Assumes manufacturers fully use A/C credit. ** Proposed CAFE standard by NHTSA. It is equivalent to 163g/mi plus CO2 cre
Global Comparison of Light-Duty Vehicle Fuel Economy/GHG Emissions Standards
Update: August 2011
Overview of Regulation Specifications Country or Region!
Target Year!
Standard Type!
Unadjusted Fleet Target/Measure!
Structure!
Targeted Fleet!
Test Cycle!
U.S./California (enacted)!
2016!
Fuel economy/ GHG!
34.1 mpg* or 250 gCO2/mi !
Footprint-based corporate avg.!
Cars/Light trucks!
U.S. combined!
U.S. (Supplemental Notice of Intent)!
2025!
Fuel economy/ GHG!
49.6 mpg* or 163 gCO2/mi!
Footprint-based corporate avg.!
Cars/Light trucks!
U.S. combined!
Canada (enacted)! 2016!
GHG!
153 (141)*** gCO2/km!
Footprint-based corporate avg.!
Cars/Light trucks!
U.S. combined!
EU (enacted)! EU (proposed)!
2015! 2020!
CO2!
130 gCO2/km! 95 gCO2/km!
Weight-based corporate average!
Cars/SUVs!
NEDC!
Australia (voluntary)!
2010!
CO2!
222 gCO2/km!
Fleet average!
Cars/SUVs/light commercial vehicles!
NEDC!
Japan (enacted)! Japan (proposed)!
2015! 2020!
Fuel economy!
16.8 km/L! 20.3 km/L!
Weight-class based corporate average!
Cars!
JC08!
China (proposed)!
2015!
Fuel consumption! 7 L/100km!
Weight-class based per vehicle and corporate average!
Cars/SUVs!
NEDC!
S. Korea (proposed)!
2015!
Fuel economy/ GHG!
Weight-based corporate average!
Cars/SUVs!
U.S. combined!
17 km/L or 140 gCO2/ km!
* Assumes manufacturers fully use A/C credit ** Proposed CAFE standard by NHTSA. It is equivalent to 163g/mi plus CO2 credits for using low-GWP A/C refrigerants. “** In April 2010, Canada announced a target of 153 g/km for MY2016. Value in brackets is estimated target for MY2016, assuming that during 2008 and 2016 the fuel efficiency of the LDV fleet in Canada will achieve a 5.5% annual improvement rate (the same as the U.S.). This estimate is used in the accompanying charts.
Historical fleet CO2 emissions performance and" current or proposed standards Grams CO2 per kilometer, normalized to NEDC
270
US-LDV
Solid dots and lines: historical performance Solid dots and dashed lines: enacted targets Solid dots and dotted lines: proposed targets Hollow dots and dotted lines: unannounced proposal
250
CaliforniaLDV Canada-LDV EU
230
Japan
210
China S. Korea
190
Australia
170 150 130 China 2020: 117
110 90 2000
US 2025:107
Japan 2020: 105 EU 2020: 95
2005
2010
2015
2020
[1] China's target reflects gasoline fleet scenario. If including other fuel types, the target will be lower. ! [2] US and Canada light-duty vehicles include light-commercial vehicles.!
2025
Historical fleet fuel economy performance and" current or proposed standards
Miles per gallon, normalized to US CAFE test cycle
65 Solid dots and lines: historical performance
EU 2020: 64.8
Solid dots and dashed lines: enacted targets Solid dots and dotted lines: proposed targets 60 Hollow dots and dotted lines: unannounced proposal
Japan 2020: 55.1
55
China 2020[1]: 50.1
50
US 2020[2]: 49.6
45 US-LDV
40
California-LDV Canada-LDV
35
EU Japan
30
China S. Korea
25
Australia
20 2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
[1] China's target reflects gasoline fleet scenario. If including other fuel types, the target will be higher. ! [2] US and Canada light-duty vehicles include light-commercial vehicles.! ! !
2025
Historical fleet fuel consumption performance and current or proposed standards 12
Solid dots and lines: historical performance Solid dots and dashed lines: enacted targets Solid dots and dotted lines: proposed targets Hollow dots and dotted lines: unannounced proposal
11
US-LDV California-LDV
Liters/100km, normalized to NEDC
Canada-LDV EU
10
Japan China
9
S. Korea Australia
8 7 6 5
China: 5.0 Japan: 4.5
4 3 2000
US: 4.6
EU: 4.1
2005
2010
2015
[1] China's target reflects gasoline fleet scenario. If including other fuel types, the target will be higher. ! [2] US and Canada light-duty vehicles include light-commercial vehicles.! !
2020
2025
Total and annual percentage CO2 reduction with enacted and proposed targets
Regions are ordered according to their overall improvement/reduction rate. ** Baseline year for each regulatory period is the first year of that period. For example, the US overall reduction rate is 17% for the MY 2012-2016, and 35% for MY 2017-2025 . One cannot combine 17% and 35% to get the overall reduction rate from 2012 to 2025.
Total and annual percentage fuel economy improvement with enacted and proposed targets
Regions are ordered according to their overall improvement/reduction rate. ** Baseline year for each regulatory period is the first year of that period. For example, the US overall reduction rate is 15% for the MY 2012-2016, and 46% for MY 2017-2025 . One cannot combine the two values to get the overall reduction rate from 2012 to 2025.
Four markets absolute and annual rate comparison
Grams CO2 per kilometer, normalized to NEDC
270
EU
US-LDV
Japan
China
250 230 US baseline: 219
! !
210 China baseline: 185
190
1.9%! ! annually!
170
! !
EU baseline: 142
150 130
Japan baseline:131
! !
! 2%! ! annually! !
110 90 2000
4.7%! annually!
China 2015: 167
3.9%! annually!
2005
2010
Japan 2020: 105 US 2025:107 EU 2020: 95
2015
2020
2025
[1] China's target reflects gasoline fleet scenario. If including other fuel types, the target will be lower. ! [2] US and Canada light-duty vehicles include light-commercial vehicles.! [3] Annual rate is calculated using baseline actual performance and target values.!
8
Thank you!
Washington DC • San Francisco • Brussels www.theicct.org +1 202 534 1617 www.twitter.com/TheICCT
