Amory B. Lovins Chairman and Chief Scientist Oil-free transportation APS seminar “Physics of Sustainable Energy III” Berkeley CA, 9 March 2014 © 2014 Rocky Mountain Institute U.S. natural gas prices: official forecasts vs. reality 10 90 Henry Hub price (2011 $/MCF) 09 10 91 85 86 92 87 08 06 07 89 11 12 05 93 94 95 5 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 96 97 0 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Year Forecasts issued annually by U.S. Energy Information Administration 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Transportation Without Oil despite 90% more automobility, 118% more trucking, 61% more flying 25 Oil Biofuels Electricity Hydrogen More-Productive Use Eﬃciency EIA Savings Mbbl/d 20 15 10 5 0 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Basic automotive physics Based largely on Marc Ross, U.Mich., “Fuel Eﬃciency and the Physics of Automobiles,” Contemp. Phys. 38(6):381–394 (1997), which he’s updated to 2004 • Powertrain eﬃciency (tank-to-wheels) • engine thermodynamic η (fuel-to-work) × engine mechanical η (work-to-output-torque) × driveline η (engineto-wheels) 0.38 [0.45 Diesel] × 0.53 × 0.85 = 0.17 (vs. 2004 Prius 0.33–0.37) • Vehicle load = tractive load + accessory loads (~2–3%, often engine-driven with conversion losses) • Tractive load in approximate instantaneous kWmech = Inertia = 0.5M × [∆v2/∆t] (M* ≈ 1.03M, [∆v2/∆t] in m2/s3); with regenerative braking, multiply by (1 – ηregen) + rolling resistance = CRMgv (M in tonnes, v in m/s) + aero drag = 0.5ρairCDAv3/1000 (ρ ≈ 1.2 kg/m3, A in m2) + grade = mgv⋅sin θ (grade = tan θ, neglected in most comparisons) • Inertial and grade loads can be negative; 2004 Prius hybrid recovers them with average wheel-to-wheel eﬃciency ηregen = 0.66, and some newer battery-electric cars may achieve >0.8 • 1995 Taurus tractive load is only 6.3 kW, equivalent to 1.6 L/100 km or 0.67 US gal/100 mi…but you must then divide by the powertrain η! • Powertrain η can’t exceed 1.0, but tractive load can be reduced almost without limit Each day, your car uses ~100× its weight in ancient plants. Where does that fuel energy go? 13% tractive load 87% of the fuel energy never reaches the wheels Engine FuelLoss Energy 0% 20% 40% 60% Aerodynamic drag Rolling resistance Idle Loss 80% 100% Driveline loss Accessory loss Acceleration, then braking resistance • 6% accelerates the car, ~0.3–0.5% moves the driver • At least two-thirds of fuel use is weight-related • Each unit of energy saved at the wheels saves ~7 units of fuel in the tank (~3–4 with a hybrid) So first make the car radically lighter-weight! Cars’ lightness doesn’t correlate well with their price Improved aerodynamic performance is uncorrelated with price Lower-rolling-resistance tires don’t cost more Weight Weight Eﬃciency Weight Eﬃciency Weight Eﬃciency Weight Eﬃciency Volume Production of Electrified Carbon-Fiber Cars Started ramping up in 2013 VW XL1 2-seat plug-in hybrid 0.9 L diesel/100 km, 2013–14 initial low-volume production BMW i3 4-seat battery-electric hatchback with range-extender option, 2013–14 midvolume production Migrating advanced composites from military & aerospace to automobiles 95% carbon composite, 1/3 lighter, 2/3 cheaper Radically simplified manufacturing ! Radically simplified manufacturing 14 parts, ~99% less tooling cost no body shop, little or no paint shop ~80% less automaking capital 2/3 smaller powertrain Decompounding mass and complexity also decompounds cost Only ~40–50 kg C, 20–45 kWe, no paint?, radically simplified, little assembly,... Exotic materials, low-volume special propulsion components, innovative design The secret sauce: how we organize designers Skunk Works® design process “If we are to achieve results never before accomplished, we must employ methods never before attempted.” —Sir Francis Bacon Toyota 1/X concept sedan (2007) Prius size, 1/2 fuel use, 1/3 weight ® Fiberforge® automated processing Unidirec5onal Tape Unidirec5onal Tape Tailored blankTM Consolidate blank Thermoformed part • •Thermoplastic advanced Structural parts/inserts composites • Low scrap • Low scrap • Optimal use of material • Optimal use of material • High-speed automation • High-speed automation © 2013 Fiberforge 16 ® Over-‐compression molding video • In-‐mold combina7on of – LFT – Woven UD tape – Tailored blank • Partners – Fiberforge – Ticona – Fraunhofer ICT – Oxeon Note: 40-second clamp time compressed for presentation. © 2013 Fiberforge 17 Bright Automotive’s 2009 IDEA commercial van (this segment is 7% of U.S. light-vehicle sales but uses 20% of their fuel) • • • RMI spinoﬀ with Alcoa, JCI, Google, PG&E, Turner Foundation • • • mc 1,452 kg, target Cd 0.30, aluminum-intensive • • • • Robust business case for fleets: ≥20% lower lifecycle cost • Firm had a driving prototype (4/09), GM’s first venture investment, GM strategic alliance, supply chain, ample and eager customers, and a manufacturing site, but closed in Feb 2012 after waiting 3.2 years for DOE’s decision on a production loan In-cab oﬃce, 5 m3 & 1 ton cargo, quiet, comfortable 1.5 L-equivalent/100 km (LA90, 82 kmi/d urban route, vs. US norm 17–19 L/100 km); at 130 km/day, ~3.1–3.4 L-equiv./100 km Plug-in hybrid (65-km all-electric range, 645-km total range) Needs no subsidy: “platform fitness” saved a ton of weight and half the batteries, making them aﬀordable NAFTA and EU market each 1M/y; Chinese market probably huge Many platform variants—van, open truck, minibus, big taxi,.... This RMI spinoﬀ had the best team of any U.S. auto startup—had brought 42 advanced-technology OEM vehicles to market Confirmed by racecar crash experience (thermoplastics are even tougher) Katherine Legge’s 290-km/h walk-away wall crash in a ChampCar (similar to Formula One), 29 Sep 2006 3.6×-more-efficient SUV can cruise at 89 km/h with the same power to the wheels that a normal SUV uses on a hot afternoon to run the air-conditioner 35-kW load-leveling batteries 137-liter 345-bar H2 storage (small enough to package): 3.4 kg for 330-mi range 35-kW fuel cell (small enough to afford early: ~32x less cumulative production needed to reach needed price) RMI’s 2008 Transformational Truck study sought proven boundaries of efficiency/productivity, and found 2.3–2.7× potential improvement (consistent with National Academy study 2010) 36.2 L/100 km 6.5 mpg 130 ston-mile/gal 1.0x Reduce energy consumption of the vehicle 1. 2. 3. 4. Cargo: Volume 5%, Weight 7% Aerodynamic Drag: 50% Rolling Resistance: 30% Engine Thermal Efficiency: 6 percentage points 18.8 L/100 km 12.5 mpg 275 ston-mile/gal 2.1x Maximum delivered cargo per vehicle and trip • • • Permit “turnpike doubles” on highways (63% of U.S. ton-miles) Increase weight from 36.3 T on 5 axles to 54.4 T on 9 axles (17% less weight per axle) Better safety than today’s doubles: Canadian “C-dollies” + Active Safety 27.0 L/100 km 8.7 mpg 335 ston-mile/gal + further-improved auxiliaries/accessories, refrigeration, hybridization & regenerative braking, idle elimination, speed optimization, digital engines 2.6x ≥3x An example of powertrain breakthroughs beyond hybrids (by Volvo, Eaton, and others): Sturman engine ~55–60+% eﬃciency >50% higher torque Electronic valves Precise fuel and air injection Unusual event sequences and combustion cycles >30% smaller size >10% lower cost Extremely low emissions Emerging efficient airplanes offer up to 80% lower fuel burn than today’s aircraft (2010 U.S. fleet average) 2010-2050 EIA Fuel Savings* ! 47% ! Stock Turnover Opportunity ! 7% ! ! Clockwise from top: Boeing’s SUGAR Volt electric-battery gas-turbine hybrid propulsion system with a strut-braced wing (–70% fuel); MIT H-Series Blended Wing Body concept with podded, actively controlled boundary-layer-inlet propulsion (–59%); Honda light jet with top-mounted engines; NASA truss-braced wing concept with buried single rear propulsor (–60– 80%); winged seed of the tropical Asian climbing gourd Alsomitra macrocarpa, which glides for hundreds of meters. Another ~2× can be saved with unducted-fan or fuel-cell LH2 cryoplanes, well validated in several countries, and ~5–12% with morphing flight surfaces already flight-tested. 23 Industry agrees today’s jet fleet can get ~2–3× more eﬃcient Boeing 787 interior NASA image of Blended-Wing-Body • Keys: advanced composites, new engines, aerodynamics, advanced actuators (replacing hydraulics), integrative design • Could save 45% of EIA 2025 fuel @ av. 46¢/gal Jet-A without Blended-Wing-Body (BWB); ~65% with BWB at comparable or lower cost • But in 2008, NASA’s Chief Scientist reported new aerodynamic & other innovations that he thinks can do 4× with tube-and-wing! • Then (in either configuration) another ≤2× profitable potential from LH2-fuel-cell-electric-prop cryoplanes...i.e., ~4–6× in all A PORTFOLIO APPROACH TO THE U.S. AVIATION SECTOR REDUCES THE NEED FOR AIRPLANE FUEL BY 54% BEYOND EIA’S 2050 SAVINGS OF 0.6 MBBL/D, LEAVING ONLY 0.9 MBBL/D IN 2050 Aviation fuel savings potential 3 2.37 Mbbl/d 2.25 EIA Savings United States jet fuel consumption (Mbbl/d) 1.79 Mbbl/d 1.5 1.3 Mbbl/ d 47% 0.9 Mbbl/d 7% 0.75 Stock turnover opportunity 0 2010 dema nd 2050 dema nd 2050 d eman d Desig n imp rovem ents Oper ation a l imp RF 20 50 de rovem ents Sources: RMI Analysis, Title: RF Aviation Model, File: RF_Aviation_model.xls, tab: MIT/NASA N+3 Final Review 2010, Bushnell 2010, Kawai et al 2006, Nickol et al 2007, Dings, Peeters, et al 2000 Operational Improvements include trip reductions, load factor improvement, and improvements to flight operations, flight planning, and APU usage. See RF_Aviation_Model.xls for Sources and Assumptions. Stock turnover opportunity represents the uncaptured savings in 2050 due to remaining legacy stock. See stock turnover slide and RF_Aviation_Model.xls for sources and assumptions *EIA Light Blue bar represents savings as a result of EIA SMPG improvement. RMI savings relative to the 2010 U.S. fleet would be 70%. mand After kerosene (>2025), cryoplanes (liquid H2 fuel) with no carbon can work (not assumed in RMI’s efficiency analysis) ◊ LH2 is 4× bulkier but 2.8× lighter than Jet A—and clearly safer* ◊ Designed & tested: Airbus, Boeing, Tupolev (TU-154 ’88), USAF ◊ Typical (767-class) Boeing study w/mass decompounding ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ Bad: empty weight (OEW) +8%, drag +11% (because bulkier) Good: takeoff weight (MTOW) –24%, Initial Cruise Altitude Capability +13%, better climb characteristics, less engine maintenance burden Net: ~4–5% better energy efficiency tank-to-flight based on airframe performance alone, or ~10–15% with H2optimized engines Liquefaction 300→20K @ modern 4–5 kWh/kg (12–15% of LHV) roughly cancels airplane’s efficiency gain; wellto-tank eff. is comparable to oil’s ◊ –NOx, 0 smoke/particulates/CO/HC/onboard CO2; H2O vapor?† ◊ Fuel cells are emerging for APUs—but maybe for propulsion too ¡ P.M. Peeters (following NASA’s Chris Snyder) thinks lightweight fuel cells & superconducting-motor unducted fans could double efficiency vs. LH2 turbofan planes: his 415-seat conceptual design (7000 km, 0.75 LF) uses 55% less fuel than 747-400; his 145-seater (1000 km, 0.70 LF) uses 68% less fuel than 737-400 (and at Mach 0.65, block time increases only 10%; might be faster if hubless, point-to-point, GPS-free-flight, ultralight, lower aero drag) ¡ Thus ~20% long-haul and ~50% short-haul savings beyond RMI’s analysis *NASA-Glenn CR-165525 & CR-165526 †Gauss et al. 2003, J Geophys Res 108(D10):4304, say climate impact is ~15x smaller than avoided CO2 (kerosene vs climate-safe hydrogen in a huge subsonic fleet), but do discourage stratospheric and polar flight ~2006 gains in combat effectiveness and energy efficiency ! (scaled-down wind-tunnel model) BWB quiet aircraft: range & SensorCraft (C4ISR): 50-h payload × ~2, sorties ÷ 5– loiter, sorties ÷ 18, fuel ÷ >30, cost ÷ 2 10, fuel ÷ 5–9 (Σ 2–4) Badenoch platform: more lethal; MRAP-like protection, less TBI; blast chimney; lighter/cheaper/less fuel than an uparmored HMMWV; handles like a fine pickup truck; fits in V-22/C-130 Advanced Fibonacci-mathematics biomimetic propulsors can save much noise and fuel VAATE engines: loiter × 2, fuel – 25–40%, far less maintenance, often lower capital cost Hotel-load retrofits could save ~40–50% of onboard electricity (thus saving ~1/6 of the Navy’s non-aviation fuel) Optimum Speed Tilt Rotor (OSTR): range × 5–6, speed × 3, quiet, fuel ÷ 5–6 FOB uses 95% of genset fuel (@ ~10% efficiency) to cool desert; could be ~0 (“Manx FOB”) Rugged, 2.5W PC, ~ $200, solar + backup crank Modern actua-tors: performance × 10, fault toler-ance × 4, size & mass ÷ 3–10 ! >20,000’; can quietly deliver 20 t (ultimately hundreds of t) to austere sites Re-engine M1 with modern diesel, range × ≥2, fuel ÷ 3–4 25% lighter, 30% cheaper advanced-composite structures; aircraft can have ~95% fewer parts, weigh ≥1/3 less, cost less 240-Gflops 2004 supercomputer, ultrareliable with no cooling at 31˚C, lifecycle cost ÷ 3– 4, energy ÷ 7–8 Ultramodern aeronautical technology embodied in a gliding bird Courtesy of Dr. Paul MacCready (1925–2007) Founder and Chairman, AeroVironment, Inc. >100x energy leverage in the EDS data center Then cut utility losses by ~50% …then cut support overhead by 90% …then cut IT equipment’s internal losses by 75% First debloat software and ensure that every computation cycle is needed reinventingfire.com | www.rmi.org, [email protected] | Twitter @AmoryLovins www.ted.com/talks/amory_lovins_a_50_year_plan_for_energy.html www.rmi.org/Knowledge-Center/Library/2012-01_FarewellToFossilFuels