1
Barriers and opportunities: Approaches to sensitive LCS sectors
~An automotive industry’s view~
14 February 2008
Barriers and opportunities: Approaches to sensitive LCS sectors ~ An - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Barriers and opportunities: Approaches to sensitive LCS sectors ~ An automotive industrys view~ 14 February 2008 Masayuki Sasanouchi Toyota Motor Corporation 1 World Energy-related CO2 Emissions by Sector in the Reference Scenario (26
1
14 February 2008
2
2 %
9 % 1 2 % 1 7 %
( I n d u s t r i a l p r
e s s )
P u b l i c S e r v i c e
( 1 . 6 b i l l i
) ( 4 . 7 b i l l i
) ( 5 . 3 b i l l i
) ( 3 . 3 b i l l i
) ( 2 . 2 b i l l i
)
( C a l c u l a t e d b y I E A d a t a )
O t h e r s 7 %
3
4
4
Population(Billion) Owned Vehicles(Billion) 8.9 B People 2 10 5 1
people 0.8 B Vehicles ( Ownership rate = 13 %) 1.3 B Vehicles (Assuming 15% Ownership) 1.1 B Vehicles (13% Ownership) 2003 2050
5
P a s s e n g e r T r a v e l a n d G D P b y R e g i
: 1 9 5
9 9 7 5 1 1 5 2 2 5 3 5 1 1 5 2 2 5 G D P p e r c a p i t a , U S $ ( 1 9 8 5 ) P a s s e n g e r
m p e r C a p i t a
N
t h A m e r i c a P a c i f i c O E C D ( J a p a n , A u s t r a l i a ) W e s t e r n E u r
e I n d i a
C h i n a
$ 1 = ¥ 250 (1985 Year) Source: WBCSD Mobility 2001
6
7
0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Mass
Specific fuel efficiency Technology innovation
1990 2000 2000 2000 Japan EU US US Passenger cars Source : IEA “Review of International Policies fro Vehicle Fuel Efficiency”
8
e.g. Direct-injection engine, Reduction of friction loss, etc.
e.g. Multiple AT (5AT, 6AT)
Fuel-Economy (km/l) Weight (kg) Source: Japan MLIT Base year Target year Front- runner
Target
Prospective technology improvement Fuel-Economy (km/l) Weight (kg) Source: Japan MLIT Base year Target year Front- runner
Target
Prospective technology improvement
9
2 1 7 2 6 2 2 6 8
2 1 5 2 2 5 2 3 5 2 4 5 2 5 5 2 6 5 2 7 5
9 0 9 1 9 2 9 3 9 4 9 5 9 6 9 7 9 8 9 9 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4
M M t
O
2 / y e a r
BAU
Introduction of the Front Runner Standard
1 7 2 6 2 2 6 8
2 1 5 2 2 5 2 3 5 2 4 5 2 5 5 2 6 5 2 7 5
9 0 9 1 9 2 9 3 9 4 9 5 9 6 9 7 9 8 9 9 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4
M M t
O
2 / y e a r
Year BAU
USA USA Japan Japan France France
0% 0% 20% 20% 40% 40% 60% 60% 80% 80% 100% 100%
Thermal Thermal Hydraulic Hydraulic Nuclear Nuclear
Electricity mix by country Electricity mix by country Well to Wheel CO2 reduction Well to Wheel CO2 reduction
1 . 1 . . 5 . 5 U S A U S A
P r i u s P r i u s P l u g i n H y b r i d C a r P l u g i n H y b r i d C a r
Well to Wheel CO
2
reduction
( P r i u s =1
)
Well to Wheel CO
2
reduction
( P r i u s =1
)
C O
2
C O
2
G a s
i n e G a s
i n e
E 8 5 E 8 5
J a p a n J a p a n
F r a n c e F r a n c e
W h e n d r i v i n g f
2 5 k m ( 1 3 k m b y e l e c t r i c i t y )
( T
ae s t i m a t e s )
10
Social advantages: Well to Wheel CO2 reduction is possible. Combining with biofuel will further increase the effect. Social advantages: Well to Wheel CO2 reduction is possible. Combining with biofuel will further increase the effect.
11