Eicher

Daimler India Commercial Vehicles

Source: SIAM, IMaCS Analysis

Table 2.2: Segmentation of buses by Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) or MM4

Vehicle Categories Application Key PlayersLight Commercial Vehicles

MM≤5 tonnes (M2 (A2) ) (no. of

seats including the driver exceeding

13)

Intra-city buses for School, Staff and

Executives

Tata Motors

Force Motors

Mahindra & Mahindra

5≤MM<7.5 tonnes Intra-city buses for School, Staff and

Executives

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

Mahindra & Mahindra

Force Motors

SML Isuzu

MM≤ 5 tonnes (M2 (A1) ) (no. ofseats including the driver not

exceeding 13)

Intra-city buses for School, Staff andExecutives

Tata Motors

Force Motors

Heavy Commercial Vehicles

7.5<MM≤12 tonnes Inter-City and Intra-city buses

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

Mahindra & Mahindra

VE CVs - Eicher

SML Isuzu

12<MM≤16.2 tonnes Inter-City and Intra-city buses

Tata Motors

Ashok Leyland

JCBL

Mahindra & Mahindra

VE CVs - Eicher

SML Isuzu

Volvo Buses India

16.2<MM tonnes Inter-City and Intra-city buses Volvo Buses India

Source: SIAM, IMaCS Analysis

4 Maximum Mass (MM) or Gross Vehicle Weight is the vehicle rating based on the combined weight of the

vehicle and its load.





2.2 Market size and Vehicle park

Sales of trucks and buses

India is the fifth largest commercial vehicle manufacturer and one of the fastest growing commercialvehicles markets in the world. Annual sales of trucks and buses in India has grown at a CAGR of over 14%

between 2001-02 and 2011-12.

Figure 2.3: Annual sales of Buses and Trucks in India

(in ‘000 vehicles)

Source: SIAM

Annual sales of trucks in India has grown from 111,485 trucks in 2001-02 to 682,300 trucks in 2011-12,

growing at a Compounded Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of around 20 per cent over this period.

Sales of trucks and buses (by segment)

Amongst trucks, LCV segment has grown at a CAGR of 25% between 2001-02 and 2011-12, significantly

faster than M&HCV segment, which has grown at CAGR of around 15% during the same period.

Figure 2.4: Annual sales of Trucks in India


Source: SIAM

9089 110 118

108 107 111 99 109 93 99111149

209261 288

390 399

312

437

563

682

0

200

400

600

800

i n ' 0 0 0 v e

h i c l e s

Buses Trucks

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

43 57 80 100 121 168 188 174253

317411

68 92129

161 167

222 211139

183

246

271

M&HCV

LCV

i '

v e

i c l e s





The annual sales of buses in India has remained relatively flat over the last ten years, increasing from 89,812

buses in 2001-02 to 98,763 buses in 2011-12, growing at a CAGR of around 1 per cent over this period.

The major reason for this flat growth in buses is the drastic reduction in demand for vehicles in

MM≤ 5 tonnes (M2 (A1)) category, which has gone down from 59,481 buses in 2001 -02 to 8,650 buses

in 2011-12. Excluding this segment from our analysis, annual sales of buses in India has grown at a

CAGR of around 12 per cent. Amongst buses, LCV segment has registered a decrease in sales at a CAGR

of -3.8% between 2001-02 and 2011-12 due to decrease in demand for vehicles in MM≤ 5 tonnes (M2

(A1)) category. However, the M&HCV segment of buses has grown at a CAGR of over 11% during the

same period.

Figure 2.5: Annual sales of Buses in India


Source: SIAM

Trucks accounted for about 88 per cent of the commercial vehicles sold in India 2011-12. Amongst the

various sub-segments, LCV trucks accounted for around 53 per cent of the total commercial vehicle sales in

2011-12.

Figure 2.6: Commercial vehicle sales break-up (2011-12)

Source: SIAM

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

73 6985 93

80 79 72 64 6645 49

17 20

2526

28 29 3935

43

4849

M&HCV

LCV

i n ' 0 0 0 v e h i c l e s

MCV & HCV

Passenger

Carriers

6%

MCV & HCV

Goods Carriers

35%

LCV Passenger

Carriers

6%

LCV Goods

Carriers

53%





Sales of trucks and buses (by weight category)

Analysis of sales pattern of trucks over the last 5 years indicates increasing polarisation of demand towards

lighter (MM≤3.5 tonne) and heavier (MM>25 tonne) trucks segments. The share of vehicles in MM≤3.5

tonne category in the total domestic truck sales has grown from around 39.4 per cent in 2007-8 to around

52.9 per cent in 2011-12. Trucks in MM>25 tonne category accounted for 0.7 per cent of sales in 2007-08.

In 2011-12, about 9.5 per cent of trucks sold in India belonged to MM>25 tonne category.

Figure 2.7: Trucks – Changing sales mix (by weight categories)

Source: SIAM

In case of buses, the buses in the segment 5>MM (M2 (A2) ) and 7.5<MM≤12 have registered the fastest

growth indicating the increasing demand for intra-city travel.

Figure 2.8: Buses - Sales mix

Source: SIAM

MM≤3.5

, 39.4%

3.5<MM

≤5, 0.6% 5<MM≤7

.5 , 7.1%

7.5<MM

≤12,

10.2%

12<MM≤

16.2,

15.1%

16.2<M

M≤25,

26.8%

25<MM,

0.7%

MM≤3.5

52.9%

3.5<M≤5

1.2%

5<MM≤7

.5

6.1%

7.5<MM

≤12

9.8%

12<MM≤

16.2

8.9%

16.2<M

M≤25

11.5%

25<MM

9.5%

5>MM(

M2(A2))

9.1%

5<MM≤7

.5

16%

5>MM(

M2(A1))

40.0%

7.5<MM

≤12

5.0%

12<MM≤

16.2

29.9%

16.2<M

M

0.0%5>MM(M

2(A2))

18.9%

5<MM≤7

.5

22%

5>MM(M

2(A1))

8.8%

7.5<MM

≤12

15.0%

12<MM≤

16.2

34.6%

16.2<M

M

0.4%

2007-08 2011-12

2007-08 2011-12





Vehicle parc of trucks and buses

Between 2001 and 2011, number of registered buses and goods vehicles in India has grown at a CAGR of

9.7 per cent and 9.1 per cent respectively. Although the number of registered goods vehicles and buses in

India in 2011 were 7.1 million and 1.6 million, respectively, the no. of on-road trucks and buses are

estimated at 4.17 million and 1.34 million, respectively (as on March 31, 2012).

Figure 2.9: Number of registered buses and goods vehicles in India (Cumulative)

Source: Road Transport Year Book 2009-10 & 2010-11, Ministry of Road Transport & Highways

In order to estimate the vehicle parc, we have assumed that the average age of trucks and buses as 15 years.

Vehicle parc of trucks and buses (by weight category)

Trucks with MM ≤3.5 form about 36.5 per cent of total on-road trucks in India. This segment is one of thefastest growing sub-segments in trucks due to increasing demand for intra-city goods transportation. With

higher mileage and low turning radius, vehicles in this category are ideally suited to traverse through narrow

city lanes and traffic in India. Going forward, the demand for this segment is expected to remain strong,

which is evident from the slew of new launches in this segment by the commercial vehicle manufacturers.

There is an evident trend of increasing demand of Heavy-duty trucks, which are used in construction and

mining industries. This is also an indicator of increasing economic activity in India.

Figure 2.10: Trucks Vehicle parc (by weight category) (as of March 31, 2012)

Source: PCRA, IMaCS Analysis

0

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6

2.9 3.0 3.53.7 4.0

4.45.1

5.66.0 6.4

7.1

N o .

o f v e h i c l e s i n m i l l i o n

Goods

VehiclesBuses

MM≤3.5

36.5%

3.5<MM≤5

0.9%5<MM≤7.5

10.4%

7.5<MM≤12

9.5%

12<MM≤16.2

18.2%

16.2<MM≤25

16.0%

25<MM

8.4%





Of the total on-road buses, about 45% are in the 5>MM (M2(A1)) category. Vehicles in this category are

mainly used for intra-city travel, especially for catering to travel needs of staff and employees. In absolute

terms, the number of on-road vehicles in this category is estimated at over 0.6 million.

Figure 2.11: Buses Vehicle parc (by weight category) (as of March 31, 2012)


Age of Vehicles

The trucks fleet in India is relatively young; around 57% of the trucks have age below 5 years. This can be

attributed to sharp increase in sales of trucks, specifically in the MM≤3.5 segment, during last five years.

Figure 2.12: Trucks – Fleet break-up by age (as of March 31, 2012)

Source: IMaCS Analysis, SIAM

Out of 1,344,870 buses plying on the roads in India, around 38% or 510,212 buses are less than 5 years old.

About 22% of the bus fleet in India is older than ten years.

Figure 2.13: Buses – Fleet break-up by age (as of March 31, 2012)

Source: IMaCS Analysis, SIAM

No. of trucks and buses to be scrapped5 in 2011-12 is estimated at around 1,52,000 and 83,000, respectively.

5 Assuming average age of trucks and buses as 15 years

0

1000

2000

3000

0-5 years 5-10 years Over 10 years

2,393

1,297

484

i n ' 0 0 0 v e h i c l e s

0

200

400

600

0-5 years 5-10 years Over 10 years

510 533

302

i n ' 0 0 0 v e h i c l e s

5>MM

(M2(A2))

9.9%

5<MM≤7.5

13.1%

5>MM

(M2(A1))

45.1%

7.5<MM≤12

4.8%

12<MM≤16.2

27.0%16.2<MM

0.1%





2.3 Future vehicle projections

Rising incomes, increasing government focus on infrastructure development and increasing economic

activity are the key drivers, which are expected to fuel the demand for commercial vehicles in India. Also,

road transport is considered to be one of the most cost effective and preferred mode of transport for both

passengers and transportation of goods in India. Therefore, demand for both freight and passenger

movement in India is expected to remain firm, which will fuel sale of buses and trucks in India. Thus, strong

growth trend in India’s commercial vehicle industry is expected to continue in future as well.

The major reason for flat growth in buses in the last decade is the drastic reduction in demand for

vehicles in MM≤ 5 tonnes (M2 (A1)) category, which has gone down from 59, 481 buses in 2001 -02 to

8,650 buses in 2011-12. Eliminating this segment from our analysis, annual sales of buses in India has

grown at a CAGR of around 12 per cent. With rapid urbanisation and improving infrastructure, thedemand for passenger transport is expected to remain positive in India. Between 2012-13 and 2024-25, sale

of buses is expected to grow at a CAGR of 5.7 per cent to increase from 0.11 million to 0.21 million.

Figure 2.14: Projected growth in sale of buses in India till 2025


Amongst the various sub-segments, buses with MM > 16.2 tonne (luxury buses), is expected to registerhighest annual growth of around 12 per cent. This can be directly attributed to increasing per capita income

and growing ease of inter-city travel due to development of world-class highways. Another buses segment

which is expected to grow faster is 7.5t < MM < 12t. The demand for this segment will be driven by travel

needs of employees of various corporates and other institutions, which will be predominantly utilised for

intra-city travel.

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.10 0.11

0.12 0.13 0.14 0.14

0.17

0.21

i

i l l i

CAGR = 5.7%





Figure 2.15: Projected sales mix of buses in 2019-20 and 2024-25


Increasing purchasing power, government focus on improving infrastructure and a relatively young

population has increased the demand for transportation of goods in the country. Roads are the dominant

mode of transportation of freight in the country today. With improvement in highways and other roads in

the country, road transportation is expected to remain the preferred mode of goods transportation, which in

turn will fuel the demand for trucks in India. Trucks are estimated to register strong growth of around 8.9

per cent between 2012-13 and 2024-45. In absolute terms, the total volume of truck sales is expected to

grow from 0.80 million in 2012-13 to 2.23 million in 2024-25.

Figure 2.16: Projected growth of trucks in India till 2025


5>MM(M

2(A2)),

21.5%

5<MM≤7

.5, 21.0%

5>MM(M2(A1)),

6.8%

7.5<MM

≤12,

20.6%

12<MM≤

16.2,

29.3%

16.2<M

M, 0.8% 5>MM(M2(A2)),

22.4%

5<MM≤7

.5, 20.5%

5>MM(2(A1)),

6.3%

7.5<MM

≤12,

22.3%

12<MM≤

16.2,

27.5%

16.2<M

M, 1.0%

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

0.68 0.80 0.92 1.04 1.16 1.281.63

2.23

CAGR = 8.9%

i n

i l l i o n

2019-20 2024-25





With “Hub & Spoke” model increasingly adopted across India, there is clear evidence of polarization of

tonnage in the CV segment towards heavy and lower tonnages. Amongst the various sub-segments, trucks

with Gross vehicle weight ≤3.5 tonne and greater than 25 tonnes are expected to grow faster than other sub-

segments. Sales of trucks in the category Gross vehicle weight ≤3.5 tonne is expected to grow at a CAGR of

around 10 per cent to increase from 0.36 million in 2011-12 to around 1.27 million in 2024-25. Truck sales

in category Gross vehicle weight> 25 tonne is expected to register fastest growth amongst the various sub-

segments at a CAGR of over 11 per cent to increase to about 0.3 million in 2024-25.

Figure 2.17: Projected sales mix of trucks in 2019-20 and 2024-2025


2.4 Diesel consumption

Rapid economic development, diesel subsidies and preference of road transportation for goods and

passengers has led to dieselisation of Indian economy. With road being the preferred mode of transportation

in India, the increasing demand for passenger and freight movement has in turn fuelled the growth of trucks

and buses in India. Since most of the buses and trucks run on diesel, the increase in number of buses and

trucks plying on the roads has significantly augmented the diesel consumption in India. This is evident from

the fact that the consumption of High Speed Diesel Oil (HSDO) in India during the last decade has

increased at an average annual rate of 5.9%. With relatively stagnant production of crude oil in the country,

this increase in demand for oil will further increase our dependence on exports.

MM≤3.5

, 56.0%

3.5<MM

≤5, 1.4%

5<MM≤7

.5 , 5.5%

7.5<MM

≤12,

10.5%

12<MM≤

16.2,

7.2%

16.2<M

M≤25,

7.9%

25<MM,

11.6%MM≤3.5

, 56.7%

3.5<MM

≤5, 1.4%

5<MM≤7

.5 , 5.3%

7.5<MM

≤12,

10.6%

12<MM≤

16.2,

6.7%

16.2<M

M≤25,

7.1%

25<MM,

12.1%

2019-20 2024-25





Figure 2.18: Consumption of HSDO in India (in 000’ tonnes)

Source: Energy Statistics 2012, CSO, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, GoI

In 2011-12, India’s total diesel consumption stood at about 64.74 million tonnes. Road transport is the

biggest diesel-consuming segment accounting for about 64 per cent of diesel consumption. Of the total

diesel consumed by road transport, trucks and buses accounted for about 77 per cent of the fuel

consumption, amounting to 31-32 million tonnes approx.

Figure 2.19: Diesel consumption mix in India

Source: Petroleum Planning and Analysis Cell

In absolute terms, the estimated consumption of diesel by buses and truck in India stood at around 7.77

million tonnes and 24.03 million tonnes, respectively. The detailed break-up fuel of consumption by various

segments is given in the table below:

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,00060,000

70,000

36,548 36,644 37,073 39,651 40,192 42,89447,669 51,711

56,24359,990

64,740CAGR = 5.9%

Power

8%

Industry

10%

Agriculture

12%

Railways6% Cars

15%

Trucks

37%

Buses

12%

Roads

64%

i n

0 0 0 ’ t o n n e s





Table 2.3: Estimated diesel consumption by trucks and buses in India (2011-12)6

Vehicle

SegmentSales Vehicle Park

Distance

Travelled

p.a. per

vehicle

Fuel

Efficiency

(km/l)

Diesel

consumed

per vehicle

per annum(litres)

Total diesel

consumed per

annum

(in mn litres)

Total diesel

consumed per

annum

(in mn tonnes)

Trucks 682,300 4,173,844 37,782 5.5 6,919 28,880 24.03

Buses 98,763 1,310,762 33,236 4.7 7,120 9,333 7.77

ALL TRUCKS

and BUSES781,063 5,484,606 36,696 5.3 6,967 38,213 31.79

LCV 460,831 2,907,678 16,866 15.5 1,092 3,174 2.64

M&HCV 320,232 2,576,929 59,071 4.3 13,597 35,039 29.15

ALL TRUCKS

and BUSES781,063 5,484,606 36,696 5.3 6,967 38,213 31.79


Segmental break-up of diesel consumption indicates that more than 90 per cent of the diesel is consumed by

M&HCV segment. This indicates the urgent need to improve diesel consumption in this segment by

formulating stringent fuel efficiency norms for these segments. In most of the countries around the world,

road transport is one of the major oil-consuming sectors. With limited oil reserves, the Governments around

the world have taken cognisance of the situation, which is evident from the fact that more and more

countries are proposing standards for regulating the Heavy-Duty vehicles.

6 Assumptions:

1. For trucks, distance travelled per annum per vehicle:-

a.

MM≤7.5 tonne – 20,000 km

b.

7.5<MM≤12 tonne – 50,000 km

c.

MM>12 tonne – 55,000 km

2.

For buses, distance travelled per annum per vehicle:-

a.

MM≤7.5 tonne – 10,000 kmb.

7.5<MM≤12 tonne - 65,000 km

c.

12<MM- 90,000 km





3 OVERVIEW OF GLOBAL FUEL CONSUMPTION STANDARDS

3.1

Introduction

Light-duty vehicles (LDVs) have a long history of regulations with formulation of energy regulations in

the United States in 1970s as a response to the global oil crisis. Since then, improvement in LDV fleet was

relatively steady with improved technology being utilised to offset increase in vehicle weight and power.

However, over the last one decade, the largest vehicle markets have resumed ambitious, mandatory fuel

efficiency and emission standards for LDVs. More than 70 per cent of the global new-vehicle markets have

mandatory fuel efficiency and emission standards for LDVs in effect. This has led to development and

introduction of new energy-efficient technologies, smaller engines, lighter vehicles, and improved

aerodynamics and tires.

Table 3.1: Fuel consumption and Emission standards for Light Duty Vehicles (LDVs)

Country/Standard Measure Structure

Targeted

FleetTest Cycle Implementation

Region

Fuel consumption standards

UnitedStates

Fuel mpg

Single standard for

cars and size-basedstandards for light

trucks

New US CAFE Mandatory

Japan Fuel km/l Weight-based New JC08 Mandatory

China Fuel l/100-km Weight-based New NEDC Mandatory

Australia Fuel l/100-km Single standard New NEDC Voluntary

South

KoreaFuel km/l Engine-size based New

US EPA

CityMandatory

Taiwan Fuel km/l Engine-size based New US CAFE Mandatory

Emission standards

EuropeanUnion

CO2 g/km Single standard New NEDC Voluntary

Canada

GHG

l/100-km Vehicle class-basedIn-use

and newUS CAFE Voluntary(CO2, CH4,

N2O, HFCS)

California

GHG

g/mile Vehicle class-based New US CAFE Mandatory(CO2, CH4,

N2O, HFCS)





In India, fuel efficiency norms for passenger cars are being framed by Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE),

which are based on the Kerb weight of the vehicle and include mandatory labelling norms. However, strong

opposition from the auto industry has led to delay in notification of these standards.

Heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs), including both heavy-duty trucks and buses, have a relatively brief

history of regulations. Establishing fuel efficiency norms for HDVs is significantly more challenging

due to their diversity in terms of vehicle size, configurations and usage patterns. Because of these

challenges, HDV efficiency standards have just begun to be proposed and adopted in some of the

major vehicle markets in the world. Japan was the first country, which introduced such standards in

2005, providing a roadmap for improvement in fuel efficiency of HDVs up to 2015. The US has

finalized HDV fuel efficiency standards in 2011, which begins with model year 2014, and increases in

stringency through 2018. Canada has aligned its Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission standards with the

US HDV fuel efficiency standards. Europe and China are in the process of designing HDV efficiency

standards. With increasing focus on the fuel efficiency/GHG emissions of M&HCV across the globe,

a number of countries are expected to introduce regulatory norms in the coming years.

Figure 3.1: HDV policy timelines across the globe

Note: Shaded and/or italics t ext represents the ICCTʼs estimate of regulatory action and timing

Source: ICCT- Anup Bandivadekar presentation on “Heavy-Duty Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Regulatory

Developments around the World”- 3rd

July, 2012

An important consideration in designing and implementation of norms for HDV vehicles is definingof duty cycle and testing conditions. Testing of HDV vehicles requires additional forethought given

Country/

Region

Regulation

Type 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

JapanFuel

Economy

Standard

proposal

Final

rule

Phase 2

implementation?

CanadaGHG/ Fuel

efficiency

Standard

proposal and

final rule?

Phase 2

implementation?

MexicoFuel

Efficiency

Standard

proposal?

Phase 2

implementation?

ChinaFuel

Consumption

Test

procedure

finalised

Industry

standard

proposal

Industry

standard

implemented

Standard

proposal?

Final

Rule?

European

UnionGHG

Impact

Assessment

California

End-user

purchase

requirements

Regulation implemented

starting MY 2016 ?

Regulation implemented starting MY 2015 ?

Technical studiesTest procedure

finalised? Policy implementation?

Requirements for new tractors and

trailers (MY 2011+)

Additional requirements for

existing tractors and trailers

(<MY 2010)

Additional requirements for existing

tractors and reefers (<MY 2010)

Phase 1 regulation implemented,

starting MY2015

United

States

GHG/ Fuel

efficiency

Regulation implemented starting MY 2014

(Mandatory DOT program starts MY 2016)Phase 2

proposal and

final rule?

Regulation implemented starting MY 2014 ?





the diversity of size and applications of the vehicles. Computer simulation of the whole truck

(typically in combination with engine testing on a bench dynamometer) seems to be the favoured

option by the Governments across the globe due to ease of implementation, accuracy of results and

cost-effectiveness. China is planning to use chassis dynamometer testing for main HDV vehicle

families and computer simulation for variants.

Table 3.2: Testing and simulation options for measurement of vehicle fuel economy

S No Type of test Parts simulated Cost of testCountries considering fuel

consumption norms for HDVs

(1) On-road None Low None

(2) Computer

simulationAll Low US, EU, Japan, China

(3) Engine

dynamometer

Road and non-

engine components High US, EU, Japan

(4) Chassis

dynamometerRoad Very High China

Source: IEA – “Technology Roadmap - Fuel Economy of Road Vehicles”

3.2

International benchmarks for fuel consumption standards for Heavy Duty

Vehicles (HDVs)

3.2.1 United States

In September 2011, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the US

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the First-ever federal regulations mandating

improvements in fuel economy among heavy-duty commercial vehicles (HDVs). Each of the agencies

have adopted complementary standards under their respective authorities, which together form a

comprehensive HD National Program, beginning with model year 2014 and increasing in stringency

through model year 2018, thereby providing a lead-time to all vehicle manufacturers. The norms setseparate standards for engines and vehicles and ensure improvements in both. The federal regulation

also sets separate standards for fuel consumption, CO2, N2O, CH4 and HFCs. However, the fuel

consumption and emission standards are aligned. The agencies are also considering next phase of

rules, as there are more opportunities to reduce GHG emissions and fuel usage by heavy-duty vehicles

fleet for model years beyond 2018.

The principal performance metric for determining compliance with the NHTSA’s fuel consumption

standards is the fuel consumption rate in gallons per 1,000 ton-miles (for vehicles) and gallons per

horsepower-hour (for engines). For EPA’s carbon emissions standard, it is grams CO 2 per tonne-mile





(vehicles) or per horsepower-hour (engines). The performance standards in both metrics are chosen to

be consistent so that achievement of one implies achievement of other (with appropriate allowance

made for alternative fuels).

The Federal Highway Administration categorises trucks by gross vehicle weight as shown in the table below:

Table 3.3: Vehicle Weight Classes Defined by US Department of Transportation

Class Description/examples

Empty weight

range

Gross weight

rangeTypical fuel intensities

Tons Tons

Gallons per

thousand

miles

Gallons per

thousand

ton-miles

1c Passenger cars 1.2 –2.5 <3 30 –40 67

1t Small light-duty trucks 1.6 –2.2 <3 40 –50 58

2a Standard pickups, large SUVs 2.2 –3 3 –4.25 50 39

2b Large pickups, utility vans 2.5 –3.2 4.25 –5 67 –100 39

3 Utility vans, minibuses 3.8 –4.4 5 –7 77 –125 33

4 Delivery vans 3.8 –4.4 7 –8 83 –140 24

5Large delivery vans, bucket

trucks9.2 –10.4 8 –9.75 83 –166 26

6School buses, large delivery

vans5.8 –7.2 9.75 –13 83 –200 20

7City bus, refrigerated truck, fire

engine5.8 –7.2 13 –16.5 125 –250 18

8aDump/refuse trucks, city buses,

fire engines10 –17 16.5 –40 160 –400 9

8bLarge tractor trailers, bulk

tankers11.6 –17 16.5 –40 133 –250 7

Source : Winston Harrington and Alan Krupnick: “Improving Fuel Economy in Heavy- Duty Vehicles”

Vehicles in the category 2b to 8 are covered under the regulations. The vehicles are categorised such

that different products in the same subcategory must meet the same standard. Broadly, HDVs were

divided into three main regulatory categories:1. Heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans (3/4 and 1 ton trucks and vans made primarily by Ford,

GM and Chrysler)

2. Combination tractors (largest heavy-duty tractors used to pull trailers, i.e. 18 wheelers)

3. Vocational trucks (everything else, buses, refuse trucks, concrete mixers, ambulances…)

Trailers were not covered under these rules, due to the first-ever nature of this program and the

limited experience of agencies in this space.

Vehicles in the category Heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans (Class 2b and 3) consist of pickup trucks

and vans with a Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) between 8,500 and 14,000 pounds. The





technologies that can be used to reduce fuel consumption and GHG emissions from this segment are

very similar to the ones used for lighter pickup trucks and vans (Class 2a), which are subject to the

GHG and fuel economy standards for light-duty vehicles. Vehicles in this category (Class 2b and 3)

are treated in the same manner as the CAFE standards for light-duty vehicles.

Table 3.4: US CAFE Standards – For Light trucks

Model

Year

Light Trucks

"footprint": 41 sq ft (3.8 m2) or

smaller (e.g. Nissan Juke)

"footprint": 75 sq ft (7.0 m2) or

bigger (e.g. Ford F-150)

CAFE EPA Window Sticker CAFE EPA Window Sticker

2012 30 23 22 17

2013 31 24 22.5 17

2014 32 24 23 18

2015 33 25 23.5 18

2016 34 26 24.5 19

2017 36 27 25 19

2018 37 28 25 19

2019 38 28 25 19

2020 39 29 25 19

2021 42 31 25 19

2022 44 33 26 20

2023 46 34 27 21

2024 48 36 28.5 22

2025 50 37 30 23

Source: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. "2017-2025 Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle GHG

Emissions and CAFE Standards: Supplemental"

For heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, the agencies are setting corporate average standards similar to

the approach taken for LDV. This approach takes into account both the inherently higher GHG

emissions and fuel consumption of higher-capacity vehicles, and the importance of payload and

towing capacity to the owners of these work trucks and vans. EPA has established standards for this

segment in the form of a set of target standard curves, based on a “work factor” that combines a

vehicle’s payload, towing capabilities, and whether or not it has 4-wheel drive. The EPA standards

adopted for 2018 (including a separate standard to control air conditioning system leakage) represent

an average per-vehicle reduction in GHG emissions of 17 per cent for diesel vehicles and 12 per cent

for gasoline vehicles, compared to a common baseline.





Figure 3.2: EPA CO2 Target Standards and NHTSA Fuel Consumption Target Standards for

Diesel HD Pickups and Vans7

Source: NHSTA

EPA’s and NHTSA’s target standards are defined by the following formulae:

EPA CO2 Target (g/mile) = [a x WF] + b

NHTSA Fuel Consumption Target (gallons/100 miles) = [c x WF] + d

Where:

WF = Work Factor = [0.75 x (Payload Capacity + xwd)] + [0.25 x Towing Capacity]

Payload Capacity = GVWR (lb) – Curb Weight (lb)

xwd = 500 lb if the vehicle is equipped with 4wd, otherwise equals 0 lb

Towing Capacity = GCWR (lb) – GVWR (lb)

Coefficients a, b, c, and d are defined for each of the model years.

Combination trailers included largest heavy-duty tractors, which are used in intercity freight hauling.

Tractor cabs are further classified by two weight classes and three roof heights. In addition, for class 8

category of vehicles, there are both “day cabs” and “sleeper cabs” at each roof height, making a total

of nine tractor categories. These nine categories differ by weight and aerodynamic qualities, both of

which are adversely affected by height. The vocational vehicle category includes the wide range of

7 The NHTSA program provides voluntary standards for model years 2014 and 2015.





remaining trucks and buses of all sizes and functions with GVWR from 8,501 lb to greater than

33,000 lb.

Table 3.5: US CAFE Standards – for Class 2b – 8 Vocational Vehicles

Engine standards (expressed as percentage emission rate reduction from baseline

Baseline 2014 MY 2017 MY

(gallons per Kbhp-hr)* Standard** Standard

Light heavy-duty engines 6.19 5.89 (5%) 5.57 (9%)

Medium-heavy duty engines 6.19 5.89 (5%) 5.57 (9%)

Heavy-heavy duty engines 5.74 5.57 (3%) 5.45 (5%)

Vehicle standards (expressed as percentage emission rate reduction from baseline)***


(gallons per Kton-mi) Standard Standard

Light heavy-duty class 2b –5 40 38.1 (4.8%) 36.7 (8.2%)

Medium heavy-duty class 6 –7 24.3 23.0 (5.3%) 22.1 (9%)

Heavy heavy-duty class 8 23.2 22.2 (4.3%) 21.8 (6%)

Source : Winston Harrington and Alan Krupnick: “Improving Fuel Economy in Heavy- Duty Vehicles”

Table 3.6: US CAFE Standards – for Class 7 – 8 Combination Vehicles

Engine standards (expressed as percentage emission rate reduction from baseline), by model year (MY)

Baseline 2014 MY 2017 MY(gallons per Kbhp-hr) Standard Standard

Medium-heavy duty engines (Class 7) 5.09 4.93 (3%) 4.78 (6%)

Heavy-heavy duty engines (Class 8) 4.81 4.67 (3%) 4.52 (6%)

Vehicle standards (expressed as percentage emission rate reduction from baseline)


(gallons per Kton-mi) Standard Standard

Class 7 day cab

Low roof 11.4 10.5(7.9%) 10.2 (10.5%)

Mid roof 12.6 11.7 (7.1%) 11.3 (10.3%)

High roof 13.6 12.2 (10.3%) 11.8 (13.2%)

Class 8 day cab

Low roof 8.7 8.0 (8.0%) 7.8 (10.3%)

Mid roof 9.4 8.7 (7.4%) 8.4 (10.6%)

High roof 10.1 9.0 (10.9%) 8.7 ((13.9%)

Class 8 sleeper cab

Low roof 7.8 6.7 (14.1%) 6.5 (16.7%)

Mid roof 8.7 7.4 (14.9%) 7.2 (17.2%)

High roof 9.3 7.3 (21.5%) 7.1 (23.7%)

Source: Winston Harrington and Alan Krupnick: “Improving Fuel Economy in Heavy- Duty Vehicles”





For combination tractors, final standards seek to achieve from nine to 23 per cent reduction in

emissions and fuel consumption from affected tractors over the 2010 baselines. The standards will

phase in to the 2017 levels as shown in the table below:

Table 3.7: US CAFE MY 2017 Combination Tractor Standards

EPA Emissions Standards

(g CO2/ton-mile)

NHTSA Fuel Consumption Standards

(gal/1,000 ton-mile)

Low Roof Mid Roof High Roof Low Roof Mid Roof High Roof

Day Cab Class 7 104 115 120 10.2 11.3 11.8

Day Cab Class 8 80 86 89 7.8 8.4 8.7

Sleeper Cab Class 8 66 73 72 6.5 7.2 7.1

Source: NHSTA

In case of vocational vehicles, final standards apply to manufacturers of chassis & engines, not

bodies. Consistent with the Engine classification, this segment has been divided into three regulatory

subcategories - Light Heavy (Class 2b through 5), Medium Heavy (Class 6 and 7), and Heavy Heavy

(Class 8). The standards as depicted in the Table below represent emission reductions from six to nine

per cent, from a 2010 baseline.

Table 3.8: MY 2017 Combination Tractor Standards

Vehicle ClassEPA Full Useful Life Emissions

Standards (g CO2/ton-mile)

NHTSA Fuel Consumption

Standards (gal/1,000 ton-mile)

Light Heavy Class 2b-5 373 36.7

Medium Heavy Class 6-7 225 22.1

Heavy Heavy Class 8 222 21.8

Source: NHSTA

In addition to the CO2 standards described above, EPA has adopted standards for N2O and CH4

emissions. EPA’s standards will act to cap emissions to ensure that manufacturers do not allow the

N2O and CH4 emissions of their future engines to increase significantly above the currently

controlled low levels. For spark-ignition and compression ignition engines, the standards limit N2O

and CH4 emissions to 0.10 g/hp-hr.

For Class 2b vehicles and Class 3 pickup trucks, the National Academy of Science (NAS) committee

recommended a chassis dynamometer fuel consumption test similar to that used in LDVs. In case of

MD/HD category, NAS committee observed that physical chassis dynamometer testing was

impractical, given the wide variations in intended function (and thus, technology content) betweenclasses and between vehicles within classes, and even between vehicles that are nominally the same





model. Instead, the committee recommended combining engine or powertrain test data with vehicle

simulation models. In case of engine testing, engine dynamometer testing was recommended by the

NAS committee.

Program flexibilities:

The program has provisions to provide flexibilities to the manufacturers rendering them sufficient

lead-time to make necessary technological improvements and reduce the overall cost of the program.

Some of flexibility provisions under the program are:

1. An engine averaging, banking, and trading (ABT) program and a vehicle ABT program that

will allow for emission and fuel consumption credits to be averaged, banked, or traded within

each of the defined averaging sets. For example, in the subcategory of medium heavy-duty

engines for class 2b – 8 vocational vehicles, credits can be traded with other engines in the

subcategory, even across manufacturers, but they cannot be traded with other tractor, chassis,

or engine categories.

2. Engine manufacturers and heavy-duty pickup and van manufacturers can use CO2 credits to

offset CH4 or N2O emissions that exceed the applicable emission standards.

3. Credits for early adoption/demonstration of improvements before they become requirements,

and use of “advanced” or “innovative” technology such as hybrid powertrains, engines with

Rankine cycle waste heat recovery systems, and electric or fuel cell vehicles. In this category,

credits can be traded across subcategories.

4. Credits for alternative-fuelled vehicles according to the carbon content of their fuel relative to

diesel. Thus, a natural gas vehicle, with 30 per cent less CO2 emissions per gallon equivalent

than the identical vehicle fuelled by diesel, would be presumed to be 30 per cent more

efficient.

5. For manufacturers who exceeded the standards prior to the model year that they become

effective, an early credit option was conceptualised.

Estimated Benefits and Costs of proposed regulations:

The US HDV fuel efficiency program is expected to achieve fuel savings of 530 million barrels of oil

over the lifetime of the vehicles. The net benefits accrued from the program are estimated to be about

US$ 49 billion.





Table 3.9: MY 2017 Combination Tractor Standards

Particulars Expected benefits

Percent Reductions (2018)

•Tractors: 10-23%

•Vocational Vehicles: 6-9%

•Pickup Trucks & Vans: 12-17%

Vehicle cost (2018)

•Tractors: US$6,220

•Vocational Vehicles: US$380

•Pickup Trucks & Vans: US$1,050

CO2eq Reduction270 MMT

(2014-2018 lifetime, Upstream + Downstream)

Source: US Department of Energy

3.2.2 Japan

Japan was the first country to introduce fuel efficiency targets for heavy-duty vehicles in April 2006.

Japanese vehicle fuel economy regulations are part of the “Law Concerning the Rational Use of

Energy” (Energy Conservation Law). Fuel efficiency targets for 2010 and 2015, were adopted

through a number of amendments to the Energy Conservation Law, as follows8:

1999 — Adoption of 2010 fuel efficiency targets for gasoline passenger cars and light commercial

vehicles (effective 2005 for diesel vehicles).

2003 — Fuel efficiency standards for LPG cars (2010 targets).

2006 — New fuel efficiency standards for heavy vehicles above 3.5 t (2015 targets).

2007 — Adoption of 2015 fuel efficiency targets for light vehicles, including revisions to

passenger car and light commercial vehicles standards, and new standards for small buses.

The regulations mandated the vehicle manufacturers to ensure that in each financial year the average

fuel economy of their vehicles in each weight category meets the standard. When the targets are fully

met, the fleet average fuel economy is estimated at:

Light trucks (3.5 t): 15.2 km/L, a 12.6 per cent increase over 2004 performance of 13.5 km/L. Small buses: 8.9 km/L, a 7.2 per cent increase over 2004 performance of 8.3 km/L

For trucks: 7.09 km/L (369.6 g CO2/km), a 12.2 per cent increase over 2002 performance of 6.32

km/L (414.6 g CO2/km)

For buses: 6.30 km/L (416.0 g CO2/km), a 12.1 per cent increase over 2002 performance of 5.62

km/L (466.3 g CO2/km)

The target of these regulations were diesel fuelled freight and passenger vehicles (riding capacity of

11 persons or more) having a gross vehicle weight of 3.5 tons or larger. Vehicles were categorised

8 Source: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/jp/fe.php#hd - Japan fuel economy targets





based on various factors such as vehicle structure, intended use, transmission type, GVW. For e.g.

Buses used for public transportation service on a fixed route other than expressway and those for

other use (ordinary bus) are quite different in terms of use and driving conditions. Therefore, they

were categorised into:

i. Route bus – a passenger vehicle having a riding capacity of 11 persons or more, used for

offering regular public transport service on a fixed route other than expressways.

ii. Ordinary bus - a passenger vehicle having a riding capacity of 11 persons or more, excluding

those in the category of “Route bus”, “small” and “light” passenger cars.

Japanese fuel economy targets are based on the top-runner approach and expressed in kilometres per

litre of fuel (km/L). The approach involved selecting a vehicle among all commercially available

heavy vehicles in each category in 2002 that has achieved the highest fuel efficiency as a basic. The

target standard values shall be determined based on it, after evaluating fuel efficiency improvement

due to technological development and effect of working around exhaust gas emission regulation on

fuel efficiency. Fuel efficiency targets for various categories of vehicles for 2015 are given below:

Table 3.10: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Mini Cargo Vehicles

Category Structure9 Transmission

Vehicle

Weight, kgFE Target, km/L

1

A

MT≤ 740 23.2

2 ≥ 741 20.3

3

AT

≤ 740 20.9

4 741-855 19.6

5 ≥ 856 20.5

6

B

MT

≤ 740 18.2

7 741-855 18

8 856-970 17.2

9 ≥ 971 16.4

10

AT

≤ 740 16.4

11 741-855 16

12 856-970 15.413 ≥ 971 14.7

Source: http://www.dieselnet.com

9 Vehicle structure - The vehicle structures refer to cab-behind-engine (bonnet type) vans for Structure A, cab-

over-engine vans for Structure B1, and cab-over-engine trucks for Structure B2. Structure B refers to vehicles of

Structure B1 and B2 combined.





Table 3.11: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Light Cargo Vehicles, GVW ≤ 1.7 t

Category Transmission Vehicle

Weight, kg

FE

Target, km/L

1 MT ≤ 1080 18.5

2 ≥ 1081 17.1

3 AT ≤ 1080 17.4

4 1081-1195 15.8

5 ≥ 1196 14.7


Table 3.12: 2015 Fuel Efficiency targets for diesel Medium Cargo Vehicles (1.7 t < GVW ≤ 3.5t)

Category Structure TransmissionVehicle

Weight, kgFE Target, km/L

28

A & B1

MT

≤ 1420 14.5

29 1421-1530 14.1

30 1531-1650 13.8

31 1651-1760 13.6

32 1761-1870 13.3

33 1871-1990 12.8

34 1991-2100 12.3

35 ≥ 2101 11.7

36

AT

≤ 1420 13.1

37 1421-1530 12.8

38 1531-1650 11.5

39 1651-1760 11.3

40 1761-1870 11

41 1871-1990 10.8

42 1991-2100 10.3

43 ≥ 2101 9.4

44

B2

MT

≤ 1420 14.3

45 1421-1530 12.9

46 1531-1650 12.6

47 1651-1760 12.4

48 1761-1870 12

49 1871-1990 11.3

50 1991-2100 11.2

51 ≥ 2101 11.1

52

AT

≤ 1420 12.5

53 1421-1530 11.8

54 1531-1650 10.9

55 1651-1760 10.6

56 1761-1870 9.7

57 1871-1990 9.5

58 1991-2100 9

59 ≥ 2101 8.8






The 2015 fuel consumption testing is performed over the JC08 cycle, which fully replaces the 10-15

mode test by 2011. The higher average speed, quicker acceleration, and the cold start requirements of

the JC08 test increase the stringency of the new fuel economy targets by about 9 per cent.

Table 3.13: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Heavy-Duty Transit Buses

Category GVW, t FE Target, km/L

1 6 < GVW ≤ 8 6.97

2 8 < GVW ≤ 10 6.3

3 10 < GVW ≤ 12 5.77

4 12 < GVW ≤ 14 5.14

5 14 < GVW 4.23


Table 3.14: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Heavy-Duty General (Non-Transit) Buses

Category GVW, tFE

Target, km/L

1 3.5 < GVW ≤ 6 9.04

2 6 < GVW ≤ 8 6.52

3 8 < GVW ≤ 10 6.37

4 10 < GVW ≤ 12 5.7

5 12 < GVW ≤ 14 5.21

6 14 < GVW ≤ 16 4.06

7 16 < GVW 3.57


Table 3.15: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Heavy-Duty Trucks (Excluding Tractors)


Category GVW, tMax Load

(L), t

FE

Target, km/L

1 3.5 < GVW ≤ 7.5 L ≤ 1.5 10.83

2 1.5 < L ≤ 2 10.35

3 2 < L ≤ 3 9.51

4 3 < L 8.125 7.5 < GVW ≤ 8 7.24

6 8 < GVW ≤ 10 6.52

7 10 < GVW ≤ 12 6

8 12 < GVW ≤ 14 5.69

9 14 < GVW ≤ 16 4.97

10 16 < GVW ≤ 20 4.15

11 20 < GVW 4.04

http://www.dieselnet.com/












Table 3.16: 2015 Fuel Efficiency Targets for Heavy-Duty Tractors

Category GVW, t FE Target, km/L

1 GVW ≤ 20 3.09

2 GVW > 20 2.01


For heavy vehicles shipped in Japan in each of the target fiscal year and subsequent years,

manufacturers shall ensure that weighted and averaged energy consumption efficiency (fuel

efficiency) by their shipped units shall not be below the relevant standard target value for each of

vehicle categories.

For measuring fuel efficiency four methods were considered: Vehicle-based actual measurement,

Engine-based actual measurement, Stand-alone engine actual measurement with the assumed vehicle

body and Simulation method. Simulation method was found to be more advantageous than other

methods in terms of various factors such as testing facilities, labor and time resources, measuring

accuracy, and factor-by-factor analysis.

Figure 3.3: Overview of Simulation method

Source: Presentation by Atsuto KAJIWARA on “HDV fuel efficiency regulation background and implementation

to date” - 2011

To simulate on-road usage as accurately as possible, based on proportion of usage, a combination of

following two driving cycles was employed:

i. urban driving mode (JE05 mode)

ii.

interurban driving mode (80 km/h constant speed mode with longitudinal grade)









Table 3.17: Driving Distance Proportion by Driving Mode

Passenger vehicles

(riding capacity : 11 persons or more)Freight vehicles

Vehicle type Ordinary bus Route bus Other than tractor Tractor

GVW14 tons or

less

Over 14

tons

20 tons

or less

Over 20

tons

20

tons

or less

Over

20

tons

Drive proportion

Upper: urban mode 0.9 0.65 1 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.9

Lower: interurban mode 0.1 0.35 0 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1

Source: Final Report by Heavy Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Standard Evaluation Group, Heavy Vehicle Standards

Evaluation Subcommittee, Energy Efficiency Standards Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Natural

Resources and Energy

A combination of these two modes is referred to as “heavy vehicle mode”. Energy efficiency (fuel

efficiency) is a weighted harmonic average of measurements in both driving modes which can be

calculated as follows:

E10

= / (αu/Eu + αh/Eh

Where,

E : Heavy vehicle mode fuel efficiency (km/l)

Eu : Urban driving mode fuel efficiency (km/l)

Eh : Interurban driving mode fuel efficiency (km/l)

αu : Proportion of urban driving mode

αh : Proportion of interurban driving mode

This method converts a given drive mode (travel speed vs. time) into an engine operating mode

(engine revolution & torque vs. time) by inputting the specs (technical data) of a vehicle into a

conversion program. Fuel efficiency under the drive mode is then calculated using an actual-

measurement based fuel efficiency map (representing the relationship between the engine revolution-

torque combination and fuel efficiency for each engine).

Assuming that the proportion of the number of shipped units for each vehicle category remains

unchanged in the target fiscal year (FY2015) from FY2002, the improvement ratio of average fuel

efficiency (weight-averaged fuel efficiency by the number of shipped units) from the actual values in

FY2002 to the estimate values in FY2015 shall be calculated as shown below:

10 Source: Final Report by Heavy Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Standard Evaluation Group, Heavy Vehicle Standards







Table 3.18: Fuel efficiency improvements in Freight Vehicles

FY2002, actual values FY2015, estimate valuesImprovement ratio

of fuel efficiency

Other than tractor 6.56(km/l) 7.36(km/l) 12.20%Tractor 2.67(km/l) 2.93(km/l) 9.70%

Total 6.32(km/l) 7.09(km/l) 12.20%




Table 3.19: Fuel efficiency improvements in Passenger vehicles (Riding capacity > 11 persons)

FY2002, actual values FY2015, estimate valuesImprovement ratio

of fuel efficiencyRoute Bus 4.51(km/l) 5.01(km/l) 11.1％

Ordinary Bus 6.19(km/l) 6.98(km/l) 12.8％

Total 5.62(km/l) 6.30(km/l) 12.1％




Japan followed an integrated approach for reduction in CO2 emissions with focus on:

Vehicle performance

Usage

Infrastructure

This approach aimed at coordinating all the relevant measures to maximise CO2 reduction and

minimise social and economic cost. Fiscal incentives such as progressive taxes levied on the vehicle

weight and engine displacement were introduced to promote purchase of lighter vehicles. The

regulations also proposed a vehicle labelling system that allows customers to identify vehicles that

exceed standards. The norms had built in flexibilities wherein manufacturers can use credits

accumulated in one weight category to offset deficit in other weight category. Penalties for missing

the targets were also not significant.





Table 3.20: Tax incentives on fuel-efficient and low-emissions vehicles

Incentives

Category Fuel EfficiencyEmissions

Performance

Automobile

Tax

Acquisition

Tax

Tonnage

Tax

Passenger Cars and Mini-

vehicles

Compliant + 25%

compared to fuel

efficiency standardsEmissions down

by 75% from

2005 standards

50%

reduction

75%

reduction

75%

reduction

Compliant + 15%

compared to fuel

efficiency standards

-50%

reduction

50%

reduction

Trucks and buses

(2.5t<GVW≤3.5t)

Compliant with 2015

fuel efficiencystandards

Compliant with

2009 emissionsstandard

-

75%

reduction

75%

reduction

Heavy-duty vehicles

(GVW>3.5t)

Compliant with 2015

fuel efficiency

standards

Compliant with

2009 emissions

standard

-75%

reduction

75%

reduction

Complaint with

2005 emissions

standard, with

Nox and/or PM

emissions down

by 10% fromthose standards

-50%

reduction

50%

reduction

Note: The above acquisition and tonnage tax incentives will be in effect for three years, as follows:

From April 1, 2009 through March 31, 2012 for the acquisition tax (imposed once only, at the time of

vehicle purchase)

From April 1, 2009 through April 30, 2012 for the tonnage tax(with reductions applicable only once,

upon first payment of the tax at the time of the very first mandatory inspection)

Source: 2011 Report on Environmental protection efforts by Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association, Inc.

3.2.3 Canada

The Canada — United States Automotive Products Agreement, also known as the Auto Pact or APTA

signed in 1965 laid the foundation for integration of automobile market in United States and Canada.

The agreement established a conditional free trading zone by removing tariffs on both vehicles and

automotive parts. It was followed by 1988 Canada – US Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and North

American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). As a result, today the US and Canadian automotive

markets are highly integrated. Auto trade represents 18 per cent of the total US – Canada trade.





Table 3.21: Data for LDV and HDV (2011)

US Canada

13.1 million units sold 1.61 million units sold

1.87 million (15%) produced in Canada 608,000 (38%) produced in US

8.61 million units produced 2.13 million units produced

10% (777,000) exported to Canada 87% (1.78 million) exported to the US

Source: Mark A. Nantais, President, Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers’ Association – presentation on

“Vehicle Standards Harmonization & Future Canada – US cooperation” – 30th

April, 2012

Highly integrated automobile market makes it imperative for Canada to achieve vehicle regulatory

harmonisation along with alignment of technical regulations (safety and emissions) with US In April

2012, Government of Canada announced the proposed Heavy-duty Vehicle and Engine Greenhouse

Gas Emission Regulations, which were fully aligned with the GHG emission standards of US EPA.

The proposed regulations apply to companies manufacturing and importing new on-road heavy-duty

vehicles and engines for the purpose of sale in Canada. As per the norms, the companies will be

subjected to progressively more stringent standards during the 2014 to 2018 model year period. The

proposed regulations include separate engine and vehicle emission standards for combination tractors

and vocational vehicles.

The regulations are aimed at vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 3856 kg (8500

lb.), except those vehicles that are subject to the Passenger Automobile and Light Truck GreenhouseGas Emission Regulations. Similar to the US, the Canadian regulations have divided vehicles into

three different categories:

i. Class 2B and Class 3 heavy-duty vehicles (full-size pick-up trucks and vans)

ii. Vocational vehicles

iii. Tractors

Trailers and vehicles that are not designed for highway use, such as farm equipment, off-road

machinery, and heavy equipment were not covered under the proposed regulations.

Heavy-duty vehicles span several GVWR classes: tractors (often called combination tractors) are

contained mainly within classes 7 and 8, and vocational vehicles span from class 2B through class 8.

Vocational vehicles also comprise a range of vehicle types, including various types of buses. Please

refer to the figure below for the regulated category of vehicles:

Figure 3.4: Regulated category of vehicles in Canada





For Class 2B and Class 3 heavy-duty vehicles, the proposed regulations would include emission

standards for CO2, N2O and CH4. For CO2 emissions, the standard would be a fleet average CO2

emission standard for all vehicles of a company’s fleet. CO2 emission standard is based on a “work

factor” which can be defined for each vehicle sub-configuration as:

Work Factor = 0.75 × (GVWR – curb weight + xwd) + 0.25 × (GCWR – GVWR)11

where

GVWR is the gross vehicle weight rating

xwd is 500 pounds if the vehicle has four-wheel drive or all-wheel drive and is 0 pounds for all other

vehicles

GCWR is the gross combined weight rating

In case of vehicles equipped with spark-ignition and compression-ignition engines, a company may

elect to use the CO2 emission target values based on one of the following formula’s, whichever is

applicable:

(a) for vehicles equipped with a spark-ignition engine: (0.0440 × WF) + 339

(b) for vehicles equipped with a compression-ignition engine and vehicles that operate without an

internal combustion engine: (0.0416 × WF) + 320

where WF = work factor as described above

11 Source: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2012/2012-04-14/html/reg1-eng.html





Alternatively, a company may elect to use the CO2 emission target values set out in the one of the

following tables:

Table 3.22: For 2014 to 2017 model years

Model Year Engine Cycle Alternate CO2 EmissionTarget (grams per mile)

2014

Spark-ignition engine (0.0482 × WF) + 371

Compression-ignition engine (0.0478 × WF) + 368

2015



2016



2017



Source: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2012/2012-04-14/html/reg1-eng.html

Table 3.23: For 2014 to 2018 model years

Model Year Engine CycleAlternate CO2 Emission

Target (grams per mile)

2014



2015



2016 to 2018




In case a company elects to use the CO2 emission target values set out in one of the tables above, the

applicable targets continue to apply for all the model years referred to in that table.

For vocational vehicles and tractors, the proposed regulations would include heavy-duty engine

standards for CO2, N2O and CH4, and separate vehicle standards for CO2.

http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2012/2012-04-14/html/reg1-eng.html












Table 3.24: CO2 Emission Standards for vocational vehicles

Class of Vocational

Vehicle

CO2 Emission Standard (grams

of CO2 per ton-mile) for the

2014 to 2016 Model Years

CO2 Emission

Standard (grams of CO2 per

ton-mile) for the 2017 and

Subsequent Model Years

Classes 2B, 3, 4 and 5 388 373

Classes 6 and 7 234 225

Class 8 226 222


Engine emission standards for vocational vehicles vary based on vehicle class and fuel type and are

measured in g/bhp-hr.

Table 3.25: Vocational vehicles CO2 Emission Standards for compression-ignition engine

(diesel)

Vocational compression-ignition engine (g/BHP-hr)

Model Year Light heavy-duty Medium heavy-duty Heavy heavy-duty

2014 to 2016 600 600 567

2017 and after 576 576 555


Combination tractors are further categorised by vehicle weight class, roof height and cab type.

Emissions are measured grams of CO2 per cargo ton-mile (g/ton-mile).

Table 3.26: Combination tractors CO2 Emission Standards

Class of Tractor Characteristics

CO2 Emission Standard

(grams of CO2 per ton-

mile) for the 2014 to 2016

Model Years

CO2 Emission Standard (grams of

CO2 per ton-mile) for the 2017and Subsequent Model Years

Class 7

Low-roof (all cab styles) 107 104

Mid-roof (all cab styles) 119 115

High-roof (all cab styles) 124 120

Class 8

Low-roof day cab 81 80

Low-roof sleeper cab 68 66

Mid-roof day cab 88 86

Mid-roof sleeper cab 76 73













Class of Tractor Characteristics

CO2 Emission Standard

(grams of CO2 per ton-

mile) for the 2014 to 2016

Model Years

CO2 Emission Standard (grams of

CO2 per ton-mile) for the 2017

and Subsequent Model Years

High-roof day cab 92 89

High-roof sleeper cab 75 72


Table 3.27: Combination tractors CO2 Emission Standards for engines (in g/BHP-hr)

Model YearMedium heavy-duty

engines

Heavy heavy-duty

engines

2014 to 2016 502 475

2017 and after 487 460


As per the norms, Class 2B and Class 3 heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty incomplete vehicles of

the 2014 and subsequent model years - excluding “vocational vehicle” - must have N2O and CH4

emission values that do not exceed 0.05 g/mile for N2O and 0.05 g/mile for CH4 for the applicable

useful life of the vehicle. Also, every heavy-duty engine that is a compression-ignition engine of the

2014 and a spark-ignition engine of the 2016 and subsequent model years must have N2O and CH4

emission values that do not exceed an emission standard of 0.10 g/BHP-hr for N2O and 0.10 g/BHP-

hr for CH4 for the applicable useful life of the engine.

The norms have also set standards for refrigerant leakage. In case of a heavy-duty vehicle, which is

equipped with an air conditioning system that uses a refrigerant other than HFC134a, the adjusted per

cent leakage rate of that refrigerant, rounded to the nearest one-hundredth of a per cent, must not

exceed 1.5 per cent per year. This would apply to pickup trucks, vans and tractors for systems with

refrigerant capacity greater than or equal to 734 grams. For systems with a refrigerant capacity of less

than 734 grams, the standard would equal 11.0 grams per year.

Conformation to the standards for different category of vehicles would be measured as follows:

Class 2B and Class 3 heavy-duty vehicles : using prescribed test cycles on a chassis

dynamometer, similarly to existing procedures for light-duty vehicles

Engines: using prescribed test cycles on an engine dynamometer

Tractors and vocational vehicles: computer simulation model (GEM)

Compliance with the vehicle standards for tractors and vocational vehicles and tractors would be

assessed using a computer simulation model (Greenhouse gas Emissions Model). The simulationmodel testing is conducting by assigning a pre-determined payload and engine size to vehicles. As a





result, Canadian manufacturers will not be disadvantaged compared to US manufacturers due to the

higher average payloads in Canada. EPA Certificates would also be accepted to demonstrate

compliance with the emissions standards.

CO2 emission credit system

The proposed regulations would include a system of emission credits to help meet overall

environmental objectives in a manner that provides the regulated industry with compliance flexibility.

The CO2 emission credit system:

i. Companies can generate, bank and trade emission credits

ii. Companies would be allowed to manufacture or import vehicles and engines with emission

levels worse or better than the standard, provided that their average fleet emission level does

not exceed the applicable emission standard

iii. Credits would be obtained by companies whose average fleet emission levels fall below the

applicable standard, while deficits would be incurred by companies whose fleet emissions

exceed the applicable standard

iv. Credits may be applied by a company to offset a past deficit for up to three model years prior

to the year in which the credits were earned, or may be banked to offset a future deficit for up

to five model years after the year in which the credits were obtained

v. Credits may also be transferred to another company

vi. Optional early credits for all 2013 model year vehicles and electric vehicles of 2011-2013

model years

vii. Credit multiplier of 1.5 for advanced technology vehicles and early credits

A company would not be allowed to obtain additional credits more than once for the same type of

GHG emission reduction technology. Other features of the regulations include:

Alternative phase-in requirements for pick-up trucks and vans and for engines

Low-volume exemption (imported or manufactured less than 100 vehicles)

Under the proposed regulations, manufacturers and importers would be responsible for ensuring that

their products comply with the proposed regulations and would be required to produce and maintain

evidence of such conformity. The policy sets out the range of possible responses to violations,

including warnings, directions, environmental protection compliance orders, ticketing, ministerial

orders, injunctions, prosecution, and environmental protection alternative measures.





3.2.4 European Union (EU)

EU has set ambitious climate and energy targets for 2020. These targets, known as the "20-20-20"

targets, set three key objectives for 2020:

A 20 per cent reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels

Raising the share of EU energy consumption produced from renewable resources to 20 per

cent

A 20 per cent improvement in the EU's energy efficiency

As a part of this program, in 2011, EU announced setting stringent emission performance standards

for new light commercial vehicles. The regulation applies to new motor vehicles of category N1, i.e.,

vehicles designed and constructed for the carriage of goods having a gross vehicle weight of less than

3,500 kg (7,716 lb) and a reference mass of less than 2,610 kg (5,754 lb). M2 and N2 vehicles were

included for monitoring purposes only. N1 vehicles in Europe account for approximately 10 per cent

of all light-duty vehicles. EU regulations introduce different emission limits for compression ignition

(diesel) and positive ignition (gasoline, NG, LPG, ethanol,...) vehicles. Diesel vehicles have more

stringent CO standards but are allowed higher NOx. This regulation sets the average CO2 emissions

for new light commercial vehicles at 175 g CO2 /km in 2017 and 147 g CO2 /km in 2020 as

compared to average emission level of approximately 185 g CO2/km in 2009. EU is currently

conducting extensive studies for development of emission standards for HDV.

Table 3.28: EU Emission Standards for Light Commercial Vehicles

Category† Stage DateCO HC HC+NOx NOx PM PN

g/km #/km

Compression Ignition (Diesel)

N1, Class I

≤1305 kg

Euro 1 1994.1 2.72 - 0.97 - 0.14 -

Euro 2 IDI 1998.01 1 - 0.7 - 0.08 -

Euro 2 DI 1998.01a 1 - 0.9 - 0.1 -

Euro 3 2000.01 0.64 - 0.56 0.5 0.05 -

Euro 4 2005.01 0.5 - 0.3 0.25 0.025 -

Euro 5a 2009.09b 0.5 - 0.23 0.18 0.005

e -

Euro 5b 2011.09d 0.5 - 0.23 0.18 0.005

e 6.0×10

11

Euro 6 2014.09 0.5 - 0.17 0.08 0.005e 6.0×10

11

N1, Class II

1305-1760

kg

Euro 1 1994.1 5.17 - 1.4 - 0.19 -

Euro 2 IDI 1998.01 1.25 - 1 - 0.12 -

Euro 2 DI 1998.01

a

1.25 - 1.3 - 0.14 -Euro 3 2001.01 0.8 - 0.72 0.65 0.07 -





Category† Stage DateCO HC HC+NOx NOx PM PN

g/km #/km

Compression Ignition (Diesel)

Euro 4 2006.01 0.63 - 0.39 0.33 0.04 -

Euro 5a 2010.09c

0.63 - 0.295 0.235 0.005e

-

Euro 5b 2011.09d 0.63 - 0.295 0.235 0.005

e 6.0×10

11

Euro 6 2015.09 0.63 - 0.195 0.105 0.005e 6.0×10

11

N1, Class III

>1760 kg

Euro 1 1994.1 6.9 - 1.7 - 0.25 -

Euro 2 IDI 1998.01 1.5 - 1.2 - 0.17 -

Euro 2 DI 1998.01a 1.5 - 1.6 - 0.2 -

Euro 3 2001.01 0.95 - 0.86 0.78 0.1 -

Euro 4 2006.01 0.74 - 0.46 0.39 0.06 -

Euro 5a 2010.09c 0.74 - 0.35 0.28 0.005

e -

Euro 5b 2011.09d 0.74 - 0.35 0.28 0.005

e 6.0×10

11

Euro 6 2015.09 0.74 - 0.215 0.125 0.005e 6.0×10

11

N2

Euro 5a 2010.09c 0.74 - 0.35 0.28 0.005

e -

Euro 5b 2011.09d 0.74 - 0.35 0.28 0.005

e 6.0×10

11

Euro 6 2015.09 0.74 - 0.215 0.125 0.005e 6.0×10

11

† For Euro 1/2 the Category N1 reference mass classes were Class I ≤ 1250 kg, Class II 1250 -1700 kg, Class III> 1700 kga. until 1999.09.30 (after that date DI engines must meet the IDI limits)

b. 2011.01 for all modelsc. 2012.01 for all modelsd. 2013.01 for all modelse. 0.0045 g/km using the PMP measurement procedure

Source: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/eu/ld.php

As per the regulations, the indicative specific emissions of CO2 for each light commercial vehicle,

measured in grams per kilometre, will be determined in accordance with the following formulae12:

From 2014 to 2017:

Indicative specific emissions of CO 2 = 175 + a × (M – M 0)

where:

M = mass of the vehicle in kilograms (kg)

M0 = 1,706 kg

a = 0.093

12

REGULATION (EU) No 510/2011 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 May

2011





From 2018, the value of M0 will be adjusted annually to reflect the average mass of new light

commercial vehicles in the previous three calendar years. The specific emissions target for a

manufacturer in a calendar year shall be calculated as the average of the indicative specific emissions

of CO 2 of each new light commercial vehicle registered in that calendar year of which it is the

manufacturer. For the calendar year commencing 1 January 2014 and each subsequent calendar year,

each manufacturer of light commercial vehicles shall ensure that its average specific emissions of CO

2 do not exceed its specific emissions target. As per the regulations, manufacturers must meet their

average emission targets in 70 per cent of their vehicle fleet in 2014, 75 per cent in 2015, 80 per cent

in 2016 and 100 per cent from 2017 onwards.

Other features of the regulation:

Super credits: Vehicles of CO2 emissions below 50 g/km will receive super-credits. Each

such new light commercial vehicle will be counted as:

3.5 light commercial vehicles in 2014




1 light commercial vehicle from 2018

The regulation limited the maximum number of new light commercial vehicles, with specific

emissions of CO 2 of less than 50 g CO 2 /km to 25,000 per manufacturer for calculation of

super-credits.

Pooling: Several auto manufacturers may form a pool to jointly meet their CO2 emission

targets. The duration of agreement for a pool was limited to five calendar years. Commission

should be informed of any changes to the membership of the pool or the dissolution of the

pool.

Excess emission premium: ‘Excess emissions’ refers to positive number of grams per

kilometre by which a manufacturer's average specific emissions of CO2 , taking into account

CO2 emissions reductions due to approved innovative technologies, exceeded its specific

emissions target in the calendar year. In case a manufacturer’s average specific emission of

CO2 exceeds its specific emissions target, excess emission premium will be imposed on a

manufacturer or pool manager. The excess emissions premium will be calculated as:

(a) from 2014 until 2018:

(i) for excess emissions of more than 3 g CO 2 /km:





((Excess emissions – 3 g CO 2 /km) × EUR 95 + EUR 45) × number of new light commercial

vehicles

(ii) for excess emissions of more than 2 g CO 2 /km but no more than 3 g CO 2 /km:


vehicles

(iii) for excess emissions of more than 1 g CO 2 /km but no more than 2 g CO 2 /km:


vehicles

(iv) for excess emissions of no more than 1 g CO 2 /km:

(Excess emissions × EUR 5) × number of new light commercial vehicles

(b) from 2019:

(Excess emissions × EUR 95) × number of new light commercial vehicles

3.3 Issues and challenges faced in Implementation of HDV regulations

Diverse configurations and applications of HDV makes it difficult to set their fuel efficiency

standards. In order to inform the development of the regulations and build consensus amongst a range

of stakeholders such as industry representatives (manufacturers, carriers and other vehicle owners and

operators), environmental non-governmental organizations, provinces and territories, as well as other

government departments, a number of stakeholder working group meetings were organised. With

interest of each stakeholder different from the other, governments around the world faced stiff

questions from various stakeholders, mostly industry concerning regulations.

3.3.1 United States:13

i. Baselines: Navistar raised its concern regarding inclusion of Selective Catalytic Reduction

(SCR) in the baseline technology, stating that SCR-equipped engines used to construct the

baseline do not meet the NOx standard and therefore do not comply with the 2007 Heavy-

Duty Highway Rule. Therefore, standards built on this baseline technology are infeasible.

EPA responded by stating that feasibility requirement implied that all designated technology

had to be available before the effective date of regulations. In addition, Navistar and other

manufacturers could resort to the alternative standards for an engine, which required a 3 per

cent improvement over the engine’s performance by the effective date. The agency also

pointed out that sufficient lead-time is available with the manufacturers for compliance.

13 Source : Winston Harrington and Alan Krupnick: “Improving Fuel Economy in Heavy- Duty Vehicles”





ii. Technologies in vocational vehicles: For class 2b – 7 vocational vehicles, the proposed

standards were associated with improvements in engine fuel intensity and anticipated

improvement in rolling resistance. Some stakeholders observed that fuel-saving technologies

potentially could apply to other vehicle components, including transmissions, advanced drive

trains, weight reduction and improved auxiliary systems and urged the agencies to set the

standards, which will force adoption of these technologies for new vehicles. The agencies

declined, because to do so would be tantamount to picking technological winners.

The agencies also received comments from vehicle and tire manufactures that development of

new tire designs and proving they were safe and effective on the wide range of vocational

vehicle types required at least six years. The agencies left the requirements unchanged in the

final regulations stating that sufficient range of products was available to lead to significant

reductions in rolling resistance.

iii. Categorisation: In the notice of proposed rulemaking, in order to prevent vocational vehicles

from being modified to serve as intercity combination trailers, the agencies classified all

vocational vehicles with sleeper cabs as “tractors”. This classification was removed based on

numerous objection raised by various stakeholders arguing that the agency had

underestimated the cost and difficulty of making vocational sleeper cabs suitable for intercity

use. The dissenters pointed out that the associated costs were at least as great as the savings

available from access to the less stringent regulation.

iv. Alternative-fuelled vehicles: Producers of alternative fuelled trucks stated that credits for

some alternative-fuelled vehicles, such as all-electrics or natural gas vehicles, should be much

larger as compared to their diesel counterparts since they use no petroleum. The agencies

stated that this issue will be revisited in the future.

3.3.2 Canada

i. GHG-reducing technologies: Environment Canada received comments that Canada can have

more stringent regulations than US by adopting additional technologies, such as automatictransmissions that were not considered under the US regulations. However, the agency

proposed the same suite of technologies as the US

Post finalisation of US regulations, the agency conducted a study of the Canadian fleet to

assess whether the proposed regulations take into consideration the range of applications of

heavy-duty vehicles and their alignment with the US norms.

ii. Low-volume importers: Some stakeholders raised concerns that in case of companies

importing small number of vehicles and engines, it is difficult to meet standards even with

inherent flexibilities of the program. Taking a note of this, Environment Canada is seeking





comments on a proposal to provide CO2 exemption to companies importing or manufacturing

less than 100 vocational vehicles and tractors. For engines that have CO2 emission levels

greater than applicable emission standard, the agency is allowing companies to import them if

these engines are covered by a US EPA certificate and are concurrently sold in greater

number in the United States than in Canada.

iii. Low rolling resistance tires: A number of stakeholders expressed concerns with regards to

safety in usage of low rolling resistance tires, especially in winters, to comply with the

proposed standards. However, there was no data, which suggested that low rolling resistance

tires bear any additional safety risk than conventional tires. Transport Canada, is proactively

undertaking additional tests to measure the safety performance of low rolling resistance tires

and will, in consultation with Environment Canada, undertake safety activities, if required.

iv.

Applicable regulated entities: Since many importers were importing engines built by a

different company, some engine manufacturers and importers expressed the desire to have the

engine manufacturer be the responsible regulatee even in cases where the importer on record

is not the manufacturer. However, the proposed regulations apply to all importers of engines,

regardless of who manufactured the engine, or where it was manufactured.

v. Less stringent payload restrictions: Environment Canada received queries on whether the

fact that Canadian province have less stringent payload restrictions for tractor trailers

compared to the US interstate limit should be taken into account for development ofregulations. The agency responded that since the proposed standards do not constrain the size

and power of vehicles and compliance with the proposed standards will be assessed with a

simulation model that uses a fixed payload, Canadian manufacturers will not be

disadvantaged compared to US manufacturers due to potentially higher average payloads in

Canada.





4 FRAMEWORK FOR DEFINING STANDARDS FOR DIESEL

(ENGINE DRIVEN) TRUCKS AND BUSES IN INDIA

India currently has standards to reduce air pollutants from motor vehicles. However, there are no

standards to reduce fuel consumption of motor vehicles in India. Efforts are already underway for

development of fuel consumption standards for passenger vehicles in India. Though passenger

vehicles in India are smaller in size and consume less fuel than their western counterparts, the Indian

commercial vehicles (trucks and buses) often consume more fuel. Further, the commercial vehicles

consume around 31 million tonnes of diesel (equivalent to retail value of approximately Rs 180,000

crore) every year. Therefore, PCRA has embarked the process of development of similar fuel

consumption norms for diesel (engine driven) trucks and buses.

In order to develop the framework for defining standards for diesel (engine driven) trucks and buses,

it is imperative to understand the long term objective or vision for setting up these standards, the

various approaches which could be adopted to define these standards, the pros and cons of various

approaches, limitations or constraints in setting up the standards using these approaches and

implementation challenges.

4.1

Fuel consumption roadmap vision

More fuel efficient vehicles lead to fuel savings for the country in general. Mandatory fuel

consumption standards are meant to encourage manufacturers to prioritise the improvement of fuel

efficiency in vehicle development. Moreover, the provision of information on vehicle fuel economy to

prospective vehicle buyers should also be central to any strategy to encourage improvements in

average fuel economy of the country. In addition, fuel consumption standards programme should

motivate the manufacturers to improve fuel efficiency beyond the target values required as per fuel

economy standard and induce consumers to purchase fuel-efficient vehicles. Accordingly, the

objectives of fuel consumption standards for diesel (engine driven) trucks and buses are two-fold:-

1) Fuel savings or Economic benefits for the country by reducing fuel consumption

2) Facilitate the buyers in making fuel-efficient purchase of these commercial vehicles

As a first step, various stakeholders shall jointly agree upon a Fuel Consumption Roadmap vision. For

instance,





“To reduce fuel consumption per kilometre by 12 per cent to 20 per cent in new diesel (engine driven)

trucks and buses in India by 2020, and by 30 per cent to 50 per cent by 2025, in order to significantly

reduce GHG emissions and diesel consumption, compared with a baseline projection.”

In US, the proposed NHTSA standards represent an average per-vehicle improvement in fuel

consumption of 15 per cent for diesel vehicles (6 per cent to 24 per cent range) and 10 per cent for

gasoline vehicles, by 2017.

4.2

Approaches for defining fuel consumption standards

Fuel consumption standards are mainly set as fuel consumption targets based on the average of the

total fleet of vehicles sold (corporate average fuel economy). Fleet average fuel economy standards provide flexibility to manufacturers to achieve the target across the sales mix rather than with each

individual vehicle sold. The fuel consumption standards typically include

Approaches to the design of fuel consumption target values,

Stringency of the target,

Timing of introduction,

Compliance roadmap

Within this general approach based on the corporate average of the total fleet of vehicles sold, thereare two main categories of possible approaches to the way standards are defined:

1) Absolute target value across all vehicles and all manufacturers regardless of size, weight,

etc. of the vehicle fleet, represented as:

a single target for all manufacturers; or

a uniform percentage improvement for all manufacturers with separate target for each

manufacturer

2) Attribute-based target values across all vehicles for each manufacturer, where the target

varies depending on the average weight or size of the vehicles sold by a manufacturer. The

different ways to align the targets with vehicle attributes are:

Continuous function or curve : target values are estimated as a continuous function of

vehicle attributes i.e. corporate averaging across categories

Target value in each category : Vehicles are separated into discrete categories by vehicle

attribute and manufacturers must meet separate standards for their vehicles in that

category – i.e. no corporate averaging within each class of vehicles.





Table 4.1: Pros and Cons of approaches to the way standards are defined

S No Approach Pros Cons

(1)

Absolute target - Absolute

across all vehicles and all

manufacturers regardless of

size, weight, etc. of the

vehicle fleet

Easier to develop andimplement

Perceived to discriminate betweenmanufacturers

a) Single Standard Approach

Focuses on improvement of

the average fuel efficiency of

each manufacturer’s fleets,

and thereby the total fleet,

regardless of a possible shift

in the sales-mix over time

Perceived to discriminate between

manufacturers - Manufacturers selling

larger or heavier (and typically less

fuel efficient) vehicles must make

greater changes to meet the standards

b)Uniform Percentage

Improvement Approach

Focuses on significantimprovement from all

manufacturers, regardless of

their starting point or relative

position in the market

Perceived to discriminate betweenmanufacturers - Unfair to

manufacturers that have already made

significant efforts to improve fuel

efficiency

(2)

Attribute-based target

Attribute-based target values

across all vehicles for each

manufacturer, where thetarget varies depending on

the average weight or size of

the vehicles sold by a

manufacturer

Provides greater fairness

among manufacturers,

because the targets are linked

to a particular vehicle

attribute regardless of theaverage weight or size of

their vehicles

Average fuel economy of new vehicles

can still increase if the vehicle sales

mix shifts towards bigger and/or

heavier vehicles (depending upon

slope of the target value curve).Implicitly encourages manufacturers to

increase the size or weight of vehicles

to take advantage of less stringent

targets.

a)Continuous function or curve

Approach

Provides more flexibility to

manufacturers, allowing them

to improve fuel efficiency

more cost-effectively

Inequalities may exist depending on

how the target value curve is set for

the continuous curve approach, or if

differences exist in applicable

technologies and marginal costs for

improving fuel efficiency along thetarget value curve.

b)Target value in each

category

Addresses inequalities

because of single target value

curve for all vehicle

categories

May be inefficient to reduce fuel

consumption in certain vehicle

categories where fuel economy-

improving technologies may be

costlier.

Target values need to be determined

based on detailed technology analysis

across vehicle categories, leading to

higher costs for governmentsdeveloping these standards.





Both Japan and the United States have adopted Attribute-based target HDV standards based on

vehicle categories. For India, based on the pros and cons of approaches to the way fuel consumption

standards are defined, the attribute-based continuous curve approach (with separate standards for

trucks and buses) is the best option in the first phase of implementation of the standards. This

approach will provide enough flexibility for manufacturers without being unfair or cost ineffective to

any manufacturer, while ensuring that the target is achieved. Instead of targeting fuel consumption

reduction across all vehicle categories (i.e. across various GVW categories), the manufacturers can

focus on reducing fuel consumption based on a target value determined as the average of the attribute

(vehicle weight or footprint or others) of the vehicles that it sells, weighted by the sales of each model

using a continuous curve standard. Thereafter, in the second phase of fuel consumption standards,

attribute-based continuous curve approach can be implemented for various categories of vehicles.

4.2.1 Attributes for Attribute-based continuous curve approach

To develop fuel consumption standards based on Attribute-based continuous curve or category-based

attribute standards, an appropriate attribute for developing standards is required. Vehicle weight and

footprint14 are commonly used attributes for designing fuel consumption standards of passenger

vehicles (footprint used as an attribute in US while vehicle weight used as an attribute in EU and

Japan). Other vehicle attributes which could be used are engine power and interior volume, but they

are not widely used.

For trucks and buses, gross vehicle weight (GVW) and payload are more appropriate attribute than

vehicle weight for developing fuel consumption standards. However, fuel consumption norms based

on GVW as an attribute do not give manufacturers an incentive to reduce vehicle weight, because

reduction in vehicle weight will be offset by an increase in payload and thus would not change GVW.

In fact, payload can also be an appropriate attribute for developing fuel consumption standards as it is

more easily understood by consumers.

Possible attributes for Attribute-based continuous curve approach for fuel consumption standards for

diesel trucks and buses are:-

1) Vehicle Weight

2) GVW

3) Footprint

4) Payload

14 Footprint indicates vehicle size and is equal to wheelbase times track width.





Table 4.2: Comparison of attributes for Attribute-based continuous curve approach

S No Attribute Pros ConsCountries

using

(1)

Light Duty Vehicles

(LDVs)

a) Vehicle Weight

Strong correlation between

vehicle weight and fuel

consumption

Implicitly encourages

manufacturers to increase

the weight of vehicles

US, EU,

Japan

b) Footprint

Can encourage

manufacturers to reduce

weight of vehicles



the size or footprint of

vehicles

Not directly proportional

to fuel consumption Difficult to set up target

values based on footprint

US

(2)Heavy Duty Vehicles

(HDVs)

a)

Gross Vehicle Weight

(GVW)

Strong correlation with

fuel consumption as GVWreflects

No incentive for

manufacturers to reduce

vehicle weight, because

reduction in vehicle

weight will be offset by

an increase in payload

and thus would not

change GVW

US, Japan,

China

b) Payload

Parameter reflects usage of

vehicle

More easily understood by

consumers

Can encourage

manufacturers to reduceweight of vehicles and

increase payload carrying

capacity



the size or footprint of

vehicles

Not directly proportional

to fuel consumption

Potential for unfairness to

manufacturers selling

vehicles with low

payloads





4.2.2 Categories for Attribute-based continuous curve approach (with

categories)

Both Japan and the United States have adopted Attribute-based target HDV standards based on

vehicle categories. As there are large differences in applicable technologies for light, medium and

heavy commercial vehicles, categories can reasonably be assigned according to gross vehicle weight.

However, creating too many categories is not a good option because the number of vehicle types in

each category would be too small to develop appropriate target values. Further, the administrative

costs for developing target values would also increase for a larger number of categories.

The recommended categories for developing preliminary fuel consumption standards for diesel

(engine driven) trucks and buses are:-

Table 4.3: Categories for Attribute-based continuous curve approach

Vehicle Categories Category Name Category details

Trucks

Category - I Light Duty Vehicles GVW ≤ 7.5t

Category – II Medium Duty Vehicles 7.5t < GVW ≤ 16t

Category – III Heavy Duty Vehicles GVW > 16t

Buses

Category - I Light Duty Vehicles GVW ≤ 7.5t

Category – II Medium & Heavy Duty

VehiclesGVW > 7.5t

4.2.3

Testing procedures and Test cycles for measuring fuel consumption

Commercial vehicles (trucks and buses) are typically classified by attributes Gross Vehicle Weight

(GVW) and footprint. Introducing Attribute-based target fuel consumption standards for trucks and

buses is a complex task because fuel consumption of trucks and buses depends on many factors apart

from the sheer vehicle weight or footprint, such as average transported payload, road gradients, drag

and rolling resistance from vehicle, engine characteristics, gear ratios and type of transmission, and

auxiliary power demand. Further, fuel savings and the impacts of technologies on fuel consumption

are highly dependent on whether these vehicles are mainly used for urban driving (such as delivery

trucks or intra-city buses) or long-haul (mainly highway) shipments or inter-city buses. Urban and

regional delivery and transportation services are dominated by small and medium freight trucks and

buses, typically up to a gross vehicle weight of 16t; long-haul trucking and inter-city transportation

are mostly carried out with large trucks and buses up to a gross vehicle weight of 40t. Urban and

regional delivery is characterised by lower average speeds, frequent acceleration and deceleration, and





frequent stops. Long-haul services are mostly carried out at high and fairly constant speeds, so

improving aerodynamics and reducing rolling resistance are key measures.

In order to define reasonable and meaningful fuel consumption standards, all these factors need to be

taken into account for each segment of vehicles. Therefore, standard driving test cycles are required to

test the vehicles for fuel consumption and pollutant emissions incorporating many, if not all, of these

factors for various categories of vehicles.

The basic input for comparison of fuel economy and development of fuel consumption standards is

fuel economy data of various models of vehicles. In order to compare fuel economy of different

vehicles in a consistent and unbiased manner, a systematic approach must be used. The fuel economy

and pollution emissions15 estimates are usually measured in a “homologation” laboratory under

predefined test conditions for a range of standardised driving cycles or test cycles to simulate typicaldriving conditions. There are numerous possible configurations of trucks and buses; homologating

each vehicle configuration is not realistic. Further, the layout of a vehicle in the testing laboratory

requires substantial investment. Therefore, several other methods are used to test vehicles for fuel

efficiency and pollutant emissions. In order to measure fuel economy, typically four different

approaches are considered:

(1) Vehicle testing using chassis dynamometer in a homologation laboratory

(2)

Engine testing using engine or bench dynamometer in a homologation laboratory -

Given the size and weight of trucks and buses, often only the engine is tested on a bench

dynamometer to measure fuel economy and pollutant emissions.

(3) Computer Simulation - Computer simulation of the whole truck (typically in combination

with engine testing on a bench dynamometer) is a favoured option by industry. The

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Model (GEM) simulation tool developed in the US adopts this

strategy, complementing the vehicle modelling tool with engine dynamometer tests.

(4) On-road testing of vehicles

15

Such as carbon dioxide (CO2 ), carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), particulate matters (PM) and

nitrogen oxides (NOx)





4.3 Key Technology areas for improvement in fuel consumption

For establishing the fuel consumption standards for trucks and buses, a detailed consultation process

with vehicle and engine manufacturers in India is required to be undertaken to evaluate various engine

and other automotive technologies, which are commercially available or will be available in the next

5-10 years. These technologies have to be evaluated on the parameters such as impacts on fuel

economy, ease of integration into the MD/HD truck manufacturing process and associated costs.

Some important considerations while evaluating these technologies are the road conditions and

emission standards in India, which might limit the impact of technologies due to practical reasons.

International Energy Agency (IEA) has classified some of the technological measures to improve fuel

efficiency into:

Engine: including auxiliary aggregates such as cooling, power steering and the braking

system;

Drive-train: transmission, including any hybridisation system;

Vehicle: chassis, bodywork (including fairings and other aerodynamic devices), trailer and

tyres;

ITS/ICT: intelligent transport systems and information/communication technologies to help

drivers optimise in-use fuel economy.

Driving pattern of commercial vehicles employed for inter-city use is characterised by lower average

speeds, frequent acceleration and deceleration, and frequent stops. Optimisation of fuel efficiency in

such cases can be achieved by improving engine and drive-train efficiency and introducing

technologies such as “idle-off” and hybridisation. Long-haul services are mostly carried out at high

and fairly constant speeds, so improving aerodynamics and reducing rolling resistance are key

measures.

Table 4.5: Truck fuel economy improvement technology matrix

Category Technology Fuel improvementpotential

Technologycost range

(USD)

Marketready

Engine Variable valve actuation 1% to 2% 300 to 600

Engine Sequential turbo/downsizing Up to 5% NA

Engine Speed control (injection) Up to 5% NA

Engine Oil and water pump with variable speed 1% to 4% NA

Engine Controllable air compressor 3.50% ~200

EngineSmart alternator, battery sensor electricaccessory drive

2% to 10% NA

Engine Start/stop automatic 5% to 10% 600 to 900

Engine Dual fuel systems 10% to 20% ~33 000





Category TechnologyFuel improvement

potential

Technology

cost range

(USD)

Market

ready

Engine Pneumatic booster: air hybrid Up to 4% 800 to 1 000

Engine Turbocompound (mechanical/electric) 4%/7% ~3 000/8 000

EngineBottoming cycles/waste heat recovery(e.g. organic Rankine)

1.5% to 10% 15 000 to 16 000

DriveTrain

Eco roll freewheel function 1% NA

DriveTrain

Automated manual transmission 4% to 6% 4 500 to 6 000

DriveTrain

Full hybrid15% to 30% urban

4% to 10% long haul30 000 to 33 000

DriveTrain

Flywheel hybrid15% to 22% urban

5% to 15% long haul~4 500

DriveTrain Hydraulic hybrid

12% to 25% urbanAvg 12% long haul ~13 000

Vehicle Low rolling resistance tyres 5% 300 to 500

Vehicle Aerodynamic fairings 0.5% to 5% 1 500 to 1 700

Vehicle Aerodynamic trailer/boat tail 12% to 15% 4 500 to 5 000

Vehicle Single wide tyres 5% to 10% ~1 700

Vehicle Light-weight materials 2% to 5% ~2 000 to 5 000

Vehicle Active aerodynamics Up to 5% ~1 600

ITS/ICT Predictive cruise control 2% to 5% ~1 900

ITS/ICT Driver support system 5% to 10% NA

ITS/ICT Acceleration control Up to 6% NA

ITS/ICT Vehicle platooning Up to 20% NA

Notes: Text in italics indicates short-haul, medium freight trucks; shaded text indicates long-haul, heavy-duty

trucks; remaining pertains to all truck types.

NA = not applicable.

Sources: IEA, 2010a; Hill et al., 2011; Cooper et al., 2009; Duleep, 2011; Law, K. et al., 2011; NRC, 2010a.

Most of the technologies listed above are already commercially available or will be available within

the next five to ten years. The above table indicates there is sufficient scope for improvement in fuel

efficiency of trucks and buses by utilisation of commercially available technologies.

In US, M&HCV norms (for MY 2014-2018) are based only on improvement in engines and rolling

resistance of tyres. Even by considering only two attributes, the US is targeting improvement of

around 12 per cent - 17 per cent in pickup trucks and vans, 6 per cent - 9 per cent in vocational

vehicles and 10 per cent - 23 per cent in tractors. The US is working on next set of norms wherein

targets will be based on improvement in the whole vehicle, which will be significantly stringent than

the present norms. As per ICCT estimates, approximately 20 - 30% fuel consumption reduction is

possible using off-the-shelf technologies and technologies that will be available in the 2015-2020

timeframe.





Table 4.6: Key Technology Areas for improvement in fuel consumption using off-the-shelf

technologies and technologies that will be available in the 2015-2020 timeframe

ParticularsLight HD

Truck

Medium HD

Truck

Heavy Combination

Tractor

Large Transit

Bus

Engine 2-5% 4-10% 8-12% 4-7%

Transmissionand driveline

3-7% 4-8% 2-5% 2-5%

Aerodynamics < 2% 2-5% 8-12% < 2%

Tires 2-5% 2-5% 8-12% 2-5%

Light weighting 1-2% 1-2% 1-3% 1-5%

Hybridization 15-20% 15-25% 5-7% 20-25%

Note: For each vehicle type, the overall FC benefits that can be achieved are highly dependent on the assumed

baseline levels, drive cycles, payload, etc.

Source: ICCT- Anup Bandivadekar presentation on “Heavy-Duty Vehicle Fuel Efficiency Regulatory

Developments around the World”- 3rd July, 2012

4.4 Developing Fuel consumption standards for India

One of the pre-requisites for development of fuel consumption standards is collection of baseline data

for various models of buses and trucks under pre-defined test conditions. As discussed in the earlier

section, for establishing the baseline for fuel consumption standards, fuel consumption or fuel

economy data under standardised test conditions is required for each model of buses and trucks for all

manufacturers for the baseline year. The fuel consumption baseline data is required as per the selected

unit in which standards will be defined. For instance, units for vehicle standards can be Litre per

kilometre, Litre per tonne-kilometre, Litre per 100-km, etc. and for engine standards, Litre per kWh,

Litre per kilometre, Litre per 100-km, etc. Further, fuel economy standards can also be developed

instead of fuel consumption standards with units as inverse of fuel consumption units (like km per

litre, tonne-km per litre, etc.).

One of the biggest challenges for developing fuel consumption standards for trucks and buses is non-

availability of any reported fuel economy data of trucks and buses, either by manufacturers orgovernment bodies like ARAI (except engine testing data). For the purpose of illustrating the

framework for developing the fuel consumption standards for trucks and buses, we have relied on on-

road data collected from our interactions with a few stakeholders (including fleet operators) and

secondary research of information available in public domain. However, this data is inconsistent in

terms of various parameters like payload under which fuel efficiency is measured (full-load / half-

load), average driving route conditions, etc. and is only illustrative for the purpose of illustrating the

framework for developing the fuel consumption standards for trucks and buses.





Since the baseline data has to be collected under pre-defined test conditions, the data we have used to

indicate the baseline has to be further refined by elaborate testing of different categories of trucks and

buses as defined in the earlier section. Our illustrations for vehicle and engine fuel consumption

standards in this section are limited by the availability of fuel efficiency data for trucks and buses in

India. For our illustrations, we have defined fuel consumption in Litre per 100-km for vehicle

standards and fuel efficiency as km/l for engine standards.

4.4.1 Vehicle standards

Fuel consumption for various models of trucks and buses are plotted in the charts below based on the

on-road data collected for each of them. In case of trucks, we have plotted fuel consumption in

L/(100-KM) against GVW and payload of the corresponding vehicle. Trucks are designed to carry

freight and therefore, establishing standards based on payload for trucks is an appropriate attribute-

based fuel consumption metric. The green line at the top of data points in the charts above indicates

hypothetical standards for the baseline year. All data points below the green line indicate compliance

by each of the commercial vehicle manufacturer (for all models) in the baseline year.

Figure 4.1: Baseline fuel consumption data for trucks (for illustrative purpose only)16


16 Note: Data shown in the charts in this section is for illustration purpose only since it is based on the on-road

data for various models of buses and trucks. For defining of standards, the baseline data in above format has to

be collected for a particular model year of all categories of buses and trucks under defined test conditions.





Figure 4.2: Baseline fuel consumption data for buses (for illustrative purpose only)


Establishing fuel consumption standards for trucks and buses is significantly challenging because of a

wide range of tasks they are designed to perform. The proposed standards have to be structured suchthat the size and power of heavy-duty vehicles is not constrained. The targeted fuel economy

improvement for various categories of trucks and buses is indicated in the table below:

Table 4.7: Targeted fuel economy improvement in 2020, 2025 (for illustrative purpose only)

Vehicle

CategoriesCategory Name Category details

% improvement in

fuel economy till

2020

% improvement in

fuel economy till

2025

Trucks

Category – I Light Duty Vehicles GVW ≤ 7.5t 12%-14% 30% - 35%

Category – II Medium Duty Vehicles 7.5t < GVW ≤ 16t 14% - 16% 35% -40%

Category – III Heavy Duty Vehicles GVW > 16t 18% - 20% 45% -50%

Buses

Category – I

Light Duty Vehicles GVW ≤ 7.5t 12%-14% 30% - 35%

Category – II Medium & Heavy Duty

VehiclesGVW > 7.5t 16%-20% 40% - 50%

We have indicated two set of targets, one for the year 2020 and other for 2025. The targets for 2020

are relatively less stringent since they are mainly based on improvements in engine technology. The

targets increase in stringency after 2020 since additional suite of technologies would be considered for

achieving the target standards for 2025. These targets are also in line with the ICCT estimates

regarding fuel consumption reduction using off-the-shelf technologies and technologies that will be

available in the 2015-2020 timeframe as discussed in previous section.

The fuel economy target for each manufacturer is determined from the sales-weighted average of the

attribute, e.g., fuel consumption target based on sales-weighted average GVW for the manufacturer.

0

10

20

30

40

0 5 10 15 20

L / ( 1 0 0 - k m

)

GVW

L/(100-km) vs. GVW

= 1.6406x + 3.312





The slope of this curve is the key factor in determining whether an incentive exists to sell heavier

vehicles. A relatively flat curve means that heavier vehicles are not given much leeway with their

targets. In general, a heavier vehicle has more scope for improvement in fuel consumption. The slope

should typically be set for creating an incentive to reduce vehicle weight. The slope of the

hypothetical standard line in 2020 and 2025 needs to be flatter for adequate stringency for all classes

of manufacturers.

Figure 4.3: Fuel consumption targets for trucks 2020, 2025 (for illustrative purpose only)







Figure 4.6: Engine efficiency targets 2020 (for illustrative purpose only)


Taking cognisance of the HDV policies across the globe, we have considered that improvements in

engine technology will account for major share of fuel economy improvements until 2020.

As indicated in the graphs above, the hypothetical standard line for engine efficiency for 2020 is:

Hypothetical standard line for 2020

LCVs: Fuel economy (km/l) = 23.916 x exp (-0.01 x Engine Power kW)

M&HCVs: Fuel economy (km/l) = 8.2016 x exp (-0.003 x Engine Power kW)





4.5 Estimation increase in fuel consumption by 2020, 202517

4.5.1

Case I : Current fuel economy scenario18

Fuel economy of buses and trucks has almost remained stagnant over the last five years. Change in

emission regime from BS III to BS IV in some of the cities of the country has made the job of

balancing the emissions and fuel economy tough for the bus and truck manufacturers. For estimating

the diesel consumption in the country up to 2025 under Current fuel economy scenario, we have

considered no improvement in the fuel economy of buses and trucks as compared to baseline data.

Trucks, under Current fuel economy scenario

The table below provides estimates for the annual diesel consumption by new trucks sold from 2015-

16 onwards (i.e. during the proposed period for fuel consumption regulatory regime, in case fuel

consumption standards are not implemented). As the number of new trucks on road (sold in or after

2015-16) increases, their share in diesel consumption will increase from 5.09 million tonne in 2015-

16 to 72.76 million tonne in 2024-25 (Rs 287 billion in 2015-16 to Rs 4,110 billion in 2024-25, in

value terms).

Table 4.8: Estimated annual diesel consumption by “New trucks” purchased from 2015-16

onwards during 2015-16 and 2024-25 (under Current fuel efficiency scenario)

Year Truck salesFuel consumed /truck purchased

in the year p.a.

(in litres)

Total fuel

consumed bytrucks purchased

in the year p.a.

(in mn tonne)

Total fuel consumed

(trucks purchased fromFY16 onwards)

(in mn

tonne)

(in Rs

billion)

2015-16 1,156,771 5,284 5.09 5.09 287

2016-17 1,276,046 5,248 5.57 10.66 602

2017-18 1,395,322 5,219 6.06 16.72 944

2018-19 1,514,597 5,194 6.55 23.26 1,314

2019-20 1,633,873 5,173 7.03 30.29 1,711

2020-21 1,753,148 5,155 7.52 37.81 2,136

2021-22 1,872,423 5,139 8.01 45.82 2,588

2022-23 1,991,699 5,125 8.49 54.31 3,068

2023-24 2,110,974 5,112 8.98 63.29 3,575

2024-25 2,230,250 5,101 9.47 72.76 4,110


17 We have not assessed business as usual approach for estimation of fuel savings as we could not get any inputs

on expected fuel improvement over the next five to ten years from the vehicle or engine manufacturers.

18

For estimation of diesel consumption in value terms, we have assumed the price of diesel as Rs 47 per litre






Buses, under Current fuel economy scenario

The table below provides estimates for the annual diesel consumption by new buses sold from 2015-

16 onwards (i.e. during the proposed period for fuel consumption regulatory regime, in case fuel

consumption standards are not implemented). As the number of new buses on road (sold in or after

2015-16) increase, their share in diesel consumption will increase from 0.74 million tonne in 2015-16

to 9.36 million tonne in 2024-25 (Rs 42 billion in 2015-16 to Rs 529 billion in 2024-25, in value

terms).

Table 4.9: Estimated annual diesel consumption by “New buses” purchased from 2015-16

onwards during 2015-16 and 2024-25 (under Current fuel efficiency scenario)

Year Bus sales

Fuel consumed /

bus purchasedin the year p.a.

(in litres)

Total fuel

consumed by

buses purchased

in the year p.a.

(in mn tonne)

Total fuel consumed

(buses purchased from

FY16 onwards)

(in mn

tonne)

(in Rs

billion)

2015-16 132,071 6,752 0.74 0.74 42

2016-17 140,596 6,711 0.78 1.53 86

2017-18 149,120 6,674 0.83 2.35 133

2018-19 157,644 6,642 0.87 3.23 182

2019-20 166,169 6,613 0.91 4.14 234

2020-21 174,693 6,586 0.96 5.10 288

2021-22 183,218 6,562 1.00 6.10 344

2022-23 191,742 6,541 1.04 7.14 403

2023-24 200,267 6,521 1.09 8.23 465

2024-25 208,791 6,502 1.13 9.36 529






Table 4.11: Estimated annual diesel consumption by “New trucks” purchased from 2015-16

onwards during 2015-16 and 2024-25 (under Fuel consumption standards regime)

Year Truck sales

Average

Fuel

Efficiency(km/l)

Fuel consumed /

truck purchased

in the year p.a.(in litres)

Total fuel

consumed by

trucks purchased

in the year p.a.

(in mn tonne)

Total fuel consumed

(trucks purchased from

FY16 onwards)

(in mn

tonne)

(in Rs

billion)

2015-16 1,156,771 6.4 5,150 4.96 4.96 280

2016-17 1,276,046 6.4 5,073 5.39 10.34 584

2017-18 1,395,322 6.7 4,881 5.67 16.01 904

2018-19 1,514,597 6.9 4,706 5.93 21.94 1,239

2019-20 1,633,873 7.4 4,411 6.00 27.94 1,578

2020-21 1,753,148 7.6 4,254 6.20 34.14 1,929

2021-22 1,872,423 7.7 4,196 6.54 40.68 2,298

2022-23 1,991,699 8.1 4,015 6.65 47.33 2,674

2023-24 2,110,974 8.4 3,849 6.76 54.09 3,055

2024-25 2,230,250 9.1 3,563 6.61 60.70 3,429


Buses, under Fuel consumption standards regime

The table below provides estimates for the annual diesel consumption by new buses sold from 2015-

16 onwards (i.e. during the proposed fuel consumption regulatory regime). As the number of new

buses on road (from the fuel consumption norms regime) increase, their share in diesel consumption

will increase from 0.73 million tonne in 2015-16 to 8.04 million tonne in 2024-25 (Rs 41 billion in

2015-16 to Rs 454 billion in 2024-25, in value terms). Therefore, implementation of proposed norms

is expected to limit the consumption of diesel by buses in 2024-25 to around 8.04 million tonne as

compared to 9.36 million tonne in absence of any norms.

Table 4.12: Estimated annual diesel consumption by “New buses” purchased from 2015-16

onwards during 2015-16 and 2024-25 (under Fuel consumption standards regime)

Year Bus sales

Average

Fuel

Efficiency

(km/l)

Fuel consumed /

bus purchased

in the year p.a.

(in litres)

Total fuel

consumed by

buses purchased

in the year p.a.

(in mn tonne)

Total fuel consumed

(buses purchased from

FY16 onwards)

(in mn

tonne)

(in Rs

billion)

2015-16 132,071 5.5 6,604 0.73 0.73 41

2016-17 140,596 5.6 6,517 0.76 1.49 84

2017-18 149,120 5.8 6,301 0.78 2.27 128

2018-19 157,644 6.0 6,100 0.80 3.07 173

2019-20 166,169 6.3 5,762 0.80 3.87 218

2020-21 174,693 6.5 5,579 0.81 4.68 264

2021-22 183,218 6.6 5,508 0.84 5.52 312

2022-23 191,742 6.9 5,296 0.84 6.36 359

2023-24 200,267 7.1 5,099 0.85 7.21 407

2024-25 208,791 7.6 4,760 0.83 8.04 454Source: PCRA, IMaCS Analysis





regime achieve a sizeable share in overall vehicle parc). The quantum of fuel savings will increase

from 0.14 million tonne in 2015-16 to 13.37 million tonne in 2024-25.

Table 4.13: Estimated Fuel savings20

from the proposed program

Fuel savings from trucks Fuel savings from buses Total Fuel savings

YearDiesel savings

(in mn tonne)

Value at

constant price

(in Rs billion)

Diesel savings

(in mn tonne)

Value at

constant

price

(in Rs billion)

Diesel

savings (in

mn tonne)

Value at

constant

price

(in Rs billion)

2015-16 0.13 7.3 0.02 0.9 0.14 8.2

2016-17 0.31 17.8 0.04 2.2 0.35 20.0

2017-18 0.71 39.9 0.09 4.8 0.79 44.7

2018-19 1.32 74.7 0.16 8.8 1.48 83.5

2019-20 2.36 133.2 0.27 15.5 2.63 148.7

2020-21 3.67 207.5 0.42 23.7 4.09 231.2

2021-22 5.14 290.5 0.58 32.8 5.72 323.3

2022-23 6.98 394.4 0.78 44.0 7.76 438.4

2023-24 9.20 519.8 1.02 57.4 10.22 577.2

2024-25 12.05 681.0 1.32 74.5 13.37 755.5

Total 41.88 2,366.0 4.69 264.7 46.57 2,630.7


India imports more than 80 per cent of its crude oil to meet the domestic demand, therefore, fuel

savings from the proposed program can have substantial positive impact on the economy of the

country over medium to long term. With transport sector being the major driver of oil demand, even a

small change in fuel consumption pattern in the sector can save substantial savings in terms of oil

consumption. The proposed program will also result in significant reduction in emissions as well.

With other countries around the globe formulating norms for HDVs and global automotive

marketplace becoming highly integrated, such programs are the need of the hour for a country like

India which is making significant efforts to establish the country as a major auto manufacturing hub in

the world.

20 For estimation of diesel consumption in value terms, we have assumed the price of diesel as Rs 47 per litre






4.6 Implementation roadmap - Draft time schedule for implementation of the

program

I Planning Phase 1 Year

a) Preliminary study to develop a framework for fuel consumption standards

b)

Finalise strategy for testing of fuel efficiency of trucks and buses under standard

test conditions (chassis dynamometer or engine dynamometer or computer

simulation or a combination of these three methods)

c) Development of test cycles for testing of trucks and buses

d)Setup of testing infrastructure for testing of trucks and buses to collect fuel

efficiency data under standard test cycles

e) Design fuel consumption standards for trucks and buses - both engine standardsand vehicle standards

f) Decide schedule of implementation of fuel consumption standards

g)Develop methodology for measurement of fuel efficiency of trucks and buses

(post implementation)

h) Define fuel economy information and labelling mechanism

i) Define policy measures for implementing the fuel consumption standards

II Consultation Phase 6 months

j)Consult with various stakeholders on policies framed and schedule of

implementation of fuel consumption standards

k) Based on consultations, finalise:-

• Fuel consumption standards for trucks and buses - both engine standards and

vehicle standards

• Schedule of implementation of fuel consumption standards

• Fuel economy information and labelling mechanism

• Policy measures for implementing the fuel consumption standards

III Implementation Phase 6 months

Decide fuel economy certification process and compliance monitoring

mechanisms

Vehicle testing and monitoring as per strategies developed for implementation

Targeted enforcement of fuel consumption standards:- 2015-16





As discussed, lack of availability of standardised data is the biggest challenge for development of fuel

consumption norms in India. Fuel economy details of various vehicle models of trucks and buses are

neither disclosed by the manufacturers nor collected by testing agencies like Automotive Research

Association of India (ARAI). Implementation of vehicle and engine standards would require

collection of baseline data of all existing models of Diesel (Engine driven) trucks & buses as well as

diesel engines under pre-defined testing conditions. Therefore, the focus in the initial phase i.e. the

Planning phase should be on developing the fuel consumption framework and testing strategy for

testing of diesel (engine) driven trucks and buses. This phase will involve defining test cycles and

standard test conditions under which fuel economy data would be recorded. This phase will also

involve defining policy measures for implementing fuel consumption standards. ARAI, being the

premier automotive technology institution in India, will have to play a pivotal role in design,

implementation and enforcement of these standards.

In the Consultation phase, focus shall be on bringing various stakeholders including OEMs, testing

agencies, government bodies and other related institutions on board to hold discussions on policies

and schedule of implementation of fuel consumption standards and build consensus across various

stakeholders. This phase would involve detailed discussions on fuel consumption standards and

practical considerations in implementation of these standards. The discussions would also involve

review of policy measures, which would accelerate the process of acceptance of fuel consumption

standards. Tax incentives such as reduction in excise duty (currently at 12% for trucks and buses) for

models compliant with finalised fuel consumption standards will promote the use of fuel-efficient

vehicles in future. Japan had taken a similar approach wherein they offered incentives such as

reduction in Acquisition tax and Tonnage tax for vehicles, which were compliant with the 2015 fuel

efficiency standards (refer Table 3.20: Tax incentives on fuel-efficient and low-emissions vehiclesfor

details on tax incentives on fuel-efficient and low-emissions vehicles provided under HDV

regulations in Japan). Based on the feedback and concerns of various stakeholders, fuel consumption

standards and policy measures for their implementation shall be finalised.

The Implementation phase will involve vehicle testing as per defined standards and establishing a

monitoring framework for the program. Considering the existing number of diesel (engine driven)

trucks and buses, significant ramp of testing facilities in India is required for collection of baseline

data and monitoring the program in the Implementation phase. ARAI can be the key nodal agency for

coordinating with various testing facilities and other agencies to facilitate the collection of data and

enforcement of standards in India.





5 OVERVIEW OF TESTING FACILITIES IN INDIA

5.1 Introduction

During the last decade, India has emerged as an important auto-manufacturing destination for the

global vehicle manufacturers. In the light of demand for global safety, emission and performance

norms, development of world-class Testing, Certification and Homologation facilities was critical for

creating a globally competitive automotive ecosystem in India. Automotive Research Association of

India (ARAI) was the premier government institute providing expertise in the areas of design &

development and know-how for manufacturing & testing of vehicles. However, rapidly growing

automotive industry, along with development of major auto-hubs across India had created a major gap

in testing and R&D infrastructure, which could not be filled by existing government automotive

testing facilities. Since testing and validation infrastructure is critical to the product development,

OEMs started investing heavily in establishing their own testing facilities. Taking cognizance of the

fact and with the aim of addressing one of the most critical handicaps in the overall growth of

automotive industry in India, Department of Heavy Industry came with a program christened National

Automotive Testing and R&D Infrastructure Project (NATRiP). NATRiP is the most significant

initiative taken by the Department of Heavy Industry for establishing much-needed world-class

automotive testing, validation, R&D and homologation facilities in India. In addition, several other

engine manufacturers, component manufacturers and institutions have facilities for engine testing

including:

1. Indian Institute of Petroleum (IIP), Dehradun

2. Indian Oil Corporation (IOC)

3. Bosch Technical Center India, Bangalore

4. Dr B R Ambedkar National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar

5.2 Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI)

ARAI was set-up in 1966 as a co-operative industrial research association established by the

automotive industry with the Ministry of Industries, Government of India. ARAI is the leading

institute in India providing technical expertise in R&D, testing, homologation and framing of

vehicular regulations. Located in Pune (Maharashtra), ARAI has state-of-the-art technology,

equipment, laboratory facilities and highly qualified and experienced personnel. ARAI is amongst the

few institutes in India, which has capabilities of conducting Engine dynamometer, computer

simulation as well as chassis dynamometer testing of heavy-duty vehicles.





5.3 National Automotive Testing and R&D Infrastructure Project (NATRiP)

NATRiP is one of the most ambitious programs in automotive sector on setting up of world-class

automotive testing and R&D infrastructure in India. The program aims to provide globally

competitive automotive ecosystem in India by deepening manufacturing, encouraging localized R&D, boosting exports, converging India’s unparalleled strengths in IT and electronics with automotive

engineering sectors. NATRIP aims at facilitating introduction of world-class automotive safety,

emission and performance standards in India and also to ensure seamless integration of Indian

automotive industry with the global industry. NATRiP envisages an investment of Rs 1718 crore

(about USD 380 million) in independent automotive testing centres within the three automotive hubs

in the country, at Manesar in Northern India, Chennai in Southern India and Pune & Ahmednagar in

Western India.

Table 5.2: List of NATRiP testing centersS. No. Center Location

1 International Center for Automotive Technology (iCAT) Manesar

2 National Automotive Test Tracks Indore

3 Global Automotive Research Center Chennai

4 National Institute for Automotive Inspection, Maintenance & Training (NIAIMT) Silchar

5 National Center for Vehicle Research and Safety (NCVRS) Rae Bareli

6 Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI) Pune

7 Vehicle Research & Development Establishment (VRDE) AhmednagarSource: http://www.natrip.in

NATRiP has planned up-gradation of ARAI and VRDE facilities with and investment of Rs 270 crore

and Rs 46.50 crore respectively. Powertrain Vehicular Test Lab, Passive Safety Lab, Fatigue test lab,

Client Workshop and General store and Maintenance workshop are some of the facilities planned at

ARAI under NATRiP. Up-gradation of facilities at VRDE includes setting up a state-of-the-art

Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) lab and multi-friction braking test track (ABS testing). Details

of facilities at other centers are given in the tables below.

Table 5.3: Details of testing facilities at iCAT, Manesar

Lab FacilitiesSchedule

Readiness

Powertrain

Vehicular test lab

Testing of vehicles, Engines and powertrains for their performance with

respect to power, efficiency and emissions etc.

Mileage accumulation, different types of engine/chassis dynamometers,

controlling and measuring equipment and instrumentation

Dec-13

Active & Passive

Safety

Testing of vehicles for Active Safety requirements like brakes, speed

governors, lighting etc

Testing for Passive Safety requirements such as seats, seat belts, air bags,

crash, pedestrian safety, etc.

Jun-13






Readiness

Steering Pad

Water (Flood) Track

Test Hill Track

Completed

Completed

June-13

Source: http://www.natrip.in

Global Automotive Research Center, Chennai is proposed to have certification facilities to conduct

the performance testing of full range of vehicles. It will also house a centre for excellence for Passive

safety, EMC AND Automotive infotronics.

Table 5.4: Proposed testing facilities at Global Automotive Research Center, Chennai


readiness

Powertrain Lab

Mileage accumulation chassis dynamometer Commissioned

Vehicle emission test cell

Engine emission test cell

Climatic vehicle test cell

Instrumentation

Shed and other supporting facilities

Dec-13

Advance safety

passive Lab

Crash core facility

Frontal impact testing

Offset impact testing

Side, rear and pole impact testing

Static, dynamics and corkscrew rollover testing Car to car impact testing

Sled testing

Dec-13

Pedestrian and occupant safety Lab& airbag testing Mar-13

Infotronics Lab Netintercomm Validation test bench

Generic tools for calibration, measurement and diagnostics of ECU’s

and measurement from external sensors

Fleet validation test bench

Rapid prototyping

Single ECU test bench

Dec-13

CAE/CADSoftware Lab

Aiding the engineering tasks

Create, modify, analyse or optimise a design

EMC Lab Vehicle Semi Anechoic chamber for performing EMC test on Vehicle

from 2 wheelers upto HCV

Jul-13

Components

Laboratory

Photometry Lab – Testing and certification of lighting, light-signalling

devices for motor vehicles and reflex-reflectors for automotive vehicles

Bulb testing lab – Testing, calibration and certification of bulbs

Certification – safety related components and tilt test platform

Shipment will

arrive at

GARC in Jan-

2013

Fatigue Lab Electrodynamics vibration shaker with climatic chamber Commissioned

MAST (Multi Axel Shaker Table) with climatic chamber and UTB

(Universal Test Bench’s) Jun-13






readiness

Testing Tracks Oval Track

Test Hill Track

Breaking Surface Track

Steering Pad

External Noise Track

Dec -13

March -13

May -13

Feb-13

Jan-13


National Automotive Test Tracks (NATRAX), Indore is envisaged to be a proving ground set-up on

4,140 acres for comprehensive testing and evaluation of all type of vehicles. The facility will have all

types of surface type to test vehicles against varying terrains and stringency.

Table 5.5: Proposed testing facilities at National Automotive Test Tracks, Indore


readiness

Powertrain Lab

Vehicle test cell – chassis dynamometer testing

Emission Analyser -

Installation

and

commissioning

on-going at the

site

Vehicle Dynamics

Lab

Kinematic and compliance test rig – for testing of small cars and LCV May-2013

Damper test rig and steering test rig April-2013

Elastomer test rig – characterisation test for suspension bushes and

engine mount

April-2013

Steering test rig – for performance testing, static strength test and

endurance test on both manual and power steeringApril-2013

Testing Tracks

High speed track

Dynamic platform

Straight braking track

Hill Track

Fatigue track

Gravel and off-road

Dry handling circuit

Comfort track

Handling track – 2 & 3 Wheelers

Sustainability track

Wet skid pad

Aqua Planning in curve

Noise track

General Road

Dec -14

Jun-13

Jun-13

Jun-13

Dec-13

Dec-13

Dec-13

Jun-13

Mar-14

Mar-14

Mar-14

Mar-14

Jun-13

Mar-14


At National Institute for Automotive Inspection, Maintenance & Training (NIAIMT), NATRiP has set

up a Hill Driving Training Institute, Mechanics Institute and Inspection & Maintenance Center (I&M)

at two campuses of Dholcura and Jaffirbund.





Table 5.6: Proposed facilities at NIAIMT, Silchar

Lab Facilities Schedule readiness

Mechanical training

institute

Diesel engine lab

Gasoline engine lab

Diagnostic and repair lab

Auto electronics and systems lab

Dec-12

Inspection and

Maintenance station

Inspection of fitness certification of Light and Heavy duty

vehicles

Dec-12


National Center for Vehicle Research and Safety (NCVRS), Rae Bareli is being planned to house a

full-fledged homologation and performance test facility for agricultural tractors and off-road vehicles,

develop capability for specialised vehicles driver training and the National Accident Data Analysis

Center.

Table 5.7: Proposed testing facilities at National Center for Vehicle research and Safety, Rae

Bareli


readiness

Powertrain Lab Homologation and basic R&D of tractors and off-road vehicles Land

acquisition for

setting up of

facilities in

process

Noise Vibration

Harshness

Homologation (tractors)

Fatigue and

Certification Lab

Homologation and basic R&D of tractors and off-road vehicles

Accidental Data

Analysis Centre

(ADAC)

Designed for regional research programs and creation of Regional Data

Accident compiling networkCommissioned

in Feb-11

Test Tracks Oval Test Track

Braking Surface Track

Fatigue Track and Wet Immersion

Test Hill Track

External Noise Track

Dry and Wet Field

Off-Road Circuit

Multipurpose Training Circuit for Tractors

Expected to be

ready after 24

months of

possession of

land


5.4

Vehicle Research & Development Establishment (VRDE)

Established in 1980, under the aegis of Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO),

VRDE was the first automotive testing facility in India. The institution is capable of undertaking

innovative development of vehicles incorporating latest technologies. The National Centre for

Automotive Testing (NCAT), a separate division of VRDE, provides one stop solution to all vehicles

testing and evaluation requirements of Defence Services as well as automotive industry. National

Centre for Automotive Testing (NCAT), consists of test tracks, emission, photometry, EMI / EMC





and safety laboratories with support infrastructure to provide a one stop solution to the testing

requirements of Indian Automotive Industry & Defence Services. NCAT is an approved agency for

testing and evaluation of vehicles and their sub systems / components for certification for compliance

to various national and international standards and regulations.

Table 5.8: List of testing facilities at VRDE

Testing Lab Facilities

Engine Testing Facility

Facilities available for testing of engines and study of all parameters under

various test conditions and endurance

Hydraulic Dynamometers for testing up to 1000 hp

Eddy Current Dynamometers up to 1000 hp

Thrust cradles for measurement of thrust up to 200 kg

Instrumentation

The NCAT maintains well-equipped Instrumentation laboratory for the

measurement of on-road performance parameters of the vehicles as per the

legislative requirements and custom specified tests. The major testinstrumentation facilities are.

Non-contact optical speed & distance measurement systems EEP-2,

EEP-3, Micro EEP-10 and DAS 1A

Pass by noise measurement system Ex. M/s Bruel & Kjaer,

Denmark

Gyro platform for pitch, roll and yaw measurement

Measurement of steering wheel Ex. M/s Datron Messtechnik,

Germany

Steering torque / angle measurement system

Dynamic simulation software – ADAMS

Correlation software ‘n code’ Ride quality meter

Fuel flow meters (positive displacement type)

High speed multi-channel data acquisition systems

Draw bar pull measuring Equipment

8 – Channel thermal array recorder

Electro-dynamic vibration shaker

Emission Laboratory

Measurement of mass emission (HC, CO & Nox) of SI and CI

vehicles and heavy-duty CI engines

Measurement of particulates from diesel engine vehicles

Smoke level measurement of diesel engines.

Power & SFC measurements

Testing & certification of gas analyzers and smoke meters

Idling emission measurements

Evaporative emission determination from gasoline vehicles

Photometry Laboratory

Assessing photometric, Colorimetric and Visibility parameters like

luminous flux, reflectance / transmittance, haze, retro-reflection,

colour, luminance, illuminance, optical distortion, etc.

Evaluation of all types of automotive lamps, signalling devices and

reflex reflectors for certification as well as research and

development purposes

EMI/ EMC Laboratory

OATS measuring 60 meters diameter complying to ANSI C63.4

EMI receiver from frequency 5 Hz to 40 GHz for peak / quasi peak /

average measurements





Test Track Details

Sand track

Wading Troughs

Gradient (7o, 10 o, 15 o, 25 o & 30 o)

Cross Country track

Step Climbing facility

Ditch crossing facility

Source: http://drdo.gov.in/drdo/labs/VRDE/English/index.jsp?pg=facility.jsp





This page has been intentionally left blank.





ANNEXURE I: ILLUSTRATIVE SPECIFICATIONS OF DIESEL

ENGINES FOR TRUCKS AND BUSES IN INDIA

Diesel Engine Classification

Engine

Size

Power

RatingApplications Features

Small

less than 188kilowatts,

or 252horsepower

Automobiles and light trucks

Agricultural and constructionapplications

Small stationary electrical-powergenerators

Mechanical drives

Most commonly produced dieselengine type

Typically direct-injection, in-line, four- or six-cylinderengines

Medium

188 to 750kilowatts,or 252 to

1,006horsepower

Heavy-duty trucks

Direct-injection, in-line, six-cylinder turbocharged and

aftercooled engines

Largegreater than

750 kilowatts

Marine

Locomotive and mechanicaldrive applications

Electrical-power generation

Direct-injection, turbochargedand aftercooled systems

Illustrative specifications of Cummins diesel engines for trucks and buses in India

EngineEngine

Model

No. of

CylinderDisplacement

Bore x

Stroke

Rated

Power

(HP)

Peak Torque

(Nm / RPM)

Emission

Norms

B5.9 MechanicalBS III

B5.9 130 6

5.9 Litre

102 x120

130 @2500

490 @ 1500 BS-III

B5.9 155 6102 x120

155 @2500

605 @ 1500 BS-III

B5.9 180 6102 x

120

180 @

2500

675 @ 1500 BS-III

B5.9 215 6102 x120

215 @2500

800 @ 1500 BS-III

ISBe

ISBe 140 4

4.5 Litre

102 x120

140 @2500

550 @ 1700 Euro ¾

ISBe 140 4102 x120

140 @2500

550 @ 1100 Euro 5

ISBe 150 4102 x120

150 @2300

580@ 1400 Euro 6

ISBe 160 4102 x120

160 @2500

600 @ 1700 Euro 3/4

ISBe 160 4102 x120

160 @2500

600 @ 1100 Euro 5





EngineEngine

Model

No. of


Bore x

Stroke

Rated

Power

(HP)

Peak Torque

(Nm / RPM)

Emission

Norms

ISBe 180 4102 x

120

180 @

2500700 @ 1700 Euro 3/4

ISBe 180 4102 x120

180 @2300

700 @ 1400 Euro 6

ISBe 185 4102 x120

185 @2500

700 @ 1200 Euro 5

ISBe 205 4102 x120

205 @2500

760 @ 1400 Euro 5

ISBe 210 4102 x120

210 @2300

760 @ 1400 Euro 6

ISBe 160 6

6.7 Litre

107 x127

160 @2500

800 @ 1200-1700

Euro 4

ISBe 210 6107 x127

210 @2500

800 @ 1200-1700

Euro 4

ISBe 225 6107 x127

225 @2300

850 @ 1200-1700

Euro 5/6

ISBe 230 6107 x127

230 @2500

900 @ 1200-1700

Euro 3

ISBe 245 6107 x127

245 @2500

925 @ 1200-1700

Euro 4/5

ISBe 250 6107 x127

250 @2300

950 @ 1200-1700

Euro 5/6

ISBe 270 6107 x127

270 @2500

970 @ 1200-1700

Euro 3

ISBe 285 6107 x127

285 @2500

970 @ 1200-1700

Euro 3/4

ISBe 285 6107 x127

285 @2300

1020 @1200-1700

Euro 5/6

ISBe 310 6107 x127

310 @2300

1100 @1200-1700

Euro 5/6

ISLe

ISLe 280 6

8.9 Litre

114 x144.5

280 @2100

1055 @ 1100 Euro 5/4

ISLe 290 6114 x144.5

290 @2100

1055 @1200-1600

Euro 3

ISLe 310 6115 x144.5

310 @2100

1200 @1200-1600

Euro 3




EngineEngine

Model

No. of


Bore x

Stroke

Rated

Power

(HP)

Peak Torque

(Nm / RPM)

Emission

Norms

ISLe 320 6116 x144.5

320 @2100 1350 @ 1100 Euro 5/4

ISLe 340 6117 x144.5

340 @2100

1445 @1200-1400

Euro 3/4/5

ISLe 360 6118 x144.5

360 @2100

1550 @ 1400 Euro 3/4/5

ISLe 375 6114 x144.5

375 @2100

1550 @ 1400 Euro 3

ISLe 380 6114 x144.5

380 @2300 1700 @ 1300 Euro 4/5

ISLe 400 6114 x144.5

400 @2300

1700 @ 1300 Euro 5

ISMe

ISMe345

6

11.0 Litre

125 x147

345 @1900

1700 @ 1200 Euro 3/4/5

ISMe380

6125 x147

380 @1900

1825 @ 1200 Euro 3/4/5

ISMe420 6

125 x147

420 @1900 2000 @ 1200 Euro 3/4/5

ISMe440

6125 x147

440 @1900

2080 @ 1200 Euro 3/4/5

ISF 107 4

2.8 Litre

94 x100

107 @3200

280 @ 1600 Euro 4/5

ISF 129 494 x100

129 @3200

310 @ 1600 Euro 3/4/5

ISF 148 494 x100

148 @3200

360 @ 1800 Euro 3/4/5

94 x 161 @

Diesel Trucks & Buses in India

Documents

Transcript of Diesel Trucks & Buses in India