|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. I
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
Page 189 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 189
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
I
Results of Other Major Studies
Tables I.1 through I.8, which indicate the costs and fuel consumption benefits from other major studies, are included here to facilitate the comparison to other sources of technology cost and effectiveness. However, the reader is encouraged to look at the original source material to gain a better understanding of the different assumptions made in each study. For example, some sources consider incremental benefits, while others do not. Certain items, such as improved accessories, may include different technologies, which makes an apples-to-apples comparison difficult. Retail price equivalent factors also vary from source to source, reinforcing the need to review the original materials as well as the tables.
REFERENCES
DOT/NHTSA (U.S. Department of Transportation/National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). 2009. Average Fuel Economy Standards, Passenger Cars and Light Trucks, Model Year 2001: Final Rule. 49 CFR Parts 523, 531, 533, 534, 536, and 537, Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0062, RIN 2127-AK29, March 23. Washington D.C.
EEA (Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc.). 2007. Technologies to Improve Light-Duty Vehicle Fuel Economy. Draft report to the National Research Council Committee on Fuel Economy of Light-Duty Vehicles. EEA, Arlington, Va. September.
EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2008. EPA Staff Technical Report: Cost and Effectiveness Estimates of Technologies Used to Reduce Light-Duty Vehicle Carbon Dioxide Emissions. EPA420R-08-008. EPA, Washington, D.C.
Martec Group, Inc. 2008. Variable Costs of Fuel Economy Technologies. Prepared for Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. June 1; amended September 26 and December 10.
NESCCAF (Northeast States Center for a Clean Air Future). 2004. Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Light-Duty Motor Vehicles. March.
NRC (National Research Council). 2002. Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
Ricardo, Inc. 2008. A Study of Potential Effectiveness of Carbon Dioxide Reducing Vehicle Technologies. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA420-R-08-004, Contract No. EP-C-06-003, Work Assignment No. 1-14, Ricardo, Inc., Ann Arbor, Mich.
Sierra Research. 2008. Basic Analysis of the Cost and Long-Term Impact of the Energy Independence and Security Act Fuel Economy Standards. Sierra Research, Sacramento, Calif. April 24.
OCR for page 190
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
TABLE I.1 Technology Effectiveness, Incremental (Percent) Fuel Consumption Benefit from DOT/NHTSA (2009)
OCR for page 191
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 192
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 193
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
TABLE I.2 Technology Effectiveness, Incremental (Percent) Fuel Consumption Benefit from NRC (2002)
OCR for page 194
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
TABLE I.3 Technology Effectiveness, Incremental (Percent) Fuel Consumption Benefit from EPA (2008)
OCR for page 195
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
TABLE I.4 Technology Effectiveness, Incremental (percent) Fuel Consumption Benefit from Ricardo, Inc. (2008), NESCCAF (2004), Sierra Research (2008), and EEA (2007)
continued
OCR for page 196
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 197
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 198
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 199
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
TABLE I.5 Incremental Costs ($) from DOT/NHTSA (2009)
OCR for page 200
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 201
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 202
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
TABLE I.6 Incremental Costs ($) from NRC (2002)
OCR for page 203
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
TABLE I.7 Incremental Costs ($) from EPA (2008)
OCR for page 204
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
TABLE I.8 Technology Effectiveness, Incremental (Percent) Fuel Consumption Benefit from EEA (2007), Sierra Research (2008), Martec (2008), and NESCCAF (2004)
OCR for page 205
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 206
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles
OCR for page 207
Assessment of Fuel Economy Technologies for Light-Duty Vehicles