EPA-460/3-74-020-a
OCTOBER 1974
IMPACT OF FUTURE USE
OF ELECTRIC CARS
IN THE LOS ANGELES REGION:
VOLUME I - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AND TECHNICAL REPORT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Alternative Automotive Power Systems Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
-------
EPA-460/3-74-020-a
IMPACT OF FUTURE USE
OF ELECTRIC CARS
IN THE LOS ANGELES REGION:
VOLUME I - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AND TECHNICAL REPORT
by
W . F . Hamilton
General Research Corporation
P.O. Box 3587
Santa Barbara, California 93105
Contract No. 68-01-2103
EPA Project Officer: C. E. Pax
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control Programs
Alternative Automotive Power Systems Development Division
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105
October 1974
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are available
free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and grantees,
and nonprofit organizations as supplies permit from the Air Pollution
Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; or, for a fee, from the National Technical
Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
This report was furnished to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
by General Research Corporation in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-01-2103
and has been reviewed and approved for publication by the Environmental
Protection Agency. Aproval does not signify that the contents necessarily
reflect the views and policies of the agency. The material presented in
this report may be based on an extrapolation of the "State-of-the-art."
Each assumption must be carefully analyzed by the reader to assure that
it is acceptable for his purpose. Results and conclusions should be
viewed correspondingly. Mention of trade names or commercial products
does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Publication No. EPA-460/3-74-020-a
-------
ABSTRACT
Impacts of the use of electric cars in the Los Angeles region in
1980-2000 were projected for four-passenger subcompact electric cars using
lead-acid and advanced batteries, with urban driving ranges of about 55
and 140 miles, respectively. Data from Los Angeles travel surveys shows
that such cars could replace 17 to 74 percent of future Los Angeles autos
with little sacrifice of urban driving. Adequate raw materials and night-
time recharging power should be available for such use in the Los Angeles
region. Air quality improvements due to the electric cars would be minor
because conventional automobile emissions are being drastically reduced.
The electric cars would save little energy overall, as compared to conven-
tional subcompacts, but would save a considerable amount of petroleum if
they were recharged from the nuclear power plants that are planned.
The electric subcompacts would be 20-60% more expensive overall than con-
ventional subcompacts until battery development significantly reduces
battery depreciation costs.
-------
CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
ABSTRACT i
INTRODUCTION ix
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2 CHARACTERIZATION OF FUTURE ELECTRIC CARS 15
2.1 Approach 15
2.2 Performance Requirements 15
2.3 Battery Characteristics 17
2.4 Parametric Range Analysis 20
2.5 Car Characteristics 22
3 BASELINE POPULATION AND TRANSPORTATION PROJECTIONS 30
3.1 Basis of the Projections 30
3.2 Population Baseline 32
3.3 Transportation Baseline 33
4 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS 38
4.1 Background and Assumptions 38
4.2 Methods and Objectives 41
4.3 Pollutant Emissions 43
4.4 Air Quality 52
5 ENERGY IMPACTS 57
5.1 Background 57
5.2 Electric Energy Baseline 57
5.3 Energy Impacts 64
6 RESOURCE IMPACTS 68
iii
-------
CONTENTS (Cont.)
SECTION
PAGE
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
7.1
7.2
7.3
Impact on Transportation Consumers
Impacts on Transportation Suppliers
Overall Economic Impact
73
73
76
81
USAGE ANALYSIS 84
8.1 Approach 84
8.2 Applicability of Limited-Range Electric Cars- 85
8.3 Alternative Usage Levels 90
EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE USAGE LEVELS 96
iv
-------
ILLUSTRATIONS
NO. PAGE
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
4.1
Assumed Battery Capabilities
Distribution of Daily Driver Travel in the Los Angeles
Area
1990 Electric Power Production and Consumption in the
South Coast Air Basin
Auto Fuel Consumption
Projected Emissions of Air Pollutants Without Electric Car
Use, South Coast Air Basin
Assumed Battery Capabilities
SAE Metropolitan Area Driving Cycle
Urban Driving Range of Future Four-Passenger Electric Cars
Four-Passenger Electric Car Concept
California's South Coast Air Basin
Population of the South Coast Air Basin
Automobiles per Person
Average Annual Passenger Car Mileage
Automobile Fuel Economy
Schematic GRC Photochemical Diffusion Model for Air Qua-
1
4
6
7
8
19
21
22
27
31
32
34
34
36
lity Simulation 42
4.2 "Los Angeles and Environs", the Heavily Populated Subarea
of the South Coast Air Basin Selected for Air Quality
Analyses 43
4.3 Projected Baseline Diurnal Power Demand on Oil-Fired
Power Plants in Los Angeles and Environs for Peak Demand
Month 47
v
-------
ILLUSTRATIONS (Cont.)
NO. PAGE
4.4 Projected Nitric Oxide Emissions 49
4.5 Projected Reactive Hydrocarbon Emissions 49
4.6 Projected Carbon Monoxide Emissions 50
4.7 Projected Sulfur Dioxide Emissions 50
4.8 Projected Particulate Emissions 51
4.9 Projected Nitric Oxide Emissions (Delay of Emission Controls) 51
4.10 Projected Diurnal Power Demand on Oil-Fired Power Plants
in Los Angeles and Environs for Peak Demand Month 52
4.11 Typical Autumn Afternoon Airflow and Critical Sites in
the South Coast Air Basin 53
5.1 Projected Baseline Energy Consumption, South Coast Air
Basin . 58
!
5.2 Projected Electrical Generating Capacity, South Coast Air
Basin 58
5.3 Variation in Hourly Electric Power Demand, 1973 60
5.4 Profile of Hourly Electric Power Demands with Projected
Supply, South Coast Air Basin 61
5.5 Projected Electric Car Recharge Energy, South Coast Air
Basin 63
5.6 Comparative Auto Energy Consumption 65
5.7 Petroleum Savings as a Function of Electric Car Usage,
South Coast Air Basin 65
5.8 Comparison of Alternative Uses of Coal for Automotive
Transportation 67
8.1 Adjusted Distributions of Daily Travel, Los Angeles
Region, 1967 87
8.2 Probability of Daily Driving Less than a Given Distance
for Secondary Drivers with Cars 89
8.3 Alternative Electric Car Population Projections, South
Coast Air Basin 92
vi
-------
TABLES
NO.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.1
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
6.1
Characteristics of Electric Cars
Characteristics of Electric Car Batteries
Applicability of Electric Cars in the South Coast Air Basin
Projected Worst-Case Air Pollution, South Coast Air Basin
Life-Cycle Car Costs
Summary Projection of Battery Characteristics
Summary Projection of Electric Car Characteristics
Comparative Energy Usage of Lead-Acid Battery Cars
Battery Material Weights
Baseline Auto Travel Projections, South Coast Air Basin
Exhaust Emission Standards for Light-Duty Vehicles
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Baseline Pollutant Emissions for Los Angeles And Environs
1980 Baseline Vehicular Emissions for Los Angeles and
Environs With and Without Delays in Implementing Auto
Emission Controls
Percentage Contribution of Heavy-Duty Vehicles to Vehi-
cular and Total Baseline Emissions for Los Angeles and
Environs
August-October Smog Statistics for 1969 and 1970
Baseline Pollutant Concentrations, South Coast Air Basin
Change in Pollutant Concentrations Due to Electric Car
Use, South Coast Air Basin
Battery Material Production and Consumption
PAGE
2
3
5
9
10
18
24
25
28
35
39
40
45
46
46
53
55
56
69
vii
-------
TABLES (Cont.)
NO. PAGE
6.2 Material Reserves and Requirements 72
7.1 Projected Life-Cycle Car Costs 74
7.2 Extra Life-Cycle Costs of Electric Cars 77
7.3 Relative Importance of Auto-Related Activity, South Coast
Air Basin 78
7.4 Baseline Projections of Total and Auto-Related Employment,
South Coast Air Basin 79
7.5 Current Percent Dependence of Auto Support Industries
on the Internal Combustion Engine System 79
7.6 Direct Effects on Local Impacted Industry Due to 100%
Electric Car Use in the South Coast Air Basin 81
7.7 Structure of Employment Changes in the South Coast Air
Basin Due to 100% Electric Car Use, 1990 82
8.1 Candidates for Electric Car Replacement, South Coast
Air Basin 90
8.2 Extra Costs of Electric Cars 94
8.3 Basic Schedules for Electric Car Introduction 95
9.1 Impacts of Alternative Levels of Use of Electric Cars in
the Los Angeles Region 97
viii
-------
INTRODUCTION
This report is published in three volumes:
Volume 1, Executive Summary and Technical Report
Volume 2, Task Reports on Electric Car Characteristics
1 and Baseline Projections
Volume 3, Task Reports on Impact and Usage Analyses
Volume 1 is a comprehensive account of the effects that electric
cars would have on the air quality, energy use, and economy of the Los
Angeles region in 1980-2000. Volumes 2 and 3 contain ten individual
reports documenting the analyses on which Volume 1 is based. These
reports detail the methods, data, assumptions, calculations, and results
of the study tasks, and were originally published at the conclusion of
each task.
Task reports in Volume 2 project future characteristics of electric
cars and of the Los Angeles region in which they would be used, as follows:
1. D. Friedman and J. Andon (Minicars, Inc.) and W. F. Hamilton,
Characterization of Battery-Electric Cars for 1980-2000
Postulates electric vehicle performance requirements, projects
representative future battery characteristics, calculates urban
driving range versus total car weight, and estimates energy
and material requirements for selected driving ranges.
2. G. M. Houser, Population Projections for the Los Angeles Region,
1980-2000
Projects population of California's South Coast Air Basin, which
includes greater Los Angeles, by county and age group.
ix
-------
3. W. F. Hamilton and G. M. Houser, Transportation Projections
for the Los Angeles Region. 1980-2000
Projects Los Angeles freeway and transit networks, auto
population, auto usage, auto size and age distributions, and
average fuel consumption.
4. J. Eisenhut, Economic Projections for the Los Angeles Region, .
1980-2000
Projects employment and income for the South Coast Air Basin,
and the payroll and employment of businesses involved in
production, distribution, and maintenance of automobiles and
parts.
5. A. R. Sjovoid, Electric Energy Projections for the Los Angeles
Region, 1980-2000
Summarizes the US energy situation as forecast in recent
studies, and in this context projects electric energy produc-
tion and consumption in the South Coast Air Basin, noting
energy available for electric car recharging and its basic
sources.
Task reports in Volume 3 project impacts due to various levels of
electric car use and investigate possible future levels of use, as follows:
6. J. R. Martinez and R. A. Nordsieck, An Approach to the Analysis
of the Air Quality Impact of Electric Vehicles
Selects the "DIFKIN" computer model and linear rollback as means
for analyzing future air quality in the South Coast Air Basin,
designates important cases for investigation, and details
required methodology.
7. J. R. Martinez and R. A. Nordsieck, Air Quality Impacts of
Electric Cars in Los Angeles
Forecasts stationary and vehicular pollutant emissions in
spatial and temporal detail, with and without electric cars,
and calculates consequent air quality levels relative to
Federal standards.
8. A. R. Sjovoid, Parametric Energy, Resource, and Noise Impacts
of Electric Cars in Los Angeles
As a function of percentage electric car use, forecasts total
energy consumption and petroleum consumption in the South Coast
Air Basin through the year 2000; compares annual consumption
-------
and rolling inventory of key electric car materials with past
and projected US production, consumption, and reserves;
analyzes possible reductions of community noise from electric
car use.
9. J. C. Elsenhut, J. A. Cattani, and F. J. Markovich, Parametric
Economic Impacts of Electric Cars in Los Angeles
Projects life cycle costs of alternative electric cars in
comparison with conventional cars; analyzes and projects changes
in employment and payroll in industry segments impacted by
electric cars, including service stations, battery manufactur-
ing, auto parts and repairs, and auto sales; considers overall
regional and national economic impacts of electric cars.
10. W. F. Hamilton, Usage of Electric Cars in the Los 'Angeles
Region. 1980-2000
Analyzes 1967 data to determine distributions of daily driving
range in Los Angeles and the applicability of limited-range
electric cars; reviews market trends and estimates the potential
free-market sales of electric cars in the South Coast Air
Basin; hypothesizes particular levels of electric car use for
impact evaluations; and considers relative economic incentives
likely to be required to obtain these usages.
xi
-------
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The scope of this study was limited to battery-electric cars in the
years 1980-2000. The study's focus was on California's South Coast Air
Basin, an area of some 10,000 square miles (25,000 square kilometers)
bounded by mountains and ocean; this area includes greater Los Angeles
and had 1970 populations of 10 million people and over 5 million cars.
The study's emphasis was on environmental, energy, and socioeconomic im-
pacts of electric car use rather than on vehicle technology and design.
As a starting point for impact calculation, future electric cars
were briefly characterized. Four representative battery technologies
were considered, with the basic capabilities shown in Fig. 1.1. Lead-
acid battery characteristics were projected from those of high-performance
electric vehicle batteries which have already been tested in electric
cars. Characteristics of advanced batteries were taken from achievements
and goals of development programs at Gould, Inc., Energy Development Asso-
ciates, Inc., and Argonne National Laboratory.
1000
SPECIFIC ENERGY. WATLHOURS PER KILOGRAM
10 100
10 100
SPECIFIC ENERGY.WATT HOURS PER POUND
1000
Figure 1.1. Assumed Battery Capabilities
-------
A computer program was developed to model battery discharge accord-
ing to Fig. 1.1 while meeting power requirements of electric cars for
urban driving. The SAE Metropolitan Area Driving Cycle for electric cars
was used in this program; it calls for a stop each mile (1.6 km), an
average speed of 24 mph (39 km/hr), and an energy requirement per mile
very near that of the US Federal driving cycle used in official measure-
ment of auto exhaust emissions and fuel economy.
After a parametric analysis, the specific car ranges of Table 1.1
were selected for the impact analysis. The electric cars were efficient
four-passenger subcompacts with performance slightly below that of cur-
rent low-performance conventional subcompacts; they were capable of
accelerating from 0 to 40 mph (65 km/hr) in 10 seconds, and of cruising
on a freeway at 60 mph (100 km/hr). At a constant 30 mph on a level
road, car ranges would be over twice those shown for urban driving; in
hilly terrain or near the end of battery life, however, they could be
significantly less than in Table 1.1.
TABLE 1.1
CHARACTERISTICS OF ELECTRIC CARS
(For Urban Use)
Availability, Year 1978 1980 1985 1990
Battery Type lead-acid nickel-zinc zinc-chlorine lithium-sulfur
Test Weight, Ib (with 450 Ib payload) 3,975 3,530 2,950 2,655
kg 1,803 1,602 1,338 1,204
Urban Driving Range, ml 54 144 145 139
km 87 232 233 224
Recharge Energy Requirement, kW-hr/mi 0.79 0.51 0.41 0.45
kW-hr/km 0.49 0.32 0.25 0.28
Cost (less battery), 1973 dollars 2,977 2,945 2,891 2,795
-------
Characteristics of batteries used in the electric cars are shown in
Table 1.2. The lifetimes shown assume urban driving of about 30 mi/day
(48 km/day). For the lead-acid battery, the projected range of lifetimes
is based on current experience; the longer life projection is optimistic.
For the nickel-zinc and zinc-chlorine batteries, the indicated lifetimes
assume that developers' goals for lifetimes of 400 and 500 deep discharges,
respectively, will be achieved, and that life with partial discharges will
be increased in inverse proportion to discharge depth. For the lithium-
sulfur battery, which must be maintained at a very high temperature, the
indicated lifetime range is assumed to be independent of use. Cost and
life characteristics for the zinc-chlorine and lithium-sulfur batteries
are relatively uncertain, and the figures in Table 1.2 are quite optimistic.
The electric car ranges of Table 1.1 were selected after a new analy-
sis of Los Angeles travel data which had been collected in an extensive
1967 survey. Figure 1.2 shows the resultant distribution of driving dis-
tances on the survey day for drivers with cars exclusively available to
them. Most present Los Angeles drivers and virtually all future Los
Angeles drivers fall in this category. The distribution of Fig. 1.2 was
TABLE 1.2
CHARACTERISTICS OF ELECTRIC CAR BATTERIES
(For Urban Car Use)
Battery Type lead-acid nickel-zinc zinc-chlorine lithium-sulfur
Weight, Ib
kg
Energy Density, W-hr/lb
W-hr/kg
Energy Efficiency, Percent
Life, Years
Cost, 1973 Dollars
1,500
681
13
27.8
46
1.3-3.4
1,200
1,090
495
44
96
66
5.8
2,930
570
259
70
157
70
7.3
600
300
136
126
276
62
3-5
600
-------
1/1
a:
a:
a
LU
a:
UJ
a.
99
98
95
90
80
60
30
DISTANCE, mi
40 50 60 70 80. 100 125150
_L
I
50 60 70 80 100 150 200 300
DISTANCE, km
Figure 1.2. Distribution of Daily Driver Travel in the Los Angeles Area
derived from about 130,000 separate trips made by 30,000 drivers at 22,000
representative households. It shows that cars of Table 1.2 with 145-mile
(230-km) range would be inadequate on only 2% of urban driving days. The
car with 54-mile (87-km) range, however, would be inadequate on about 1
driving day out of 6, a frequency considered unacceptable. As a secondary
car in a two-car household, however, where longer trips were accomplished
by the primary car, even this car could be adequate on over 97% of driving
days. Average daily car travel in Los Angeles is no greater than the
national average, which has been growing quite slowly since the 1930s,
and little future change is expected. The average in Fig. 1.2, 28.5 mi
(45 km), is projected to increase only 6% by the year 2000.
Simple overnight recharging, rather than a system of battery exchange
and recharge stations, was assumed. Overnight recharging would be easiest
arranged at single-family houses with off-street parking. There will be
about one million such households in Los Angeles in 1980 having at least
-------
one secondary car. Thus, as shown In Table 1.3, the shorter-range elec-
tric car would be applicable to the functions of one million cars in 1980,
or 17% of all cars in the Air Basin; but these secondary cars would be
driven less than the average car and would account for a smaller propor-
tion of area travel. The longer-range electric cars could generally re-
place automobiles where overnight recharge facilities will be available.
In 1990, 3.1 million automobiles in the Air Basin are expected to be parked
off-street at single-family houses, where recharging would be most easily
arranged. In 2000, recharge facilities might be available at all of the
5.6 million off-street parking places projected at Los Angeles residences.
These are the bases for the corresponding applicability projections in
Table 1.3.
Provision of certain battery materials for the numbers of cars indi-
cated in Table 1.3 could perturb US metals markets. The nickel required
for extensive regional use of nickel-zinc battery cars would require sig-
nificant increases in US nickel imports. The lithium for wide use of
lithium-sulfur batteries would require a major expansion in US production
facilities, but this is not a serious problem: US reserves are adequate,
and current production is modest.
TABLE 1.3
APPLICABILITY OF ELECTRIC CARS IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
Cars, millions
Percent of all area cars
Daily travel, millions of mi
millions of km
1980
1990
2000
1.0
17
18
29
3.1
46
90
145
5.6
74
169
272
Percent of all auto travel
11
46
74
-------
Sources of recharge energy for electric cars were investigated
through projection of future electric power production and consumption
in the Los Angeles area. The result, which is subject to major uncer-
tainties, is shown in Fig. 1.3. The peak demand is anticipated on hot
August afternoons, but even on the peak day, demand is expected to fall
dramatically in the late evening hours in the absence of car battery
recharging. About 85 million kilowatt-hours, the shaded area in Fig.
1.3, would be available during the night of the peak 1990 day—more than
enough to recharge the 3.1 million electric cars of Table 1.3.
Future peak power production is expected to grow at about 4-1/2%
per year per capita in Los Angeles, and most of the new capacity is ex-
pected to be nuclear. Since the use of existing oil-fired plants in the
Air Basin will be more expensive and cause air pollution, Fig. 1.3 assumes
that oil-fired facilities will be used primarily for meeting peak loads,
PEAK AUGUST DAY
TYPICAL
MAY MONDAY
6A.M.
NOON
6P.M.
MIDNIGHT
Figure 1.3. 1990 Electric Power Production and Consumption in the South Coast
Air Basin
-------
and so would be shut down in the late evening unless electric car re-
charging were in progress. On the peak day, petroleum would thus be the
fuel for electric car travel. On low-demand days, however, such as the
May Monday of Fig. 1.3, coal, gas, and nuclear fuel could provide recharge
power. On an annual average basis, 46 percent usage of the efficient
advanced-battery cars could enable a reduction in automotive petroleum
usage of 28-35%, but only if nuclear power plants are built at the high
rates planned by electric utilities serving the Los Angeles area.
The petroleum fuel consumption of the electric cars of Table 3.1
and internal-combustion-engine (ICE) cars are shown in Fig. 1.4. The
thermal efficiency of electric power generation is assumed to be 36% and
the efficiency of electric power transmission to be 91%, in line with
utility projections for the Los Angeles region. All recharge energy is
assumed in this efficiency comparison to be provided by oil-fired facili-
ties. As the dashed line of Fig. 1.4 indicates, the fuel consumption of
12,000
cc 10,000
Oj._
LU ^
-j Ł 8000
UVIL
O ELECTRIC CAR
CAR
O
1970
I
^LITHIUM-
O °SULFUR
CHLORINE
I
1980 1990
YEAR
2000
Figure 1.4. Auto Fuel Consumption
-------
average ICE cars In Los Angeles Is expected to improve by 50% in this cen-
tury, in line with legislation now being considered by the Federal govern-
ment. The improvement would be achieved partly through improved techno-
logy and partly through a substantial reduction in average car weight from
its present level of 3,500 Ib (1,600 kg). Fuel consumptions of ICE cars
in Fig. 1.4 include a refinery energy penalty of 10%.
Despite the major improvement projected for the average ICE car,
Fig. 1.4 shows that the electric cars promise further reductions in total
energy consumption—as compared with the average ICE car. They offer lit-
tle or no energy saving, however, as compared with existing ICE subcompacts
of comparable size (and superior performance).
Electric cars can be nearly pollution-free. But as shown in Fig.
1.5, the 90% reductions of conventional auto exhaust emissions required by
existing legislation in this decade will dramatically reduce total vehicular
Q 1.0
> cc
< 1500
Q
CC
Ul
s 100°
0
h-
<4 500
^
O
CO
CO
^ n
LU
a.
CO
J>
< 1 0
QC '•"
a
o
—
(J 0.5
co"
z
O
co n
NITRIC OXIDE
_
TOTAL
.
\^^^
\VEHICULAR
^
I 1
REACTIVE
HYDROCARBONS
, TOTAL
VEHICULAR
LU
1970 1990 1970 1990
YEAR
Figure 1.5. Projected Emissions of Air Pollutants Without Electric Car Use,
South Coast Air Basin
-------
emissions of air pollutants, and make cars a minor rather than major con-
tributor to total projected emissions. Under these circumstances, air
pollution will no longer be a critical problem in Los Angeles, and even
extensive electric car use will have little further effect.
Table 1.4 shows worst-case air pollution projected for 1990 in re-
lation to Federal air quality standards and 1970 measurements in Los
Angeles. Concentrations of secondary pollutants (ozone and NO.) were
estimated by applying a photochemical-smog simulation to detailed fore-
casts of emissions. Concentrations of the other pollutants were assumed
to decrease in direct proportion to the emissions. The 1990 baseline
projection (no electric cars) in Table 1.4 shows major improvements in
air quality, after which even very high usage of electric cars will reduce
secondary pollutant concentrations relatively little, and will actually
raise sulfur dioxide (SO.) concentrations due to power plant emissions.
The projected SO. levels assume only the use of low-sulfur fuel in power
plants; if stack scrubbers were added, S0? levels with or without electric
TABLE 1.4
PROJECTED WORST-CASE AIR POLLUTION, SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
Measure ..„ ,»..„
Pollutant
Ozone
N02
CO
S°2
Particulates
Units
*
pphrc
pphm
**
ppm
pphm
Pg/m
Period
1 hr
1 hr
1 hr
1 yr
24 hr
Standard
8
35
3.0
260
Actual
62
43
5-4
2.6
357
Baseline
15
10
7
4.1
437
J.77U unange ipr ou/t
Electric Car Use
-10%
-14%
-26%
+14%
-21%
Parts per hundred million.
**
Parts per million.
'No hourly standard is established. The annual average concentration standard is
5 pphm; the 1970 actual annual average was 6.3 pphm.
-------
cars would be well within Federal air quality standards. The impacts of
electric cars shown in Table 1.4 would not be changed much by a two-year
delay in imposing final auto emission standards or by relaxation of the
nitrogen-oxides emission standard from 0.4 to 2 grams per mile.
The overall costs of electric car operation are projected in Table
1.5, together with costs of a conventional ICE subcompact automobile. The
life of the conventional car is 100,000 mi (161,000 km) and 10 years; its
initial cost is $2,270, its fuel economy is 30 mpg (0.078 liters per km),
and it utilizes air pollution control devices with a significant initial
and recurring cost. The electric cars are assumed to last for 12 years
and 120,000 mi (193,000 km). Their higher initial costs (see Table 1.1)
TABLE 1.5
LIFE-CYCLE CAR COSTS
1973 cents per mile
Depreciation
Vehicle
Battery
Upkeep
Fuel
Pollution Control
Financing
Taxes, Insurance
Parking, etc.
Total
Conventional
ICE
Subcompact
Electric Cars
Lead-
Acid
Nickel- Zinc- Lithium-
Zinc Chlorine Sulfur
2.3
0
2.4
1.9
0.9
1.6
4.3
13
2.5
3.5-9.2
1.5
1.5
0
2.5
4.5
16-22
2.5
5.1
1.2
1.0
0
3.7
4.5
18
2.4
0.8
1.2
0.8
0
2.2
4.5
12
2.3
1.2-2.0
1.2
0.9
0
2.2
4.5
12-13
10
-------
are more than offset by longer life, lower maintenance, and reduced fuel
costs. For the lead-acid and nickel-zinc battery cars, however, high
battery depreciation costs make overall costs 22 to 66% higher than those
of the conventional subcompact, or about equal to those of standard-size
ICE cars. The much smaller depreciation costs projected for the zinc-
chlorine and lithium-sulfur battery cars remain to be verified in practice.
The higher costs of the nearer-term electric cars would significantly
reduce consumer income available for non-transportation expenditures.
With 100% electric car use, 30,000-40,000 service station jobs would dis-
appear, along with some 10,000-20,000 jobs in automobile service, parts,
and sales businesses. The total job loss would be only partly compensated
by increased employment in battery manufacturing. Overall, however, only
about one percent of the regional labor force would be affected, over a
period of years.
In conclusion, it appears that future electric cars could replace
many Los Angeles automobiles with little sacrifice of urban mobility.
Electric power facilities already planned for the Los Angeles region would
be adequate for their nighttime recharge, and high levels of use in the
Los Angeles region would pose problems of materials availability only in
the case of nickel-zinc battery cars. Air quality improvements due to
electric car use would be relatively minor in importance. Total energy
saving would be modest, but potential reductions in regional automotive
petroleum consumption are substantial, and could be the most important
benefit of electric car use. Until battery depreciation costs are sig-
nificantly reduced, electric car life-cycle costs would be high compared
with ICE subcompacts.
11
-------
CONCLUSIONS
1. Electric car range and performance can be adequate for sub-
stantial urban use. Even limited-range lead-acid battery
cars could replace a million second cars in the Los Angeles
area in 1980 (17% of all area cars) with little sacrifice in
typical daily driving patterns. Electric cars utilizing ad-
vanced batteries such as nickel-zinc, zinc-chlorine, or
lithium-sulfur batteries could have sufficient daily range
for general urban use without serious travel restriction.
Electric cars could perform the functions of 45-75% of Los
Angeles cars in 1990-2000, depending on the fraction of off-
street parking places equipped with electric outlets for
overnight recharging.
2. Adequate electric power and material resources will be avail-
able for electric car use in Los Angeles. Available late-
night capacity of electric utilities serving the Los Angeles
region will be adequate for electric car recharge unless
planned facilities are not constructed. No likely usage of
lead-acid or zinc-chlorine battery cars in the Los Angeles
region will significantly perturb US demand for key materials;
demand for nickel and lithium, however, would be substantially
increased by extensive regional use of nickel-zinc and lithium-
sulfur battery cars.
3. Air quality benefits obtained by electric car use in the Los
Angeles region are projected to be minor. By the time any
significant level of electric car use could be obtained, the
projected improvement in combustion-powered car emissions
will have significantly reduced car emissions as a factor in
overall regional air pollution. The modest reductions in
regional oxidant, carbon monoxide, and particulate concentra-
tions due to electric car use will probably be accompanied
by moderate increases in sulfur dioxide concentrations re-
12
-------
suiting from increased electric power plant emissions within
the Los Angeles region due to electric car recharging.
Energy benefits of electric car use can be significant.
Advancing battery technology should keep electric cars
moderately more energy-efficient, where petroleum is the basic
fuel, than the average ICE car; but electric cars would be
little or no more efficient than ICE subcompacts which offered
equal accommodations and performance. An increasing number
of electric cars in Los Angeles could be recharged from coal
or nuclear power, according to current facilities planning
of utilities serving the region; thus by 1990 electric car
use of 40% could reduce regional automotive petroleum use by
26-33% if these plans materialize.
Regional economic impacts of substantial electric car use
would be moderate. Electric car use will entail shifts in
Los Angeles regional transportation employment from automo-
tive support, principally service stations, to battery manu-
facturing; but at most only about one percent of the regional
labor force would be directly affected and this would be
accomplished over a long time period. The life-cycle costs
of lead-acid and nickel-zinc battery cars will be near those
of standard-size ICE cars and significantly higher than those
of ICE subcompacts; to the extent that they replace subcom-
pacts, these electric cars will reduce consumer resources
available for non-transportation expenditures. The zinc-
chlorine and lithium-sulfur battery cars, however, may
actually have lower life-cycle costs than ICE subcompacts if
the ambitious cost and life goals of the respective battery
developers are achieved.
The free-market level of electric car usage appears most
desirable in the Los Angeles region. The principal externa-
lities to free-market auto transactions are air quality and
13
-------
energy; but air quality in Los Angeles will be little affected
by choices of electric rather than ICE cars, and petroleum
savings will only be large if nuclear power plants planned
for Los Angeles are built, an uncertain prospect at present.
Without assurance of nuclear electric power, there seems to
be insufficient justification for market intervention to en-
sure extensive regional use of electric cars.
Battery technology and specifically battery depreciation
costs are the principal technological determinants of electric
car desirability. The energy storage capability of even the
lead-acid battery is adequate for significant urban use in the
Los Angeles region, and the higher energy densities of advanced
batteries are ample for more general use. Higher energy den-
sities, however, will do little to make electric cars desir-
able and beneficial unless they are achieved with depreciation
costs considerably less than those of the lead-acid batteries.
Long life and low initial cost are thus vital objectives for
battery research.
National use of electric cars would differ in important respects
from regional use in Los Angeles. Materials markets and re-
serves would be seriously impacted by any of the battery types
considered here, since twenty times as many electric cars
would be involved. Petroleum savings could be larger, how-
ever, since electric utilities nationally are far less depen-
dent on petroleum than in the Los Angeles region. If coal
is used in the future to make synthetic gasoline, the amount
of coal required for this purpose would be up to twice as
much as would be required if the coal were burned directly
in an advanced cycle electric generating plant and the elec-
tricity used in advanced battery cars.
-------
2 CHARACTERIZATION OF FUTURE ELECTRIC CARS
2.1 APPROACH
The starting point for calculating impacts of electric cars is a
quantitative description of their functional characteristics, such as
performance, accommodations, range between recharges, energy consumption,
materials requirements, and so on. The objective of this car characteri-
zation is simply to develop such descriptions for alternative future
electric cars on a consistent basis. It is in no sense an exercise in
detailed, innovative, or definitive design.
The electric cars characterized here are intended to be as useful
as they can be made, but not to compete feature by feature with prospec-
tive ICE cars. Storage battery cars are not likely to achieve the range,
acceleration, speed, and low cost of ICE cars simultaneously; some compro-
mise is necessary. The best compromise will maximize the utility of the
electric car in serving actual travel needs, rather than compete with
ICE cars in particular characteristics such as acceleration or top speed.
Given the present battery technology, it is clear that range between
recharges is critical for electric car utility. Without adequate range
for a typical day's collection of urban trips, other virtues such as
high acceleration and top speed, excellent accommodations and amenities,
or low cost will be of limited value. Accordingly, after minimum perfor-
mance requirements are established, driving range is given high priority
and treated as a basic parameter in this electric car characterization.
Range is initially analyzed parametrically as a function of car and bat-
tery weight. Then particular ranges for different battery technologies
are selected to be compatible with reasonable battery costs and represen-
tative daily travel ranges.
2.2 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS
Both present and prospective electric car batteries are relatively
heavy for their energy storage capacity. With present technology, as
15
-------
much as 500 pounds of battery may be required to provide the mechanical
energy obtainable from a single gallon of gasoline, despite the low effi-
ciency of the gasoline engine relative to the electric motor. The battery
equivalent of even a 10-gallon tank of gasoline will be prohibitively
heavy until improved battery technology becomes available.
In consequence, energy efficiency and minimization of energy storage
requirements are far more important in electric cars than in ICE cars.
For these reasons, practical electric cars are usually conceived as sub-
compacts of relatively low performance.
Performance requirements were set in this characterization at mini-
mal levels for maintaining traffic flow. Average accelerations of 5 mph
per second from 0 to 30 mph, and 4 mph per second from 0 to 40 mph, were
selected to ensure adequate traffic volumes through signalized intersec-
tions. This is at the low end of the performance spectrum spanned by cur-
rent conventional subcompacts—a bit less than that of the Pinto or Vega,
but about equal to that of the common VW Beetle. A top speed of 65 mph
was chosen to enable freeway cruising at moderate speeds with an accelera-
tion reserve for on-ramps and minor grades.
Safety in accord with prospective Federal motor vehicle standards
is taken as a fundamental requirement for these electric cars. Accommo-
dations for four passengers are assumed, to ensure general utility for
family, social, and recreational trips as well as work and business trips.
A modest heater capability appropriate to the mild Los Angeles winters is
assumed to be provided from waste heat given up by the propulsion motor
and its controller. No air conditioning is assumed, because its rela-
tively high energy demand could significantly reduce range between re-
charges. Moreover, in 1973 only a minority (30%) of subcompacts sold in
the US were equipped with air conditioning.
16
-------
2.3 BATTERY CHARACTERISTICS
Because future battery technology is the critical issue in electric
car capability and cost, a brief survey of the field was made. From it
four representative future batteries for electric cars were characterized
approximately as in Table 2.1. There are, of course, other promising bat-
tery types; but their prospects are encompassed in the range spanned by
the entries in Table 2.1.
The prospective energy storage of these batteries is further des-
cribed in Fig. 2.1 for different power levels, which correspond to dif-
ferent rates of discharge. Particularly in the case of lead-acid batteries,
single figures for energy density such as those offered in Table 2.1 can
only be rough approximations because of their dependence on discharge
rate. In calculating ranges in this characterization, the curves of
Fig. 2.1 rather than the particular energy densities (and associated
efficiencies) of Table 2.1 were employed.
The lead-acid battery specific energy projected for 1978 is based
on developmental batteries which have actually been operated in electric
cars. All are of the golf-cart type, which offers relatively high energy
density at high discharge rates with a life of several hundred deep dis-
charge cycles. In these respects the electric car batteries represent a
compromise between long-life industrial traction batteries and high-energy
starting-lighting-ignition batteries for automotive use. While their
projected specific energy can probably be achieved, the simultaneous
achievement of the higher cycle life in Table 2.1 is quite uncertain;
accordingly, the indicated range of lifetimes has been carried through
the impact analysis.
The nickel-zinc battery characteristics in Table 2.1 are based on
recent results and objectives of a development program at Gould, Inc.
The potential performance of the nickel-zinc couple with aqueous potas-
sium hydroxide electrolyte has long been recognized, but cycle life
17
-------
M TABLE 2.1
oo
SUMMARY PROJECTION OF BATTERY CHARACTERISTICS
(Source: Task Report 1, Table 5.1)
Lead-Acid Nickel-Zinc Zinc-Chlorine Lithium-Sulfur
Specific Energy, W-hr/lb
W-hr/kg
OEM Cost Per Unit of Capacity, $/kW-hr
Life, Deep-Discharge Cycles
*
Energy Efficiency, Percent
Availability
13
29
20-25
250-750
46
1978
44
96
25-35
200-400
66
1980
70
155
10-15
500-1,000
**
70
1985
140
310
15
3-5 years
62f
1990
Assumes discharge in urban driving and overnight recharge.
**
Includes allowance for electrolyte circulation pumps and for refrigeration required during
charging.
Includes allowance for heater to maintain battery operating temperature.
-------
1000 cr
SPECIFIC ENERGY, WATT-HOURS PER KILOGRAM
1 10 100
| I i I i I I 11 | I I I I I I 11
10 100 1000
SPECIFIC ENERGY.WATT HOURS PER POUND
Figure 2.1. Assumed Battery Capabilities (Source: Task Report 1, Fig. 5.15)
problems have heretofore prevented applications. The cycle life shown
in Table 2.1 is a projection based on current laboratory results for deep
discharges. As discharge depth is decreased, cycle life is expected to
Increase in inverse proportion; i.e., the total energy delivered by the
battery during its life is expected to be independent of cycle depth.
The zinc-chlorine battery characteristics in Table 2.1 are based
upon objectives of a five-year development program being conducted by
Energy Development Associates, Inc. To allow for unforeseen problems,
availability is here projected in 1985. This battery might more informa-
tively be described as an energy system, since it utilizes a chlorine
hydrate store separate from the electrode stack and includes pumps for
electrolyte circulation and a refrigerator for forming the chlorine
hydrate.
19
-------
The lithium-sulfur battery characteristics in Table 2.1 are derived
from a recent development program at Argonne National Laboratory. They
refer to a high-performance, high-temperature battery with molten lithium
and sulfur electrodes, rather than a less-ambitious battery with solid
lithium alloy and metal-sulfide electrodes which is the current focus of
development. This battery, unlike the others, has never been operated in
any electric vehicle; it is in a much earlier stage of development, and
consequently its commercial availability, even by the distant date pro-
jected in Table 2.1, is relatively uncertain. The molten salt electro-
lyte must be operated at temperatures near 375°C, which gives rise to
very difficult problems of corrosion and dissolution. Moreover, a heater
is required except during periods of battery discharge and charge when
internal energy losses are sufficient to maintain the required tempera-
ture; at an estimated 3 kilowatt-hours per day, heater energy is a sig-
nificant factor in the overall energy efficiency, which otherwise would
be near 80% in Table 2.1. As with the zinc-chlorine system, the cycle
life of Table 2.1 is a goal yet to be corroborated by laboratory results.
2.4 PARAMETRIC RANGE ANALYSIS
With the electric car performance requirements and battery charac-
teristics of Sees. 2.2 and 2.3, driving range between recharges was esti-
mated as a function of battery weight to show a range of reasonable pos-
sibilities for each battery type. Ranges were evaluated by a computer
simulation consisting of a road load model and an elementary battery dis-
charge model.. The road load model calculated power and energy require-
ments for each time increment in an urban driving cycle. The battery
discharge model estimated the fraction of the battery capacity used in
meeting each time increment's power and energy requirement, by reference
to the curves of Fig. 2.1.
The SAE Metropolitan Area Driving Cycle shown in Fig. 2.2 was used
for the range calculations. Comparisons showed that it gave results
within a few percent of those obtained for the much more complicated
20
-------
O-
oo
o
zr:
40
30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
TIME, seconds
Figure 2.2. SAE Metropolitan Area Driving Cycle (SAE J-227)
Federal driving cycle. Additional comparisons showed that the computer
model could reasonably reproduce actual measurements of electric auto
ranges on these SAE and Federal driving cycles.
The basic parametric results produced by the computer model are
shown in Fig. 2.3. In obtaining these results, the frontal area of the
electric car was taken to be 22 square feet. Its aerodynamic drag coef-
ficient was taken as 0.4, midway between the value of 0.3 achieved by
the VW Karmann Ghia and the values of 0.5 to 0.6 typical of US passenger
cars. Special low-loss tires were assumed, with 42% of the rolling resis-
tance of conventional bias-ply tires. A DC series traction motor and
thyristor controller were assumed, with power adequate to meet the per-
formance requirements described in Sec. 2.2. Average electrical effi-
ciency (from controller input to motor output) was taken as 80%, and
average mechanical efficiency (from motor output to rear wheels) as 90%.
A two-speed automatic transmission, which raises motor speed and efficiency
at low road speeds, is implicit in these figures.
21
-------
4000 i-
o
-•1500
- 1000
500
UJ
5
>-
cc
UJ
<
00
2400
80 120 160
RANGE, mi
200
240
Figure 2.3. Urban Driving Range of Future Four-Passenger Electric Cars (SAE
Metropolitan Area Driving Cycle) (Source: Task Report 1, Fig. 6.2)
The longer ranges in Fig. 2.3 may be conservative, since lengthy
urban trips will probably involve less stopping and starting than the SAE
driving cycle of Fig. 2.2. The ranges of these cars on level ground at
steady moderate speeds are more than twice those shown.
Battery life is commonly considered to be ended when capacity has
dropped to 60% of its initial value. Thus the range capability of Fig.
2.3 would decrease substantially with battery age. The lead-acid and
nickel-zinc batteries are somewhat temperature-sensitive; at 32°F, the
range of the lead-acid car may be reduced by about 30% of that shown.
2.5 CAR CHARACTERISTICS
A preliminary calculation showed that depreciation costs for lead-
acid batteries might range up to six cents per mile with increasing range
capability and battery weight, even with optimistic battery life assump-
tions. Thus it can be expensive to buy range capability which is seldom
needed. Preliminary car usage data showed that a 55-mile daily range
22
-------
was generally adequate for second-car applications, while 140-mile daily
range was sufficient for most urban driving. Accordingly, these were
selected as characteristic ranges for the lead-acid car and the advanced-
battery cars, respectively. After these selections and after completion
of car characterization, detailed car cost and usage analyses were per-
formed, as described in Sees. 7 and 8.
The characteristics of cars with the selected ranges are summarized
in Table 2.2. In addition to weights from Fig. 2.3, they show energy
consumption rates measured at the battery charger input and at the motor
controller input. Controller inputs were derived directly from the compu-
ter road load model; battery charger inputs were estimated by several
methods, each assuming a high charger efficiency of 97%. For the zinc-
chlorine and lithium-sulfur batteries, the overall charge-discharge effi-
ciency goals stated by the developers were utilized. For the lead-acid
battery an overnight charging efficiency of 83% was deduced from typical
recharging recommendations; an equal efficiency was assumed for the nickel-
zinc battery; and for both, energy to be replaced was assumed to be that
withdrawable from the battery at a low rate of discharge—although in
practice something less would be required, depending on how high the
actual discharge rate was.
Though they are based on simple and approximate calculations, the
range and energy consumption estimates do not appear unreasonable in the
light of experience to date. Table 2.3 presents results of energy con-
sumption tests on several electric cars, both as reported and normalized
per pound of test weight. In comparison, the energy consumption of the
lead-acid battery car characterized here appears a bit low at a constant
30 mph and a bit high in urban driving. Urban driving is the important
case for impact analysis; here the characterization's energy use estimate
is only 10% above the range reported for the Sundancer, the only car of
Table 2.3 tested on the SAE driving cycle used in the characterization.
It is noteworthy that the Sundancer and the lead-acid car characterization
23
-------
TABLE 2.2
SUMMARY PROJECTION OF ELECTRIC CAR CHARACTERISTICS
(Source: Task Report 1, Tables 7.1 and 8.1, Fig. 6.3)
Battery Type
Test Weight,* Ib
kg
Battery Weight, Ib
kg
**
Urban Driving Range, mi
km
Range at 30 mph, mi
km
Lead-
Acid
3,975
1,803
1,500
681
54
87
183
295
Nickel-
Zinc
3,530
1,602
1,090
495
144
232
375
604
Zinc-
Chlorine
2,950
1,338
570
259
145
233
309
497
Lithium-
Sulfur
2,655
1,204
300
136
139
224
. 317
510
Overall Energy Use '
kW«hr per mi
kW«hr per km
**
Battery Energy Output
kW'hr per mi
kW'hr per km
0.79
0.49
0.35
0.22
0.51
0.32
0.33
0.21
0.41
0.25
0.28
0.17
0.45
0.28
0.27
0.17
Includes 450-lb payload.
**
SAE Metropolitan Area Driving Cycle.
From power lines. Assumes 97% battery charger efficiency and overnight
recharge; includes allowances for pumping and refrigeration in the zinc-
chlorine system, and for heating in the lithium-sulfur system.
24
-------
TABLE 2.3
COMPARATIVE ENERGY USAGE OF LEAD-ACID BATTERY CARS
(Source: Task Report 1, Table 8.2)
Car
GM 512
ESB Sundancer
EFP Mars II
EFP Electrosport
Four-Passenger
Characterization
Test
Weight,
Ib
1,650
2,000
4,650
5,980
3,975
Energy Use, Specific Energy Use,
kW'hr/mi W'hr/mi/lb
30 mph
0.196
0.4
0.447
0.234
Drivin * 30 mph Urban Drivin8*
0.119
O.ji-0.37 0.155-0.185
0.086
0.075
i 70 n nco
» — • *•* J
SAE Metropolitan Area Driving Cycle (J 227).
are similar in key respects: both have DC traction motors with chopper
controllers, two-speed transmissions, and high-efficiency tires; and both
have high-performance batteries constituting 38% of car test weight. In
range tests, 50-55 mi on the SAE Metropolitan Cycle of Fig. 2.2 was
reported for the Sundancer, bracketing the 54-mile simulation result in
Table 2.2.
Battery energy outputs per mile in Table 2.2 are equivalent to
average battery power outputs of 6.5 to 8.4 kW. At the estimated average
efficiency of 80%, 1.2 to 1.7 kW of heat would be available from the
motor and controller, enough to maintain comfortable interior tempera-
tures even on overcast days with 40-50° ambient temperatures. In Los
Angeles, the average minimum daily temperature in January, the coldest
month of the year, is 45°.
25
-------
Allowances for accessory power are not included In the figures of
Table 2.2, but with the exception of air conditioning, accessory power
consumption would be relatively low. Lights, windshield wipers, blowers,
and radio would require only about 225 W total, less than 3% of the aver-
age battery output power implicit in Table 2.2. Power steering and brakes
together would consume even less; they would be especially desirable for
the heavier lead-acid and nickel-zinc battery cars. Air conditioning,
on the other hand, would require about 1.3 kW, or 15-20% of average bat-
tery output power for propulsion; driving range would thereby be reduced
by 25% or more from the figures of Table 2.2.
The zinc-chlorine and lithium-sulfur batteries for cars in Table
2.2 are relatively light; their size could be readily Increased to allow
air conditioning, improved accommodations, higher performance, and ex-
tended range between recharges. At the other extreme, such changes would
be much more costly in the lead-acid battery car, where battery weight
is high and capabilities marginal to begin with.
The cars characterized in Table 2.2 are conceived as subcompacts,
with performance at the low end of the current subcompact ICE car market.
With lead-acid batteries, the car might be sized and arranged as suggested
in the sketch of Fig. 2.4, which allows adequate crush distance for occu-
pant protection to high standards. The zinc-chlorine and lithium-sulfur
batteries are each a single package rather than a collection of modular
units as sketched; they might be placed ahead of the car occupants, or
(with change of occupant position) under the front seat. Cases for such
batteries would protect against accidental release of battery materials,
and could be designed to contribute energy absorption capabilities as
well in a crash.
The materials required by the cars of Table 2.2 differ from those
of conventional cars primarily because of the batteries. Table 2.4 sum-
marizes battery material requirements.
26
-------
SCALE
Figure 2.4. Four-Passenger Electric Car Concept (Source: Task Report 1, Fig. 3.8)
-------
TABLE 2.4
BATTERY MATERIAL WEIGHTS
.3)
Pounds Per Car
**••*. * ***%*. «.»»*• A*AVJ»f&AJ TV *J ^X*4A 4. U
(Source: Task Report 1, Table 8.:
Lead-Acid Battery
Lead 481
Lead Oxide 489
Antimony 24
Electrolyte 426
Polypropylene 56
Filled Polyethylene 20
Epoxy 4_
Total Weight 1,500
Nickel-Zinc Battery
Nickel 362
Zinc Oxide 328
Potassium Hydroxide 109
Electrolyte 96
Polypropylene Oxide 64
Plastic Separators 33
Band and Terminals (Copper or Nickel) 11
Miscellaneous 67
Total Weight 1.090
Zinc-Chlorine Battery
Zinc 64
Chlorine 69
Water >00.
Titanium 34
Frames, Electrodes, Mountings 34
Heat Exchanger (TltanluB and Coolant) 17
Support Structure ' 17
Miscellaneous 135
Total Weight 570
Lithium-Sulfur Battery
Lithium 17
Sulfur 66
Electrolyte 63
Porous Graphite 23
Porous Stainless Steel 29
Stainless Steel Housing 61
Aluminum Casing 7
Thermal Insulation 16
Insulation, Connectors, Misc. 18
Total Weight 300
28
-------
Much smaller electric cars were also characterized in this study.
Intended only for neighborhood travel, they seated two passengers and
offered neither the acceleration nor speed desirable for freeway use. In
curb weight, they ranged from 1/2 to 2/3 that of the four-passenger cars,
with similarly reduced energy consumption and battery depreciation costs.
Because these cars offered so much less capability than conventional cars
now in use, and were so sharply limited in passenger capacity and perfor-
mance, no clear area of applicability emerged for them in the analyses of
automobile usage patterns discussed in Sec. 8. Accordingly, they were
not carried through the impact analysis, and are not considered further
here.
29
-------
3 BASELINE POPULATION AND TRANSPORTATION PROJECTIONS
The "baseline" projections used In this study outline the prospects
for the Los Angeles region In the absence of electric cars, providing a
benchmark relative to which the Impacts of future electric car use may be
measured. These baselines are often crucial In Importance. If, for
example, high air quality Is already to be assured through other means,
further pollution reductions due to electric cars may be minor in both
amount and importance; or if nuclear energy is to supplant petroleum as
the major source of electricity in Los Angeles, then petroleum savings
due to electric car use may be greatly Increased.
This section presents the baseline regional population and transporta-
tion projections. The air quality, energy, and economic baselines are
described subsequently in Sees. 4, 5, and 7, each with its associated
analysis of electric car impacts.
3.1 BASIS OF THE PROJECTIONS
The study area, California's South Coast Air Basin, is outlined
in Fig. 3.1. A region of roughly 10,000 square miles, it is bounded by
the Pacific Ocean and by Inland mountains, accommodates a population
approaching 10 million persons, and includes greater Los Angeles.
Baseline regional projections in this study rest on two basic
assumptions: first, that population growth in the region will be
moderate, considerably less than in the past; and second, that environmental
and economic progress will be balanced without systematic subordination
of either one to the other. At the present time, a much-reduced rate of
population growth is already a matter of record, but the long-term balance
of economic and environmental priorities remains to be fully established.
The baseline projections in this study further assume that there
will be no dramatic technological breakthroughs, such as practical solar-
electric power generation, or high-capacity personal rapid transit and dual-
mode transportation systems. Though worthy of consideration elsewhere, such
developments are beyond the scope of this analysis.
30
-------
KERN COUNTY
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
COUNTY BOUNDARY
SCAB BOUNDARY
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
Figure 3.1. California's South Coast Air Basin (Source: Task Report 2, Fig. 1.1)
-------
3.2 POPULATION BASELINE
The population projections shown in Fig. 3.2 were developed for
the South Coast Air Basin from county-by-county projections of the
California Department of Finance and the Southern California Association
of Governments. In years past, the Series D projection (which included
substantial net immigration) was generally accepted for the region.
Recently, however, an end to net immigration and a continued decline in
regional birth rates has led the agencies concerned to move towards the
Series E projection in Fig. 3.2, which was accordingly adopted in this
study. It assumes zero net migration and a completed fertility rate of
2.1, conditions leading eventually to population stabilization: the
growth implicit in this Series E projection is only 0.8% per year for
the period 1970-2000. Even lower growth is conceivable: during the
C/5
Ł-
O
O
H
<
Q.
O
Q.
15
10
I
1940
1960 1980
YEAR
2000
Figure 3.2. Population of the South Coast Air Basin (Source: Task Report 1,
Tables 2.1, 2.3, 3.1)
32
-------
early 70*s, the population of Los Angeles County actually declined, and
current birth statistics are following an even lower trend line, Series F.
3.3 TRANSPORTATION BASELINE
As in other cities across the nation, freeway construction in Los
Angeles has slowed considerably from its pace in the 50's and 60's.
Though almost half the officially planned and adopted freeway network
for the Air Basin had been completed in 1972, present indications are
that only a small fraction of the remainder will be built. Nonetheless,
it appears that freeway route mileage in the Basin will continue to grow
somewhat faster than the population, at an annual rate of about 1-1/2%.
Moreover, freeway capacity should expand even faster as lanes are added
along existing routes.
Continued growth in automobile ownership rates is projected for the
Air Basin, as shown in Fig. 3.3. The region has historically had more
automobiles per capita than the United States or even the rest of California.
The future growth projected in Fig. 3.3 follows projections based on
detailed regression analyses involving household size, type, and income
which were developed at the Los Angeles Regional Transportation Study
(LARTS).
The usage of individual automobiles has been relatively stable for
many years. In the United States as a whole (except during the war years),
average annual mileage per car has taken three decades to increase from
9,000 to 10,000. California auto usage in recent years has been below
the national average. Future usage growth in line with the national
trend shown in Fig. 3.4 is projected for this study.
Table 3.1 presents baseline auto projections for the South Coast
Air Basin. These projections were developed by combining the population,
auto ownership, and auto usage projections of Figs. 3.2-3.4, and adding
figures on trip frequency, trip speed, and freeway usage developed by
LARTS through detailed network modeling.
33
-------
0.61-
0.5
O
CO
cc
UI
a.
cc 0.4
in
Q.
CO
§ 0.3
O
** 0.2
1920
^JOr
CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES
SOUTH COAST S
AIR BASIN i
I
1940
1960
YEAR
1980
2000
Figure 3.3. Automobiles per Person
(Source: Task Report 3, Fig. 4.1)
14,000
12,000
10,000
z
z
O
8000
cc
LU
< 6000
TREND
'UNITED STATES
1920 1940
1960
YEAR
1980
2000
Figure 3.4. Average Annual Passenger Car Mileage
(Source: Task Report 3, Fig. 5.2)
34
-------
TABLE 3.1
BASELINE AUTO TRAVEL PROJECTIONS, SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
(Source: Task Report 3, Table 5.5)
Daily Vehicle-Miles, millions
Percent on Freeways
Percent on Streets
Daily Miles Per Vehicle
Daily Trips Per Vehicle
Daily Minutes Per Vehicle
Miles Per Trip
Minutes Per Trip
Average Speed, mph
1980
167
39
61
28.3
4.6
53
6.15
11.5
32.0
1990
196
42
58
29.2
4.6
54.7
6.35
11.9
32.0
2000
228
45
55
30.0
4.6
56.2
6.52
12.2
32.0
Despite ambitious regional plans and a prospective multi-billion-
dollar investment in new facilities and equipment, public transit will
apparently play only a minor role in future regional travel. A system
recommended in 1973, combining 140 miles of grade-separated rapid transit
with an expanded fleet of 2740 buses, was expected to divert only 2.4% of
motorists in its service area to rapid transit in the year 1990.
Overall, the outlook in Table 3.1 is for relative stability: little
change in average auto usage, or travel speeds, or congestion levels, and
only moderate growth in total regional automobile travel. More rapid
growth in regional population and auto ownership would have relatively
little effect on electric car impacts. Rapid growth in average automobile
usage, however, could significantly Increase daily driving ranges relative
to practical capabilities of nearer-term electric cars, thus reducing
their applicability. Though the stability of the usage trend in Fig. 3.4
35
-------
makes this seem unlikely, regression analysis at LARTS has led in the
past to projections far above the 1990 daily mileage in Table 3.1.
Future auto energy consumption is projected as shown in Fig. 3.5.
Although auto fuel economy has been declining for many years, as indicated
by DOT data for cars on the road and EPA data for new cars, the projection
anticipates major improvements: 50% by 1984 and 100% by the end of the
century. Powerful economic and political forces have already begun a
movement 'in this direction; and though the gasoline "crisis" of early 1974
has eased, these forces remain at work: petroleum reserves are dwindling,
prices remain much higher than in previous years, international payments
deficits accumulate rapidly, and the US desires independence of politically-
inspired embargoes by oil-producing nations. The projection of Fig. 3.5
is in line with a legislative request to Congress planned in early 1974
by EPA (circle 1 in Fig. 3.5), and with the goal of legislation actually
^D
20
O
CL
> 15
O
0
O «-.
tD 10
uu
5
0
s*
/f
""
AVERAGE OF ALL CARS o / \
IN THE US VARIOUS 1 V -f STUDY PROJECTION
/PROPOSALS Q ^ FOR NEW CARS SQLD
pv / IN LOS ANGELES
~ *~~ ~~ >>T^* «»^ '
•^**?n. v®'
AVERAGE OF NEW CARS
SOLD IN THE US
-
I 1 1 1 i I
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990
YEAR
|
2000
O
N-)
m
Figure 3.5. Automobile Fuel Economy (Source: Task Report 3, Fig. 7.4)
36
-------
passed in December, 1973, by the US Senate (S.2176) to encourage auto fuel
economy (Circle 2 in Fig. 3.5). Though this projection represents a dramatic
reversal of past trends, it remains less ambitious than other legislative
goals and technology-development goals advanced during 1973 (unnumbered
circles in Fig. 3.5). Part of the projected economy increase may be
attributed to a continuation of the trend to smaller cars, in which Los
Angeles has led the nation for many years. In 1972, 45% of the automobiles
sold in the area were compacts and subcompacts; by 1990, this proportion
is projected to rise to 65%, mostly subcompacts. The remainder of the
economy improvement will require more efficient power trains and weight
reductions within each auto size class. If the projection is realized,
total gasoline consumption in the South Coast Air Basin will decline by
almost 1/4 during the remainder of this century, despite the increase in
travel shown in Table 3.1.
The projection of Fig. 3.5, though clearly within technological reach,
is relatively optimistic. The data points in Fig. 3.5 for 1974 and 1975
cars, which became available after the projection was made, are encouraging
evidence that the anticipated economy upturn has begun, but it may
nevertheless fall far short of the projection. In that case, the savings
of energy and petroleum due to electric car use could be substantially
increased in both magnitude and importance.
37
-------
4 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS
4.1 BACKGROUND AND ASSUMPTIONS
In this study of electric car impacts, the largest single analytic
effort was devoted to air quality. There were several reasons for this
emphasis. First, air quality has been an important problem in the Los
Angeles area for over thirty years. Second, Los Angeles air pollution
has been primarily vehicular in origin: in 1970, almost 100% of carbon
monoxide emissions and about two-thirds of reactive hydrocarbons and nitro-
gen oxides emissions were from motor vehicles. Third, the use of electric
cars instead of conventional cars drastically alters automotive air pol-
lutant emissions.
The quantitative impacts of electric car use on air pollution will
depend strongly on the extent to which pollution from conventional auto-
mobiles is controlled. California legislation to limit automotive emis-
sions first took effect in 1963; Federal legislation followed in 1968.
With the Clean Air Act of 1970, the Federal government moved towards a
90% reduction of automotive pollutant emissions relative to 1970 by the
year 1977. As Table 4.1 shows, the major part of this reduction is to
take effect progressively from 1974 to 1977—and California, in recogni-
tion of its particular air quality problems, is to lead the rest of the
nation in the tightening of controls.
Though the scheduled emissions standards of Table 4.1 remain effec-
tive as of this writing, legislation is being proposed and developed to
delay and relax the final steps in the schedule. It is thus quite pos-
sible that the imposition of the 1976 requirements will be delayed two
years, and that the final reduction of nitrogen oxides emissions from
2.0 to 0.4 grams per mile will be delayed indefinitely.
In developing baseline projections of air quality for this study,
it was assumed that the emissions standards of Table 4.1 would be applied,
38
-------
TABLE 4.1
EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS FOR LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLES
(Source: Task Report 7, Table A.3)
Emission Standards, grams per mile
1974 Federal
California
1975 Federal
California
1976 Federal
California
1977 Federal
California
Hydrocarbons
3.4
3.2
1.5
0.9
0.41
0.41
0.41
0.41
Carbon Monoxide
39
39
15
9.0
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
Nitrogen Oxides
3.0
2.0
3.1
2.0
2.0
2.0
0.40
0.40
as existing law requires. In recognition of the possibility of future
revisions, however, projections for an alternative baseline in 1980 were
also developed. This case, in which standards are delayed and relaxed as
discussed above, is called "1980D" in the following pages.
The Clean Air Act of 1970 has led not only to emissions standards,
but to the air quality standards summarized in Table 4.2. At present,
Federal law requires compliance with these standards in Los Angeles by
1977. Since it has appeared unlikely that the scheduled reduction of
pollutant emissions from both vehicular and stationary sources would be
sufficient to reach compliance, stringent transportation controls are
being developed for application in the Los Angeles region. But just as
relaxation of emission standards is possible, so also are delays and
revisions in air quality standards and related controls.
39
-------
TABLE 4.2
NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
(Source: Task Report 6, Table 7.1)
Level Not to Exceed
Pollutant
Sulfur Dioxide
Particulate Matter
Carbon Monoxide
Photochemical
Oxidants
Hydrocarbons
Nitrogen Oxides
Primary
3
80 ug/m (0.03 ppm)
365 ug/m3 (0.14 ppm)
75 ug/m3
3
260 ug/m
10 mg/m (9 ppm)
40 mg/m (35 ppm)
160 ug/m (0.08 ppm)
160 ug/m (0.24 ppm)
100 ug/m (0.05 ppm)
Secondary
3
60 ug/m (0.02 ppm) (a)
260 ug/m3 (0.1 ppm) (b)
3
60 ug/m"
150 ug/nT
Same
Same
Same
Same
(c)
(b)
(d)
(e)
(e)
(f)
(a)
(a) Annual arithmetic mean.
(b) Maximum 24-hr concentration not to be exceeded more than once a year,
(c) Annual geometric mean.
(d) Maximum eight-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once
a year.
(e) Maximum one-hour concentration not to be exceeded more than once a
year.
(f) Maximum three-hour concentration (6-9 AM) not to be exceeded more
than once a year.
40
-------
Because transportation controls assuring compliance in 1977 with the
air quality standards would be very severe, the baseline projections of
this study have assumed that such strict controls will not be imposed
(see Sec. 4.4), and consequently that the air quality standards will not
necessarily be met as presently scheduled. In the absence of such con-
trols, vehicular emissions and air pollution levels would be higher than
otherwise, and both the size and the desirability of reductions due to
electric cars would be enhanced.
4.2 METHODS AND OBJECTIVES
In accord with initial planning for an efficient and effective
analysis, this study addressed air pollution in three steps: emissions
projections, photochemistry simulations, and simple "rollback" calcula-
tions.
The emissions projections show prospective air pollutant emissions
in considerable spatial, temporal, and chemical detail, both with and
without the use of electric cars. The changes in total emissions by
themselves indicate what electric cars can do. But they do not tell the
whole story: besides changing total emissions, electric cars will shift
emissions from streets and freeways to power plants and from daytime tc
nighttime, and will also alter the mixture of pollutants emitted. The
net effect on air quality depends significantly on the interaction of all
these changes in the photochemical diffusion processes through which
"secondary" pollutants appear. Most important among secondary pollutants
are the oxidants of Table 4.2. Photochemical oxidants have been a serious
problem in Los Angeles, repeatedly reaching concentrations triggering
local health alerts.
To investigate the effects of the detailed emissions changes on
secondary photochemical pollutants, a computer simulation developed at
General Research Corporation for the Los Angeles area, DIFKIN, was em-
ployed. The basic operation of DIFKIN is illustrated schematically in
Fig. 4.1.
41
-------
SUNLIGHT |S GIVEN AS
A FUNCTION OF TIME
TIME-DEPENDENT MIXING
AND REACTION IS COMPUTED
FOR AIR PARCEL UP TO THE
MIXING HEIGHT h
SPACE/TIME TRACK
-THROUGH THE SOURCE
GRID IS DERIVED FROM
WIND DATA
POLLUTANT INFLUXES AT ANY
ELEVATION (INCLUDING THE
GROUND) ARE IMPOSED BY THE
EMISSION SOURCE FUNCTIONS
Figure 4.1. Schematic GRC Photochemical Diffusion Model for Air Quality
Simulation (Source: Task Report 6, Fig. 3.1)
As a check on the DIFKIN results and to estimate primary pollutant
concentrations not computed by the simulation, projections were also made
by means of "linear rollback" calculations. In these calculations, changes
in pollutant levels are simply assumed to be proportional to changes in
aggregate daily emissions. Largely because simulations are difficult to
operate and validate, rollback has been widely accepted as an analytic
tool despite its evident theoretical limitations.
The basic objective of the air pollution analysis has been to deter-
mine changes in air quality due to future electric car use. The importance
of a given change depends, however, on the absolute level of air quality
at which it is effective. Thus a secondary objective has necessarily
been to forecast absolute air quality levels in the absence of electric
car use. Though such forecasts are admittedly contentious, they are essen-
tial to electric car impact assessment.
42
-------
<4..J POLLUTANT EMISSIONS
Detailed projections of pollutant emissions were made for the
heavily populated subarea of the South Coast Air Basin shown in Fig. 4.2,
hereafter referred to as "Los Angeles and Environs." Vehicular and dis-
tributed stationary sources were aggregated by a system of 2 * 2 mile
grid squares. Future vehicle movements and emission factors for streets
and freeways, treated separately, were developed from the emission stand-
ards of Table A.I and the detailed travel forecasts of the Los Angeles
Regional Transportation Study, adjusted for this study's population and
transportation baselines (see Sec. 3). Distributed stationary sources
(such as gasoline marketing and dry cleaning) were developed from land
use plans of the Southern California Association of Governments. Finally,
point-source emissions from power plants were derived from the baseline
electric energy projection of Sec. 5, while those of oil refineries were
projected in accord with actual facilities plans. The projections detail,
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
KERN COUNTY
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
SANTA BARBARA •<. VENTURA COUNTY \
COUNTY BOUNDARIES
SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
BOUNDARY LINE
BERNARDINO
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
PACIFIC OCEAN
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
Figure 4.2. "Los Angeles and Environs", the Heavily Populated Subarea of
the South Coast Air Basin Selected for Air Quality Analyses
(Source: Task Report 7, Fig. A.2)
43
-------
for each grid square, the hour-by-hour emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon
monoxide, and oxides of nitrogen, as required by the DIFKIN simulation.
Sulfur dioxide and particulate emissions were only projected on an aggre-
gate basis, as required for rollback calculations. Except as noted below,
the projections apply to the average work day; emissions are typically
less on weekends.
Table 4.3 summarizes the emissions by source projected for 1980,
1990, and 2000 in the absence of electric car use, and the actual 1970-71
emissions, for direct comparison.
In the case where auto emissions standards are delayed and relaxed,
baseline projections for 1980 with and without the delay are shown in
Table 4.4 for the most important vehicular emissions.
The projections of vehicular emissions in Table 4.3 were based on
emissions measurements in the Federal Driving Cycle by model year, assum-
ing for future years compliance with the standards of Table 4.1. These
emissions were weighted by three factors: first, a deterioration factor
accounting for the loss in effectiveness of emission controls with vehicle
mileage; second, the fraction of daily vehicle miles contributed by vehi-
cles according to their ages and use; third, a speed correction factor
for speeds other than the driving cycle average speed. In general, all
these factors are functions of vehicle model year.
5% of total vehicle miles traveled are assumed to be contributed by
heavy-duty vehicles (over 6000 pounds). This figure is subject to some
uncertainty, and varies significantly with locale. Because emissions
standards for heavy-duty vehicles are less stringent than for automobiles,
they contribute a disproportionate amount of the total vehicular emis-
sions, as detailed in Table 4.5.
44
-------
TABLE 4.3
BASELINE POLLUTANT EMISSIONS FOR LOS ANGELES AND ENVIRONS
(Source: Task Report 7, Tables 2.4-2.6 and C.I)
Four entries for each source and type are 1970-71 actual emissions, and
projections for 1980, 1990, and 2000, in that order.
Emissions, tons per day
Vehicular
Stationary
Area
Sources
Power
Plants
Oil
Refineries
Totals
Nitrogen
Oxides
455.0
181.5
75.5
80.6
77.5
106.0
140.8
181.1
78.6
113.3
116.2
98.1
44.6
48.8
53.7
57.6
655.7
449.6
386.2
417.4
Hydrocarbons
918.4
160.3
72.3
77.1
472.3
160.7
160.7
160.7
30.8
33.7
37.1
29.8
1,421.6
354.7
270.1
277.6
Carbon Sulfur
Monoxide Dioxide
9,719.7 20.2
2,202.8 22.4
1,084.2 24.4
1,152.1 26.4
178.0
195.3
213.1
227.7
175.0
362.0
372.0
315.0
55.4
60.6
66.7
71.5
9,719.7 428.6
2,202.8 640.3
1,084.2 676.2
1,152.1 640.6
Particulates
82.2
91.2
99.2
107.5
88.3
96.9
105.7
112.9
7.5
12.6
12.9
10.9
10.1
11.0
12.2
13.0
188.1
211.7
230.0
244.3
45
-------
TABLE 4.4
1980 BASELINE VEHICULAR EMISSIONS FOR LOS ANGELES AND ENVIRONS
WITH AND WITHOUT DELAYS IN IMPLEMENTING AUTO EMISSION CONTROLS
(Tons/Day)
(Source: Task Report 7, Table 2.7)
Nitrogen Oxides Hydrocarbons Carbon Monoxide
With Delay
Without Delay
300.6
181.5
168.5
160.3
2,328.2
2,202.8
TABLE 4.5
PERCENTAGE CONTRIBUTION OF HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES TO VEHICULAR
AND TOTAL BASELINE EMISSIONS FOR LOS ANGELES AND ENVIRONS
(Source: Task Report 7, Table 2.9)
Nitrogen Oxides Hydrocarbons Carbon Monoxide Sulfur Dioxide Partlculates
Vehicular Total Vehicular Total Vehicular Total Vehicular Total Vehicular Total
1980 18 7 23 10 31 31 9 0.3 8 3
1990 31 6 33 9 67 67 9 0.3 8 3
2000 31 6 33 9 67 67 9 0.4 8 3
1980D 11 6 22 10 29 29 9 0.3 8 3
The projections of power plant emissions in Table 4.3, principally
nitric oxide and sulfur dioxide, assume no breakthroughs in emission con-
trol. The sulfur dioxide emissions are based simply on the use of 0.5%
low-sulfur crude, without stack scrubbers. An increasing fraction of
electric power for Los Angeles and environs is expected to be generated
outside the air basin, and increasingly by nuclear power stations. In
consequence, although total electricity consumption is projected to grow,
46
-------
the power generation that contributes air pollution in the air basin is
projected to remain relatively constant. As ishown in Fig. 4.3, the peak
capacity of oil-fired power plants in the area is expected to increase
modestly, but load factors will decrease as nuclear power becomes avail-
able to meet base demands.
For comparison with these baseline projections, emissions were also
projected for selected levels of electric car use. Upper-bound usage
levels were chosen, in order to show the maximum possible effects of elec-
tric cars on pollutant emissions and the resultant air quality. Usage
levels of 20% in 1980, 80% in 1990, and 100% in 2000 were actually em-
ployed. Because they were selected and analysis begun before the results
of the usage analysis of Sec. 8 were available, these figures are some-
what higher than the upper bounds estimated there.
20 r
o 10
s
ec
UJ
I
5 5
1974 - 1980
1990
. 2000
0600
1200
TIME
1800
2400
Figure 4.3. Projected Baseline Diurnal Power Demand on Oil-Fired Power
Plants in Los Angeles and Environs for Peak Demand Month
(August) (Source: Task Report 6, Fig. 5.2)
47
-------
I
.Projected emissions with upper-bound electric car use are shown in
Figs. 4.4-4.8, together with the baseline emissions already presented in
Table 4.3. In each figure, vehicular contributions to the total are
indicated (for carbon monoxide, total and vehicular contributions are
equal), and where appropriate, power plant emissions are also separately
indicated. These figures show that electric cars will change total emis-
sions relatively little, even at very high levels of use, primarily be-
cause of the relative future importance of emissions from stationary
sources and heavy-duty vehicles after the cleanup of conventional auto-
motive emissions now in progress.
Figure 4.9 shows similar projections for nitrogen oxides emissions,
assuming a delay of two years in effecting the final reduction of auto
emissions standards in Table 4.1, and assuming that the nitrogen oxides
emission standard will remain at 2 grams per mile rather than reach 0.4
grams per mile. In this circumstance, total nitrogen oxides emissions
would remain much higher, and the potential reductions due to electric
cars are more significant.
In Figs. 4.4-4.8, overnight recharging of electric cars is implicit.
On the day of peak annual demand, most of the recharging power will be
generated in the Air Basin; this is shown in Fig. 4.10, which is to be
compared with Fig. 4.3, the baseline case without electric cars. On the
average day, however, an increasing fraction of recharge power will come
from new power plants planned for construction outside the Basin; as a
result, extra oil-fired generation in the Basin will be much less than
shown in Fig. 4.10. The peak demand day typically occurs during the late-
summer smog season. For worst-case analyses, then, the emission rates
from power plants corresponding to Fig. 4.10 are used. For addressing
average annual pollution levels, as is appropriate for sulfur dioxide
and particulates, the lower average annual emissions due to electric car
recharge are used.
48
-------
500
§
*J
s
—^— EHISSIONS WITH NO ELECTRIC CAR USE 5
— EMISSIONS KITH UPPER-BOUND ELECTRIC CAR USE 5
(20'. IN 1980, 801 IN 1990. 1001 IN 2000) 5
X ^^^__ __ — — ^. POWER PLANTS
VEHICULAR
1970
1980
1990
2000
YEAR
Figure 4.4. Projected Nitric Oxide Emissions (for Los Angeles and
Environs, Without Delay of Emission Controls) (Source:
Task Report 7, Fig. 3.2)
MISSIONS WITH NO ELECTRIC CAR USE
MISSIONS WITH UPPER-BOUND ELECTRIC CAR USE
20> IN 1980, 801 IN 1990, 1002 IN 2000)
TOTAL
VEHICULAR
1970
1980
1990
2000
YEAR
Figure 4.5. Projected Reactive Hydrocarbon Emissions (Source: Task
Report 7, Fig. 3.3)
49
-------
10,000
g
Ł
5
fe
2000
• EMISSIONS WITH NO ELECTRIC CAR USE
• — EMISSIONS WITH UPPER-BOUND ELECTRIC CAR USE
(>OT IN 1980, 801 IN 1990, 1001 IN 2000)
1980
2000
500
Cl
1970
EMISSION: UTK NO ELECTRIC CAR USE
• — —EHISSIONS KITH UPPER-BOUND ELECTRIC CAR USE
(20*. IN 1980, 80". IN 1990, 100% IN 2000)
VEHICULAR
1980
YEAR
Figure 4.6. Projected Carbon Monoxide Emissions
(Source: Task Report 7, Fig. 3.4)
Figure 4.7. Projected Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
(Source: Task Report 7, Fig. 3.5)
-------
g 100
•EMISSIONS WITH NO ELECTRIC CAR USE
• EMISSIONS WITH UPPER-BOUND ELECTRIC CAR USE
(20). IN 1980. SOT IN 1990, 1001 IN 2000)
TOTAL
VEHICULAR
POWER PLANTS
1970
1980
1990
2000
YEAR
Figure 4.8. Projected Particulate Emissions (Source: Task Report 7,
Fig. 3.6)
——— [MISSIONS WITH NO ELECTRIC CAR USE
— — — EMISSIONS WITH UPPLR-UOUND ELECTRIC CAR USE
(ZO? Ill 19UO, BO: IN 1990, 100: IN 3000)
1980
1990
2000
YEAR
Figure 4.9. Projected Nitric Oxide Emissions (for Los Angeles and
Environs, Delay of Emission Controls) (Source: Task Report
7, Fig. 3.7)
51
-------
20
15
10
1980, 20* ELECTRIC CARS
1990, 80% ELECTRIC CARS
2000, 100% ELECTRIC CARS
I |
0600
1200
TIME
1800
2400
Figure 4.10.
Projected Diurnal Power Demand on Oil-Fired Power Plants in
Los Angeles and Environs for Peak Demand Month (August)
(Source: Task Report 7, Fig. 3.1)
4.4 AIR QUALITY
The Federal air quality standards of Table 4.2 rely on a worst-case
approach: they state for each pollutant a level allowable anywhere in
the region only once annually, except for nitrogen oxides, for which only
a maximum annual mean is established. To project corresponding future
levels of air pollution, it is thus necessary to select the worst loca-
tions in the Air Basin for the various pollutants, and to establish for
them representative meteorological conditions under which worst-case
concentrations will arise.
These selections were made by a review of historical pollution
records at measurement stations spanning the Air Basin, as shown in Fig.
4.11. The records show that conditions for smog in 1969 and 1970 were
about the same, as summarized in Table 4.6. 1970 pollution maxima were
used as the basis for rollback calculations, a convenience since 1970 is
the reference year for Federal automotive emission reductions. For the
52
-------
Figure 4.11. Typical Autumn Afternoon Airflow and Critical Sites in the South
Coast Air Basin (Source: Task Report 6, Fig. 3.2)
TABLE 4.6
AUGUST-OCTOBER SMOG STATISTICS FOR 1969 AND 1970
(Source: Task Report 6, Table 3.1)
1969 1970
Number of alerts
Number of days with eye irritation
Number of days on which oxidant > 0.1 ppm hourly average
*
Number of days on which N0« >_ 0.25 ppm hourly average
^ *
Number of days on which CO > 10 ppm for 12 hours
4
65
88
41
50
5
57
84
40
52
California state standard in force in 1970.
53
-------
air quality simulations, meteorological conditions observed in the smog
episode of late September 1969 were used, primarily because the available
data is unusually extensive and had previously been used in the calibra-
tion and validation of the DIFKIN model.
Baseline worst-case pollutant concentrations are summarized in
Table 4.7. In the case of secondary pollutants (ozone and nitrogen diox-
ide), both DIFKIN and rollback results are presented; they compare favor-
ably, differing principally as would be expected because of changes in
emissions mixes not accounted for in rollback. Both methods lead to the
same conclusion: major decreases in secondary pollutants may be expected
in future years. In the case of ozone, the Federal standard will nonethe-
less be exceeded on the worst-case day and probably several other days,
but this is to be compared with excesses recorded during over 1500 hours
at Riverside in 1970. No worst-case hourly or daily average is prescribed
in Federal air quality standards for nitrogen dioxide, but the 1970 hourly
maxima of Table 4.7 were accompanied by annual means about equal (in the
worst Basin locations) to the standard. Thus the baseline projections
of Table 4.7, representing a fourfold reduction in hourly maxima, suggest
that the standard will be met. In contrast, the sulfur dioxide and par-
ticulate standards do not appear likely to be met.
Pollutant reductions due to upper-bound usage of electric cars are
shown in Table 4.8. As in the case of emissions reductions, the low
leverage of the electric cars—except for carbon monoxide—is apparent.
Overall, the introduction of electric cars is likely to bring about a
relatively small further change beyond that already in prospect due to
improving control of conventional automobile emissions. In no case will
the upper-bound usage of electric cars bring excessive pollutant concen-
trations of the baseline into compliance with Federal standards. In the
case of sulfur dioxide, on the contrary, high electric car use moderately
aggravates the already excessive pollutant concentrations in prospect.
These concentrations appear in relatively small areas downwind of fossil-
fuel power plants in the Basin; they may be reduced to acceptable levels
when stack scrubbers are brought into use, as seems possible in the 1980s.
54
-------
TABLE 4.7
BASELINE POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS, SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
(Source: Task Report 7, Tables 3.9, 3.11, 3.14)
Measure
Pollutant
Ozone
N02
CO
so,
Particulates
Units
pphm
pphm
ppm
pphm
0
yg/m
Period
1 hour
1 hour
1 hour
1 year
24 hours
Federal
Standard
8
35
3.0
260
1970
Maximum
62
43
54
2.6
357
Projections
1980
*
16
16
*
12
14
13
3.9
402
1990
*
15
13
10*
13
7
4.1
437
2000
*
15
13
11*
14
7
3.9
464
1980D
*
12
17
*
13
17
14
3.9
402
Location
Riverside
Azusa/Anahi
Lennox
Reseda
Anaheim
DIFKIN simulation result; other projections from linear rollback.
-------
TABLE 4.8
CHANGE IN POLLUTANT CONCENTRATIONS DUE
TO ELECTRIC CAR USE, SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
(Source: Task Report 7, Tables 3.10, 3.12, 3.15)
Ratio of Pollutants With and Without
Electric Cars
v Percent Electric . * „. .
Year Ozone NO *
Car Use 2
1980
1990
2000
1980D
20
80
100
20
0
0
0
1
.99/0.
.90/0.
.87/0.
.04/0.
94
88
84
94
0.92/0.
0.86/0.
0.88/0.
0.92/0.
97
99
88
93
**
CO
0.86
0.74
0.67
0.86
** **
S0_ Particulates
1.
1.
1.
1.
07
14
07
07
0.
0.
0.
0.
96
79
80
96
**
(DIFKIN result)/(Rollback result).
Rollback result.
Because Los Angeles is atypical in its meteorology and photochemistry,
the air quality projections of Tables 4.7 and 4.8 are inapplicable to most
other large US urban areas. The emissions projections, however, exhibit
an underlying condition for air quality which may be expected elsewhere:
rapid reductions in both the overall quantity of air pollutant emissions
and the relative importance of automotive emissions. These are simply the
developing impacts of the Clean Air Act of 1970, which adopted as a national
goal the elimination of 90% of conventional automobile emissions by 1977.
56
-------
5 ENERGY IMPACTS
5.1 BACKGROUND
Because future energy supply and demand has been repeatedly analyzed
in recent years, existing studies and projections were relied upon here
as much as possible. The 1972 report on the US energy outlook by the
National Petroleum Council was employed as background. Recent studies
of the California situation by Stanford Research Institute (SRI) and the
RAND Corporation supplied the regional setting. Detailed projections and
plans by the electric utilities serving the South Coast Air Basin provided
local detail.
The future energy situation assumed in the baseline projections
resembles the second of four alternatives detailed by the National Petro-
leum Council. It is characterized by rapid future growth in nuclear power
generation, oil importation near present levels through the 1970s, and
eventual independence of oil importation in the late 1980s. As noted in
Sec. 2, the baseline transportation projections of this study include ris-
ing automobile efficiency and consequent moderation in gasoline consump-
tion. Reasonably stable gasoline prices are assumed, in the range of 50c
to 80c per gallon (in 1973 dollars, including taxes). This assumption,
of course, is very uncertain, since world oil prices are now set by an
international cartel.
5.2 ELECTRIC ENERGY BASELINE
In line with RAND, SRI, and utility forecasts of baseline growth in
per capita energy consumption, Fig. 5.1 shows the electric energy consump-
tion baseline projected for the South Coast Air Basin. The growth rate,
about 4-1/2% per year, is considerably less than in the past, but the
total increase projected from 1970 to 2000 is nevertheless about 300%.
The baseline electrical generating capacity is projected in Fig. 5.2,
In the near term, it follows the facilities plans of Air Basin utilities:
57
-------
3 x 10
11
o
I—
Q.
Z
=>
OO
•z.
o
CJ
o:
<Ł
~ 1
'
o
1/1
SCAB (BASED ON 95% OF SCE
LADWP + G/P/B CONSUMPTION
CORRECTED TO SERIES E, NO
NET MIGRATION POPULATION
FORECAST)
0
1970
1980
1990
2000
YEAR
Figure 5.1. Projected Baseline Energy Consumption, South Coast Air Basin
(Source: Task Report 5, Fig. 3.8)
100 X 10 r-
PLANNED ADDITIONS
(SCE + LADWP + G/P/B)
1970
1980
1990
2000
YEAR
Figure 5.2. Projected Electrical Generating Capacity, South Coast Air Basin
(Source: Task Report 5, Fig. 3.11)
58
-------
Southern California Edison (SCE), Los Angeles Department of Water and
Power (LADWP), and the Municipal Utilities of Glendale, Burbank, and
Pasadena (G/B/P). After 1978, however, these plans (though now lagging
behind schedule) call for faster growth than is needed to meet the demand
forecast of Fig. 5.1. Accordingly, the projection for later years in Fig.
5.2 is simply taken as 1.23 times the peak demand projection. The factor
1.23 allows 18.6% reserve capacity at peak load, a figure projected by
SRI as appropriate for scheduled maintenance and a margin of safety.
Figure 5.3 shows recent hourly demand profiles for SCE and LADWP,
which provide around 95% of the Air Basin's electricity. They are in
reasonable agreement, both peaking with air conditioner demand on summer
afternoons; even on the peak day, demand drops to about half the afternoon
maximum after midnight.
Baseline projections of peak-day and average-day supply and demand
profiles for electric power in the South Coast Air Basin are shown in
Fig. 5.4. These projections assume the overall demand growth of Fig. 5.1,
the daily fluctuation of Fig. 5.3, and the availability of power from dif-
ferent sources of Fig. 5.2. They further assume that base loads will be
taken over by future nuclear and coal power stations, leaving the higher-
cost oil-fired power generation to be used increasingly for meeting peak
loads.
All these assumptions are uncertain at best. The overall energy
situation, and the particular future
-------
Ł 100
>-
_i
LU
>-
U-
o
a.
»
o
z
s;
UJ
Q
o
IE
0600
1200
HOUR
1800
SCE
LADWP\
2400
a) Typical Peak Month
100
O
UJ
0.
Q
i
o
I
0600
1200
HOUR
1800
2400
b) Typical Off-Peak Month
Figure 5.3. Variation in Hourly Electric Power Demand, 1973 (Source: Task
Report 5, Fig. 3.12)
60
-------
10011-
PEAK DAY (AUGUST)
(SCE)
6:00 AM 12:00 NOON 6:00 m 12:00 MIDNIGHT
a) 1980
1001
PEAK OAK (AUGUST)
(SCE)
6:00 AM 12:00 NOON 6:00 Pit 12:00 MIDNIGHT
b) 1990
g
1
i- = 50,000 MW
^PEAK DAY (AUGUST)
NUCLEAR
| HYDROELECTRIC
J
6:00 AM
12:00 NOON 6:00 PM
12:00 MIDNIGHT
c) 2000
Figure 5.4. Profile of Hourly Electric Power Demands with Projected Supply,
South Coast Air Basin (Source: Task Report 5, Fig. 3.13)
61
-------
consumption without much depressing peak demands, as for air conditioning
on very hot afternoons, and consequently exaggerate the daily variation
in demand.
On the supply side in Fig. 5.4, there are also important uncer-
tainties. The plans of regional utilities to build nuclear plants have
not yet received all necessary permits and approvals, and intense debate
over public safety and environmental pollution continues. Systematic con-
version of oil-fired plants to coal could be required as a matter of
national policy. Finally, if electric storage batteries are sufficiently
improved, energy stored during early morning hours could be used to meet
peak demands of the afternoon; substantially less generating capacity
would then suffice, allowing the construction of less new capacity, whether
nuclear or other, or earlier retirement of existing oil-fired facilities,
or some combination of the two.
Given the projections of Figs. 5.4, considerable reserve capa-
city will be available even on the peak-demand day during the early morn-
ing hours. This capacity could be used for electric car recharge; if it
were, oil would be the additional fuel principally consumed on the peak
day in 1980 and 1990. The capacity potentially available for electric
car recharge is shown in Fig. 5.5. The unused generating capacity is
assumed to be as shown in Fig. 5.4, with recharge done late at night
and in the early morning hours, and total demand including recharging
limited to 85% of the annual peak so as to provide for necessary mainte-
nance. On the average day rather than the peak day, much more power would
be available. Also shown in Fig. 5.5 are the recharge requirements for
100% electric car use, given the baseline auto mileage projections of
Sec. 3 and each of the per-mile electric car energy requirements of Sec. 2.
Even at rapid rates of electric car introduction, as will be discus-
sed in Sec. 8, it appears unlikely that the required recharge power would
exceed the available generating capacity projected, even for the peak day
of the year. Thus generating capacity for recharge poses no limitations
62
-------
300
200
y 100
ELECTRIC ENERGY AVAILABLE
FOR OVERNIGHT RECHARGING
ELECTRIC ENERGY REQUIRED
FOR lOOt ELECTRIC CAR USE
AVERAGE DAY
LITHIUM-
SULFUR
ZINC-CHLORINE
PEAK DAY
1970
1980
1990
2000
YEAR
Figure 5.5. Projected Electric Car Recharge Energy, South Coast Air Basin
(Sources: See Text)
on electric car use—unless, of course, baseline electric energy projections
are not fulfilled. This might come about if advocates of reduced growth,
environmental protection, neighborhood preservation, or nuclear safety
prevail in legislative and judicial proceedings over utility plant expan-
sion. It might also come about if rapid advances in battery technology
permit utilities to store substantial quantities of electricity economi-
cally, allowing sizing of their generating facilities for average rather
than peak loads. In this instance utilities might be expected to build
additional new facilities only as required to serve electric cars (unless
restrained by the forces just noted); if these new facilities were nuclear,
then electric car use even on the peak day would not require petroleum
fuels.
63
-------
5.3 ENERGY IMPACTS
The energy consumption of prospective conventional and electric cars
in the South Coast Air Basin is shown in Fig. 5.6. The average ICE car
is expected to become much more efficient in its fuel usage, as discussed
in Sec. 3. Energy usage for ICE cars in Fig. 5.6 includes a 10% penalty
for refining energy in excess of that required in the production of power
plant fuels from crude oil. Energy usages for electric cars in Fig. 5.6
assume a power plant efficiency of 36% (9500 Btu/kWh), and 91% transmis-
sion efficiency, as projected by SCE.
Overall, advancing battery technology promises to keep electric cars
a bit ahead of the advancing efficiency of the average ICE car. It must
be noted, however, that the electric cars are all low-performance subcom-
pacts, in contrast to the larger "average" ICE car. In comparison with
ICE subcompacts, as represented by the current Pinto and Honda in Fig. 5.6,
the lead-acid battery car is relatively inefficient, and the advanced bat-
tery cars offer modest improvements which may well be matched by engineer-
ing progress in ICE subcompacts. The Pinto was the best selling subcompact
in the Los Angeles region in 1973; the Honda led all subcompacts in fuel
economy as measured by EPA for 1974 models.
In comparison with the average ICE car of Fig. 5.6, electric cars
would offer some saving in petroleum use even if recharging were entirely
dependent on petroleum-fired electric power generation. Under the base-
line projections of this study, however, energy sources other than petro-
leum will become available for at least a portion of overnight recharging
on the average day, as shown in Fig. 5.4. In consequence, usage of
electric cars instead of average ICE cars would reduce petroleum consump-
tion considerably more than Fig. 5.6 alone would imply. This is illus-
trated in Fig. 5.7, which shows savings in petroleum use for automotive
travel as a function of percentage auto travel by electric cars, for each
electric car characterized in Sec. 2. The "typical" weekday of Fig. 5.7
is a composite of typical weekdays for all 12 months of the year; thus the
64
-------
12.000
10,000
to
§
o.
I
8000
6000
S 4000
2000
,AVERAGE ICE CAR
-1974 PINTO
-1974 HONDA
LITHIUM-SULFUR CAR
ZINC-CHLORINE CAR
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
Figure 5.6. Comparative Auto Energy Consumption (Sources: Task Report 8,
Tables 2.1 and 2.2; EPA 1974 Fuel Economy Measurements)
100
S
o
60
40
20
NOTE: BASED ON LADWP DATA
Zn-Cl, 2000
'XLi-S, 2000
H'1-Zn. 2000
Zn-Cl, 1990
Z
' Li-S, 1990
^
Ni-Zn, 1990
20 40 60
PERCENT ELECTRIC CAR USAGE
Figure 5.7. Petroleum Savings as a Function of Electric Car Usage, South
Coast Air Basin (Source: Task Report 8, Fig. 2.7)
65
-------
savings it shows in petroleum use are approximately those which could be
achieved during a full year of electric car use. In general, low usage of
electric cars can be almost entirely accomplished with recharge from
nuclear power in 1990, so that initial petroleum savings are proportional
to electric car use. At higher levels, where oil-fired recharge power
is required, electric cars produce further saving on account of their
greater overall fuel economy (compared to the "average" ICE car),, but the
rate of increase with electric car use is much less rapid.
At very high levels of use, electric cars must replace average ICE
cars, as assumed throughout in Fig. 5.7. At low levels of use, however,
electric cars might replace only subcompacts, in which case petroleum sav-
ings would be much less. On the other hand, the baseline projection of
fuel economy for the average ICE car could prove overoptimistic, in which
case savings due to electric car use could be significantly increased at
every usage level.
In the baseline projections, relatively little additional generation
of electric power from coal is included. Much-increased dependence on
coal, however, is an important possibility in the US, not just for electric
power generation, but also for production of synthetic crude oil and gaso-
line for automotive propulsion. In both these applications, important
technological advances are likely: production of gasoline from coal itself
is a significant technological innovation, while Advanced Power Cycles are
being developed for improved efficiency of coal use in electric power
generation. Some of these prospects are illustrated in Fig. 5.8, which
compares the energy content of coal which would be required in various
future years for automotive transportation by ICE cars and electric cars.
While there are many uncertainties, it appears that as much as 50% less
coal could be required in future years to propel electric rather than
ICE cars.
66
-------
10
E
3
+J
co
*
z
o
t—I
H-
O.
CJJ
OC
or
a.
Q.
i/o
8
0
MODERN COAL FIRFD
POWER PLANT
Pb-ACID BATTERY
D
IOAL/SYNCRUUL7GASOLINE/20 HPG
1980
1990
APC = COAL/GAS/BRAYTON/RANKINE
MHD TOPPING = COAL/MHD/RANKINE
130 MPG
MHD TOPPING, LEAD-ACID
MHD TOPPING, Ni-Zn
MHD TOPPING, Zn-Cl
2000
Figure 5.8. Comparison of Alternative Uses of Coal for Automotive Trans-
portation (Source: Task Report 8, Fig. 2.1)
-------
6 RESOURCE IMPACTS
Requirements of copper, steel, plastics, and other common materials
for the electric cars of Sec. 2, without batteries, are modest in relation
to overall US demand. At present auto sales rates in the South Coast Air
Basin, for example, 100% substitution of the electric cars of Sec. 2 for
conventional new cars would increase US copper demand less than 1%. The
batteries of the electric cars, however, require various less-common
materials; the amounts necessary could potentially impact US markets sub-
stantially, or even exceed domestic reserves.
Table 6.1 summarizes the resource impacts of key battery materials
for maintaining large numbers of cars in the Los Angeles region. As in-
dications of material availability, Table 6.1 shows US primary production
and demand in 1968 and as projected to the year 2000, both from US Bureau
of Mines data published in 1970. Electric car requirements are stated in
terms of annual need for maintaining a given level of electric car usage,
as opposed to building up the electric car population and its battery
material inventory. Finally, significant impacts are noted, where they
occur, for possible usage of electric cars both in the South Coast Air
Basin and nationwide.
Comparison of the production and demand columns of Table 6.1 to the
annual requirement column shows the prospective overall level of market
impact, and the extent to which imports, foreign dependence, and foreign
payments would be involved. Where electric car requirements are a small
fraction of US primary production—that is, production exclusive of
recycling—imports would be unnecessary. Where the electric car require-
ments are large compared to US primary demand, the major impact would
probably be to increase imports. In the particular case of titanium,
present production of titanium metal is near zero, and US demand is quite
small. Production of and demand for titanium compounds, however, is very
much larger. Table 6.1 shows the titanium content of such compounds, on
the assumption that extraction of the metal could and would be undertaken
to fulfill electric car demand.
68
-------
TABLE 6.1
BATTERY MATERIAL PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION
(Source: Task Report 8, Table 3.5)
Significant Impact
Quantities, Thousands of Tons
US Primary Production
Battery Type
Lead- Ac id
Nickel-Zinc
Zinc-Chlorine
Lithium-Sulfur
Material
Lead
Antimony
Nickel
Zinc
Zinc
Titanium
(Metal)
Chlorine
Lithium
Graphite
Sulfur
1968
354
1.9
15
529
529
305
(0)
8,400
2.9
3.0
11,000
2000 (Range)
520-1,120
2.5-4.8
36-52
786-1,500
786-1,500
670-1,610
(0)
26,400-
43,900
9.4-14.4
4.0-4.7
28,000-
45,000
per Year A:
US Prinary Demand a
1968
880
21.1
160
1,406
1.406
440
(13)
8,400
2.6
60
10,000
2000 (Range)
1,300-2,800
28-52
382-550
2,040-4,000
2,040-4,000
960-2,160
(62-234)
26,400-
43,900
8.7-13.1
80-135
26,000-
41,500
nnual Electric^
r Consumption,
South Coast
Air Basin
22
0.6
29
20
12
9.5
130f
3.2
50t
128f
Percent Electric
Car Use Assumed, South Coast »*
for Future Year T A.ir Basin. Nationwide .
Implementation Implementation
17?,
17* ,
46Z,
461,
100Z,
1001,
100Z,
100Z,
100X,
100Z,
1980 X
1980 X
1990 X
1990
2000
2000 Xtf
2000
2000 Xt+ Xft
2000 X X
2000
Assume constant electric car population, 2-year battery life, and 907. material recycling. This does not Include inventory buildup in cars on
the road.
Significant impacts are assumed wherever annual materials requirements exceed 20Z of US primary demand for that year, as determined by linear
interpolation between the 1968 demand and the midpoint of the range projected for 2000. National requirements for materials are assumed to be
20 times those for the South Coast Air Basin.
No recycling assumed for this material.
4.—
Electric car requirements for these materials would Impact on production capacity for metallic forms.
-------
The annual requirement column of Table 6.1 assumes the usage of
electric cars tabulated in the adjacent column, with two-year battery
life and 90% recycling of battery materials. A two-year life is rela-
tively brief, even for lead-acid batteries, and tends if anything to
overestimate the amount of battery material to be replaced each year.
90% recycling is the figure currently indicated for lead (in lead-acid
battery data from the Battery Council International), and may also lead
to overstatement of material requirements. The batteries required by
the electric cars described in Sec. 2 are much more valuable than con-
ventional auto batteries as salvage; recycling rates would tend to in-
crease as a result. Again, the effect is to make the annual requirement
of Table 6.1 conservatively large.
The maximum likely usage of lead-acid electric cars, as shown in
Sec. 8, is for 17% of Los Angeles area travel in 1980. The resultant
lead and antimony requirements are well under 10% of 1968 US primary de-
mand, and hence not deemed likely to produce significant impacts. Nation-
wide, however, a 17% population of such cars would require 20 times the
quantities of materials in Table 6.1; and this would clearly impact the
metal market significantly.
Though nickel is a relatively scarce material, nickel for nickel-
zinc batteries would not significantly impact the national market if
electric car usage in Los Angeles reached the 46% level in 1990, the
maximum foreseen in Sec. 8; but at 100% usage it would approach the sig-
nificance threshold adopted in Table 6.1. The US is highly dependent on
nickel imports; at $2 a pound, 29,000 tons of nickel imported per year
would cost over a hundred million dollars and alter the US balance of
payments accordingly.
The material requirements of the zinc-chlorine battery are relatively
moderate, even for 100% usage in the Los Angeles area. For national im-
plementation at the 100% level, however, the titanium (compound) market
would be significantly perturbed.
70
-------
The lithium required for lithium-sulfur batteries could impact
national markets significantly, even for electric cs.r usage only in Los
Angeles. The present production of lithium is quite low, apparently
because demand is low, and it is interesting to note that the US has
been an exporter of the metal. Because production is quite small, it
could probably be expanded to cope with electric car needs for Los Angeles,
but national needs would be much more difficult. The US demand for
graphite could be nearly doubled by demands for these batteries in the
Los Angeles area alone. Graphite, however, is relatively inexpensive
(around 10
-------
TABLE 6.2
MATERIAL RESERVES AND REQUIREMENTS
(Source: Task Report 8, Table 3.6)
Estimated Reserves,
Thousands of Short Tons
Maximum Inventory Required for
100% Electric Car Use in 2000
Lead
Antimony
Nickel
Zinc
Titanium
Lithium
Graphite
US
39,000
110
900
78,000
25,250
5 , 254
600
World
99,000
4,000
> 75, 000
90,000
160,000
6,036
VLOO.OOO
South Coast
Air Basin
3,550
91
1,360
**
1,000
188
64
106
*
United States
71,000
1,820
27,200
**
20,000
3,760
1,280
2,120
Assumes national requirement is 20 times that of South Coast Air Basin
alone.
Determined by nickel-zinc battery car; requirements for zinc-chlorine
battery are about 24% of these amounts.
Generally, of course, it must be recognized that reserves are cal-
culated on the basis of known deposits from which materials may be ex-
tracted at specified prices, usually near those prevalent at the time of
the estimate. New discoveries of mineral deposits, new production tech-
nology, and increases in materials prices can all cause reserve estimates
to increase significantly. Recent major increases in nickel prices, for
example, have made extraction from laterite deposits profitable, warrant-
ing major additions to the reserves shown in Table 6.2.
72
-------
7 ECONOMIC IMPACTS
7.1 IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION CONSUMERS
For the consumer, the electric car will be important in its direct
impacts on the costs of automotive travel. Prospective costs for the
electric cars characterized in Sec. 2 are summarized in Table 7.1, together
with baseline cost projections for both subcompact and standard ICE cars.
Table 7.1 generally follows the format of the annual DOT publica-
tion Cost of Operating an Automobile, from which the ICE costs were pri-
marily derived. To this format, in the last two lines of Table 7.1, are
appended financing charges and total costs which include them. Financing
charges were computed as though purchase costs of cars and propulsion bat-
teries were amortized in equal payments throughout their lifetimes, at a
10% annual rate of interest. This rate is a compromise between the higher
interest charges customary in auto financing, and the lower interest in-
come that consumers forego on the equity they have in a car. The financ-
ing charge is necessary to reflect the considerably higher average invest-
ment which consumers must eventually support in electric cars.
For the ICE cars of Table 7.1, recent DOT figures are modified in
two respects. First, additional initial and recurrent costs of anti-
pollution devices are added in accord with estimates developed by the
Environmental Protection Agency. Second, gasoline and oil prices are
adjusted upward to the range of 50-SOc per gallon for gasoline, as is
projected to prevail (in 1973 dollars) through the study period. It
should be noted that the DOT fuel economy figures were not modified; thus
the major improvements projected in Fig. 3.5 are not reflected in Table
7.1. For the average Los Angeles car, these improvements could reduce
fuel costs by about two-thirds of a cent per mile in the year 2000.
For the electric cars of Table 7.1, a 20% longer life was assumed
than used by DOT for ICE cars. Considering the probable long life of
73
-------
TABLE 7.1
PROJECTED LIFE-CYCLE CAR COSTS
1973 Dollars
(Source: Task Report 9, Tables 2.1, 2.3, 2.4)
*
ICE Cars
Battery-Electric Cars
Cost Item
Depreciation
Basic Vehicle
Propulsion Battery and
Replacements
Repairs and Maintenance
Replacement Tires
Accessories
Pollution Control
***
Gasoline and Oil
Electricity
Insurance
Garaging, Parking, Tolls,
Etc.
Taxes
Financing Charge
TOTAL
Total Average Cost per
Mile
Subcompact
$2,270
0
1,953
344
57
860
2,004-3,484
0
1,376
1,990
805
1,591
13,250-14,730
.133-. 147
Standard
$4,817
0
2,362
440
57
930
3,097-5,395
0
1,485
1,990
1,299
3,200
19,677-21,975
.197-. 220
Lead-Acid
$2,977
4,200-10,982
1,200
527
69
0
0
1,800
1,782
2,388
1,248
3,009-3,225
19,200-26,498
.16-. 218
Nickel-Zinc
$ 2,945
6,125
900
451
69
0
0
1,163
1,782
2,388
1,241
4,462
21,609
.180
Zinc-Chlorine
$ 2,891
993
900
451
69
0
0
935
1,782
2,388
1,241
2,640
14,290
.119
Lithium-Sulfur
$ 2,795
1,440-2,400
900
451
69
0
0
1,026
1,782
2,388
1,241
2,580-2,628
li, 672-15, 680
.122-. 1?1
**
10-year, 100,000-mile life.
12-year, 120,000-mile life.
At gasoline prices per gallon of $.40-.70 (not including $.10 tax), with corresponding range for oil; 21.A and 1?.6
miles/gallon were assumed.
Assumes amortization of car and propulsion battery purchase prices over respective lifetimes at 107. interest charges.
-------
the electric car's motor and controller, and the enhanced car body life
likely in the gentle climate of Los Angeles, even longer lifetimes are
possible. The 20% increase of Table 7.1 assumes that lifetime will be
limited by interior and exterior wear and tear, by technological obso-
lescence, and by style changes, which in combination will eventually lead
consumers to prefer purchasing new cars to repairing and refurbishing
old ones.
Electricity costs for electric car recharging were assumed to be
1.9C per kilowatt-hour in Table 7.1, near the average marginal rate for
large residential users in a recent year. Higher rates may be coming,
but their effects on total costs would be minor, since electricity amounts
to less than 10% of the total electric car costs per mile in Table 7.1.
Road user taxes in current amounts are assumed for both electric and ICE
cars; they are included in a separate tax'account rather than in fuel
costs.
Like fuel costs, repair and maintenance costs for electric cars are
expected to be substantially less per mile than for gasoline cars, as will
be discussed in more detail in Sec. 7.2. For the next decade, however,
total electric car costs promise to be near the cost of standard-size ICE
cars, and substantially higher than for ICE subcompacts. This is a conse-
quence of the large prospective depreciation and financing costs of lead-
acid and nickel-zinc batteries.
In accord with Sec. 2, the high-energy lead-acid battery pack is
expected to last roughly 1.3 to 3.4 years in automotive use. At a retail
price of 80c a pound (including a 10% allowance for turn-in of the old
battery), the battery pack will cost about $1,200 to replace. Even at
the high usage of 10,000 miles per year, the resultant depreciation charges
range from 3.5c to 9c per mile. As noted previously, the longer life and
lower cost are probably optimistic.
75
-------
Because of its more expensive materials and higher capability, the
nickel-zinc battery pack will cost about $2,930 (or even more, if recent
increases in nickel prices persist). At a life of 400 full discharges
or proportionately more partial discharges (as described in Sec. 2), the
total depreciation cost for this battery pack is near that of the longer-
lived lead-acid battery pack in Table 7.1.
If the goals of their developers are met, the zinc-chlorine and
lithium-sulfur batteries will relieve the depreciation cost problem and
make electric subcompacts cost-competitive with ICE subcompacts. The
developers expect an initial cost of only $600 for these batteries, which
are considerably lighter than the lead-acid and nickel-zinc batteries.
Life targets are 500 deep cycles and 3-5 years, respectively; but the
likelihood of meeting these ambitious targets remains to be established
by laboratory and in-the-field vehicular tests.
Average car costs in the Los Angeles area are between those of the
standards and subcompacts of Table 7.1, and are expected to move lower
as the proportion of subcompacts in the auto population increases to a
projected maximum of 45% by 1990. Table 7.2 shows extra total costs of
electric cars relative to these average ICE car costs, which are neces-
sarily the proper basis for comparison if electric car usage levels are
very high. At lower levels of electric car use, where primarily subcom-
pacts would be replaced, extra total costs could be higher, as is also
shown in Table 7.2.
7.2 IMPACTS ON TRANSPORTATION SUPPLIERS
Baseline Projections. The importance of auto-related economic
activity in the South Coast Air Basin in 1971 is indicated in Table 7.3.
About 3.5% of the area's economy is directly involved in supplying and
supporting automotive transportation, but a larger fraction of the area's
businesses are involved because of the large number of gasoline stations.
76
-------
TABLE 7.2
EXTRA LIFE-CYCLE COSTS OF ELECTRIC CARS
(Source: Task Report 9, Table 2.5)
*
Extra Life-Cycle Cost Per Mile
Electric Car
Battery Type
Lead-Acid
Nickel-Zinc
Zinc-Chlorine
Lithium-Sulfur
Relative to Average
Los Angeles ICE Car
1% to 37%
13%
-25%
-15% to -21%
Relative to Los
Angeles ICE Subcompact
20% to 63%
35%
-11%
-2% to -8%
*
Assumes gasoline at 50c per gallon including tax in 1973 dollars.
Baseline total regional employment was projected for the study
period as summarized in Table 7.4. Baseline activity in each of the
industrial classifications of Table 7.3 was separately projected from
historical trends. The auto-related employment thus determined is also
shown in Table 7.4, as a percentage of total employment. This percentage
grows slowly, primarily because of higher-than-average rates of employ-
ment growth in the auto distribution, supply, and repair sectors.
The employment in industries likely to be impacted by electric cars
is relatively small. At under 4% of the total for the South Coast Air
Basin, it stands well below current regional unemployment. Even if Los
Angeles shifted entirely to electric cars in a period as short as ten
years, the annual impact on regional employment would be very small.
Within the individual industries of Table 7.3, however, electric car use
would make major changes. As shown in Table 7.5, activity in several of
these industries is highly dependent on the needs of automotive internal-
combustion engine systems (including radiator, exhaust, fuel, and ignition
subsystems)—needs unlikely to be paralleled in automotive electric motor
77
-------
oo
TABLE 7.3
RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF AUTO-RELATED ACTIVITY, SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN (1971)
(Source: Task Report 4, Table 4.2)
Employment
Vehicle and Parts Mfg. 19,210
(SIC 3717)
Petroleum — Wholesale and
Retail Sales (SIC 5092 39,703
and 5541)
Auto Parts and Supplies 22,606
(SIC 5013, 5014, and
5531)
Auto Repair (SIC 7534, 9,448
7538, and 7539)
Vehicle Distribution 5,606
(SIC 5012)
Vehicle Sales (SIC 5511 37,679
and 5521)
Battery and Motor Mfg. 4,910
(SIC 3621, 3622, and 3691)
Percent of
Area Total
Employment
0.5
1.0
0.6
0.2
0.1
0.9
0.1
3.4
-. , . Percent of Number _ ,
layr,01' Area Total of *erce<* of
$ million payroll Firmg Area Firms
233.5 0.7 62 0.0
192.7 0.6 6,694 4.1
175.4 0.6 1,938 1.2
65.0 0.2 2,444 1.5
57.2 0.2 147 0.1
362.2 1.2 1,182 0.7
44.5 0.1 65 0.1
3.6 7.7
-------
TABLE 7.4
BASELINE PROJECTIONS OF TOTAL AND AUTO-RELATED
EMPLOYMENT, SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
(Source: Task Report 4, Tables 2.1, 4.5-4.7)
Total Projected Projected Auto-Related
Employment Employment, Percent of Total
1980
1990
2000
4,335,000
4,579,000
5,025,000
3.7%
3.9%
4.0%
TABLE 7.5
CURRENT PERCENT DEPENDENCE OF AUTO SUPPORT INDUSTRIES
ON THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE SYSTEM
(Source: Task Report 9, Tables 3.3, 3.5, 3.6)
Service Stations 91%
Auto Parts and Supplies 44%
Auto Repairs and Service 72%
systems. In battery manufacturing, however, the situation is reversed.
These cases are discussed individually, in order of importance of employ-
ment impacts, in the remainder of this section. Section 7.3 discusses
the collective impacts.
Impacts on the Petroleum Distribution Industry. According to re-
cent figures for the South Coast Air Basin, over 82% of service station
sales are concentrated in gasoline and oil. After allowance for addi-
tional ICE-related sales of parts and labor, only an estimated 9.2% of
sales would remain if all ICE automobiles were replaced by electric cars.
For lead-acid battery cars, the reduction is partly offset by new require-
ments for periodic inspection and addition of water to the individual
79
-------
cells of the batteries. 50% of motorists were assumed to service these
batteries themselves, to save the expense and time of visiting a service
station; nevertheless, the prospective reduction in baseline employment
for wholesale and retail petroleum distribution is 71%, assuming 100%
usage of lead-acid electric cars. Other battery cars utilize battery
systems for which maintenance will be largely or entirely eliminated;
the consequent impacts are even greater than for lead-acid battery cars.
Impacts on the Battery Manufacturing Industry. Because battery
production can be economical on a relatively modest scale and because
battery materials will be largely recycled, local manufacturing.of bat-
teries is projected for electric cars in the Los Angeles region. With
high levels of electric car use, much of the decrease in service station
employment will be compensated by an increase in battery manufacturing
employment. Of the battery candidates, only lead-acid batteries are now
in production; hence the estimates of employment requirements for manu-
facture of advanced batteries, which here were based on discussions with
battery developers, are at best relatively uncertain. Moreover, battery
production rates (and manufacturing employment) for a given level of
electric car use will depend on battery lifetimes, which are also uncertain.
Impacts on the Automotive Aftermarket and Repair Industry. Elimi-
nation of ICE propulsion would eliminate 44% of current sales of automo-
tive aftermarket items, according to Table 7.5. To the remaining sales
would then be added sales of replacement batteries for electric cars,
which differ for each battery type depending on its prospective frequency
of replacement. Except for the short-lived lead-acid batteries, however,
battery sales to electric cars would be less frequent than for the ICE
cars they replaced. Each battery would, of course, be a much larger
unit at a much higher price for the electric cars; but a much lower per-
centage markup and ratio of sales effort per sales dollar is expected.
80
-------
Recent reports of frequencies of ICE car services, labor involved
per service, and the resultant distribution of service labor Indicate
that over 50% of labor hours are involved in ICE engine overhaul and
tuneup alone. In total, removal of the ICE system would eliminate about
72% of car service hours. Added service requirements of the electric
power train are expected to be minimal: annual inspection of the con-
troller and motor, with motor brush replacement as necessary. Battery
service for electric cars was previously assumed to be performed at ser-
vice stations, and is not included here.
7.3 OVERALL ECONOMIC IMPACT
Table 7.6 aggregates the impacts that were discussed individually
in Sec. 7.2, plus small additional impacts expected in the new car sales
industry. In every case, substantial reductions in total regional employ-
ment are the direct result of the assumed 100% usage of electric cars.
Reductions in total area personal income are relatively less, however,
TABLE 7.6
DIRECT EFFECTS ON LOCAL IMPACTED INDUSTRY DUE TO 100% ELECTRIC
CAR USE IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
(Source: Task Report 9, Table 4.1)
Total Direct Effects on Impacted Industries
Year
1980
1990
2000
Electric Car
Battery Type
Lead-Acid
Lead-Acid
Nickel-Zinc
Zinc-Chlorine
Zinc-Chlorine
Lithium-Sulfur
As Percent of
Total Area Employment
-0.22 to -0.79
-0.17 to -0.74
-0.88
-1.20
-1.21
-1.15 to -1.25
As Percent of
Area Personal Income
-0.23 to +0.14
-0.20 to -4-0.15
-0.18
-0.36
-0.31
-0.27 to -0.31
81
-------
largely due to a shift In employment from low-pay service station jobs
to higher-pay battery manufacturing jobs, as shown In Table 7.7. In the
case of the shortest-life lead-acid battery, regional personal Income
would actually Increase due to this effect.
Although auto manufacturing activity In the South Coast Air Basin
Is almost entirely assembly, which would presumably continue with little
change even though electric propulsion replaced ICE propulsion, outside
the area there would be Impacts felt due to wide use of electric cars in
Los Angeles. These Impacts would come about through reduction of ICE
manufacturing and a corresponding increase in electric motor and control
manufacturing. The ICE manufacturing reduction would be small compared
to annual national fluctuations in the automotive business, however, and
consequently minor in impact. The national impacts on electric motor and
control manufacturing would range downward from 3.3% and must also be
regarded as minor.
In the employment changes of Table 7.7, individuals losing service
station jobs who could find new employment in battery manufacturing would
benefit through a major Increase in earnings. Such cases could be few,
TABLE 7.7
STRUCTURE OF EMPLOYMENT CHANGES IN THE SOUTH COAST
AIR BASIN DUE TO 100% ELECTRIC CAR USE, 1990
(Source: Task Report 9, Table 4.2)
Petroleum Battery Auto Parts
Distribution Manufacturing and Service
Electric Car Type:
Lead-Acid -32,400 14,800 to 39,200 -14,900 to -11,400 -3,450
Hickel-Zinc -41,500 20,600 -15,800 -3,450
Zinc-Chlorine -41,500 6,600 -16,800 -3,450
Lithium-Sulfur -41,500 4,600 to 8,100 -18,600 to -14,600 -3,450
82
-------
however, because many service station jobs require minimal skills and are
often held by those unqualified for more demanding employment elsewhere.
Beyond the direct effects of Table 7.7, secondary and tertiary im-
pacts on regional economic activity may be expected. For 100% use of
lead-acid or nickel-zinc battery cars, total regional expenditure for auto
transportation would increase significantly, while regional labor inputs
to supply this transportation would generally decrease. The difference
would be made up by expanded regional imports from the rest of the nation,
with a corresponding reduction in regional funds available for purchase
and import of other needed commodities and services. Such reductions tend
to depress regional payrolls. Conversely, reduced regional expenditures
for zinc-chlorine and lithium-sulfur battery cars could increase funds
available for extra-regional purchases and thus tend to expand regional
economic activity.
83
-------
8 USAGE ANALYSIS
8.1 APPROACH
The competitive disadvantages of electric cars in the auto market-
place have long held their sales and usage to negligible levels. Air
pollution and energy considerations external to free-market transactions,
however, suggest that much higher electric car use might be beneficial
overall in future years. In this section, specific higher levels of
electric car sales and use are hypothesized, so that the desirability of
the net impacts may be subsequently evaluated.
First, daily driving patterns in Los Angeles are analyzed to develop
basic needed data: the extent to which limited-range cars are applicable
to drivers' actual travel. Next a lower bound on future electric car
use is developed by projecting free-market sales, and an upper bound is
postulated from production lead-time considerations. Then intermediate
usage levels are hypothesized as possible public policy goals, and measures
required to achieve them are considered. Finally, specific schedules for
introducing alternative electric cars are postulated, so that the net
benefits of alternative future levels of use may be evaluated in Sec. 9.
In this analysis, as throughout this report, overnight recharging of
electric car batteries is assumed. This assumption is important to usage
for two reasons: first, because it implies that daily driving must be
limited to the range between recharges; and second, because it also
implies that availability of residential recharging facilities will be a
prerequisite for electric car use.
To circumvent the range limitations of electric cars implicit in
overnight recharging, systems of service stations are sometimes suggested
to make available interchangeable battery packs. Such stations would main-
tain large inventories of battery packs on recharge, substituting fully
charged for discharged packs with results equivalent to refilling the
84
-------
gasoline tanks of conventional cars. In any large-scale, long-term usage
of electric cars with very limited range, such institutional arrangements
would surely develop to supplement overnight recharging, despite the
considerable associated cost. In this study, however, such prospects are
not considered further, simply because improved technology, improved
range capability, and therefore reduced need for battery exchange appear
less than ten years away. Within that limited time, the wide development
of a battery exchange system seems unlikely.
Overnight recharging of electric car batteries requires considerable
amounts of electricity. At the energy consumption rates of Table 2.2,
recharge energy for the average day's driving of 30 miles will range from
about 12 to 24 kWh. Corresponding average recharge power levels during
8 hours are 1.5 to 3 kW. Initial recharge rates may be twice the average
rates, however, so 3 to 6 kW may initially be desirable; on days of more
than average driving, further increases in charging power will be required.
In comparison, the standard 110-V, 15 amp AC outlet delivers 1.65 kW
maximum. Evidently, then, 220-volt circuits capable of delivering 5 to
10 kW will be required for overnight recharge, and electric cars will be
unattractive or infeasible for those who cannot conveniently arrange such
electrical service at their car's overnight parking place.
8.2 APPLICABILITY OF LIMITED-RANGE ELECTRIC CARS
The lead-acid battery car of Sec. 2 is capable of some 55 miles of
urban driving between recharges, considerably more than the 30 miles driven
each day by the average urban motorist. Nevertheless, the electric car is
not necessarily adequate for the average motorist, because he will
occasionally wish to drive further than its range capability—even if the
capability is increased far above 55 miles. The adequacy and applicability
of the electric car must consequently be measured in terms of the fraction
of days on which its range would probably satisfy typical driving
requirements.
85
-------
In this study, an electric car range adequate for 95% of urban
driving days was employed as the criterion of electric car applicability.
Less than a 5% sacrifice in desired urban travel is implied by this
criterion, since even on problem days the electric car could provide at
least a part of the desired mileage. Interurban travel is assumed here
to be made by other means.
Though urban driver travel has been repeatedly surveyed in origin-
destination studies across the nation, the basic analytic unit has been
the single trip. This unit, unfortunately, is inadequate for the present
purpose. To determine the probability that the average driver will wish
to drive more than a specified range on an average day, the distribution
of total trip mileages for driving days must be determined. To do so,
computer tapes were obtained from the Los Angeles Regional Transportation
Study detailing 197,000 trips described at 33,000 households (a 1% sample)
in the 1967 origin-destination survey. A special processing program then
computed and totaled mileages of trips reported by each surveyed driver
for the survey day, and from these whole-day mileages developed distributions
of daily driver travel.
The resultant distributions of urban travel distance on the survey
day are shown in Fig. 8.1, together with the ranges selected for lead-acid
and advanced battery cars. Among drivers with cars available on the
survey day—that is, drivers from households reporting as many available
vehicles as drivers—83% drove less than the range of the lead-acid battery
cars, while 98.4% drove less than the range of the advanced battery cars.
Where a single car served the needs of two drivers, the corresponding
figures were lower: 55% and 95%. Since the survey disclosed that 88% of
drivers had cars available, and in future years even higher automobile
ownership is predicted, the upper distribution of Fig. 8.1 has been taken
to define electric car applicability, rather than the more demanding
lower distribution for single cars serving two drivers.
86
-------
CJ
Qi
LU
Q-
o
99
98
95
90
80
60
40
20
2 DRIVERS,
1 CAR
DRIVERS WITH CARS
10
20
I
I
LEAD-ACID BATTERY
CAR RANGE
I
ADVANCED BATTERY
CAR RANGE
i I I I I I
40 60
DISTANCE, mi
80 TOO
200
Figure 8.1. Adjusted Distributions of Daily Travel, Los Angeles Region,
1967 (Source: Task Report 10, Fig. 4.2)
87
-------
Though the advanced battery-car range is generally applicable to
drivers' needs by the criterion of this study (even for cars shared by
two drivers), the lead-acid battery car is not. It could be satisfactory,
however, in restricted circumstances. Figure 8.2 shows daily driving
range distributions for secondary drivers in multicar households, computed
from the basic results of Fig. 8.1 under the assumption that separate travel
of individual drivers in households is uncorrelated (i.e., that two drivers
in a household will not tend to plan separate long trips for the same days).
The figure shows that the lead-acid battery car would be applicable to
96.6% of secondary-driver days in two-car households, where the secondary
driver is defined as that driver traveling least on the given day.
For electric cars to be useful, overnight recharging facilities
must be made available. This will generally require a 220-volt electric
outlet near the car's parking place. Such outlets are not always feasible:
according to the 1967 survey, only 74% of Los Angeles area cars had off-
street overnight parking available. Furthermore, some of this off-street
parking was in apartment lots or garages in which electric installations
would be more difficult to arrange than at single-family houses, where
the householder is in control and often has both 220-volt service and a
private garage.
89% of single-family housing units reported having off-street parking
in the survey, and were assumed to be able to provide recharge facilities
for electric cars in 1980. 1,136,000 single-family households in the
Los Angeles area are expected to have more than one car by 1980; at 89%
of these, or 1,011,000 households, the lead-acid electric car might
reasonably replace a conventional secondary car. In 1990, advanced
battery cars with sufficient range for general use might reasonably replace
all cars having off-street parking at single-family housing units. Of
4,188,000 cars expected at single-family housing units, at least 74%, or
3,099,000, should have off-street parking. By 2000, when electric cars
might be in more general use, recharge provisions might be assumed
available at off-street parking of all residences, that is, for 74% of
all cars in the region, or 5,624,000 cars.
88
-------
CD
Q.
99.8
99.5
99
98
95
90
80
60
40
20
10
TWO-CAR
HOUSEHOLD
20
I
LEAD-ACID BATTERY
CAR RANGE
ADVANCED BATTERY
CAR RANGE
I
I I I
40 60
DISTANCE, mi
80 100
200
Figure 8.2. Probability of Daily Driving Less than a Given Distance for
Secondary Drivers with Cars (Source: Task Report 10, Fig. 5.1)
89
-------
These projections of candidates for electric car replacement in future
years are shown in Table 8.1. For 1980, the candidates constitute 17% of
all cars but account for only 11% of daily vehicle miles. This arises in
the limited daily range and usage of secondary cars, which would be driven
only 6400 miles per year rather than the usual 10,000 miles.
The numbers of candidate cars in Table 8.1 are plainly impressive.
Even with the limited 55-mile range assumed for electric cars with lead-
acid battery technology, over a million conventional cars could be
replaced in the Los Angeles region with very little sacrifice of daily
urban travel. Since driving in Los Angeles appears similar to 'that
elsewhere in the nation, prospects are that electric cars could find
comparably wide application on a national basis.
TABLE 8.1
CANDIDATES FOR ELECTRIC CAR REPLACEMENT, SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN
Source: Task Report 10, Table 5.4
Cars,
Daily
thousands
Percent of Total
Vehicle Miles, millions
Percent of Total
1980
1,011
17
18
11
1990
3,099
46
90
46
2000
5,624
74
169
74
8.3 ALTERNATIVE USAGE LEVELS
Prospective free-market sales and use of electric cars place a
lower bound on their usage and consequent impact. Recent electric car
market studies based on consumer interviews, for example, projected that
only 1 to 2% of national car sales would be captured by electric cars in
1980.*
See Task Report 10, Sec. 6.3.
90
-------
In a free-market projection for the Los Angeles region undertaken
for this study, a review of price, performance, and market share data for
subcompact ICE car sales In the Los Angeles area disclosed no useful
quantitative relationships for projecting electric car sales. Instead,
the data show that wide differences in market shares of competing
conventional cars are occasioned by differences in price, performance,
and style which are insignificant in comparison with the differences
between ICE and electric cars. In short, there is no basis in current
market share data for quantitative forecasting of electric car sales.
On the other hand, the data do not show that electric cars cannot sell
well: an ICE car with novel propulsion (the Mazda) captured a substantial
market share despite a significantly higher price, and low-performance
cars such as Volkswagen successfully competed despite power-to-weight ratios
as low as those of the electric cars characterized in Sec. 2.
Since quantitative projection methods for electric car sales fore-
casts were not developed in this study, a qualitative approach was necessary.
From qualitative consideration of the factors noted above, and from pub-
lished electric car market surveys, the free-market sales of electric cars
characterized in Sec. 2 were estimated by assuming capture rates of 5%, 10%,
and 15% of sales to replace candidate cars for 1980, 1990, and 2000 in
Table 8.1. The resultant electric car sales range from under 1% of the
Los Angeles regional market in 1980 to 11.1% in 2000. The resultant
regional populations of electric cars are at most a few percent. Thus
the free-market case places a lower bound on electric car use which is
small enough to promise little area-wide Impact.
An upper bound on prospective electric car use, assuming that high
usage levels were to be urgently fostered by public policy, is basically
set by manufacturing lead times and acceptable scrappage rates for
existing cars. Because transportation controls proposed for the Los Angeles
area to assure compliance with the Clean Air Act of 1970 Include drastic
gasoline rationing, a high degree of urgency is implicit in public policy
91
-------
and hence seems appropriate In setting an upper bound on electric car use.
Accordingly, the upper bound projection for electric car population is
based on assumptions of an immediate decision to proceed (in 1975), a three-
year lead time to production in 1978, and a production quantity to support
sales amounting to 80% of projected sales for conventional cars in the
Los Angeles region.
Figure 8.3 shows upper and lower bound electric car populations in
future years which would result from the bounding sales projections. It
also shows total regional car population (the baseline projection), and
two intermediate electric car populations which could be adopted as public
policy goals. The "high use" policy projection assumes auto market shares
for electric cars proportional to the candidate percentages in the second
CO
eg
1970
UPPER BOUND
ELECTRIC CAR POPULATIONS
MEDIUM USE POLICY
1980
YEAR
1990
2000
Figure 8.3. Alternative Electric Car Population Projections, South Coast Air
Basin (Source: Task Report 10, Fig. 8.1)
92
-------
line of Table 8.1, with linear interpolation between tabulated values,
and sales beginning in 1978. The "moderate use" policy assumes electric
car market shares half those for "high use."
On the one hand, the hypothetical policy goals of Fig. 8.3 are very
high: they presume major changes in a major sector of the economy which
are very unlikely under free-market conditions and consequently would
require powerful legislation to be achieved. On the other hand, they are
relatively low so far as auto impacts are concerned: even in 1990 they
lead to electric car populations of less than 1 in 3, with correspondingly
low leverage for the electric cars in changing regional conditions
dependent on the automobile.
The probable difficulty in achieving high levels of electric car
use may be appraised in terms of the relative costs of electric cars.
Table 8.2 summarizes the extra initial and life costs of electric cars
relative to competitive ICE subcompacts. Most of the initial cost
differential is attributable to the battery; through battery leasing,
this difference could be shifted to operating costs, so that the remaining
extra initial cost might not be a substantial buyer deterrent, given the
probable longer life and reduced maintenance of the electric car. The
life cost differentials remain as shown, however, and for the lead-acid
and nickel-zinc batteries they are high.
Table 8.2 shows these extra life costs both per mile and per 30-mile
day, for which about a gallon of gasoline would be required to fuel the
competitive ICE subcompact. If a gasoline tax were instituted to dis-
courage the ICE subcompact by eliminating its cost advantage relative to
lead-acid and nickel-zinc battery cars, per-gallon gasoline taxes of
$0.81-2.55 would be required, as Table 8.2 indicates. Because of the
additional performance disadvantages and range limitations of the electric
cars, an even greater tax might actually be necessary to ensure their
use. Any such taxes would be very painful and would inappropriately
discourage total auto travel, so per-day subsidies of the electric cars
93
-------
TABLE 8.2
EXTRA COSTS OF ELECTRIC CARS
Source: Task Report 10, Tables 8.2, 8.3, 8.4
Extra Initial Cost* Extra Life-Cycle Cost*
$ Per 30-
Car Battery Type Without Battery With Battery c Per Mile mile Day
Lead-Acid
Best Life $707 $1907 2.7C $ .81
Worst Life 707 1907 8.5 2.55
Nickel-Zinc 675 3615 4.7 . 1.41
Zinc-Chlorine 621 1221 -1.4 -.42
Lithium-Sulfur
Best Life 525 1125 -1.1 -.33
Worst Life 525 1125 -.2 -.06
In 1973 dollars, relative to ICE subcompact at $2270 initial cost and
13.3c/mi operating cost (for 10,000 mi/yr and gasoline price of $.50
per gallon including taxes).
in like amounts could be preferable. In either case, heroic measures appear
required to ensure substantial use of the higher-cost electric cars.
For the remaining battery cars of Table 8.2, lower total operating
costs than those of conventional ICE subcompacts are indicated. Because
of range and performance disadvantages, however, some sort of subsidy or
differential taxation would probably be required to bring these cars
into general use. Moreover, it should be noted that the cost differentials
of Table 8.2 could disappear, or be reversed, if the cycle-life goals of
the battery developers are not met.
To serve as a basis for overall Impact evaluations and to permit
clean differentiation between basic battery technologies, simple schedules
94
-------
were postulated for introduction of Individual types of electric cars, in
quantities which would permit achievement of the policy use levels of
Fig. 8.3 through combinations of individual schedules. These schedules
are shown in Table 8.3.
TABLE 8.3
BASIC SCHEDULES FOR ELECTRIC CAR INTRODUCTION
Source: Task Report 10, Table 8.5
Target
Year
1980
1990
2000
Use Elec. Car
Policy Pop. Target Battery Type
High
Moderate
High
Moderate
High
5%
15%
30%
30%
60%
Lead-acid
Lead-acid
Nickel-zinc
Zinc-chlorine
Nickel-zinc
Zinc-chlorine
Li t hiura- sul fur
Zinc-chlorine
Lithium-sulfur
Sales Period
1978-80
1978-90
1980-90
1985-90
1980-90
1990-2000
1990-2000
1990-2000
1990-2000
Approx. Avg.
Market Share
16%
16%
17%
30%
35%
35%
35%
70%
70%
95
-------
9 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE USAGE LEVELS
In this section, the individual impacts analyzed in Sees. 4-7 are
evaluated and summarized for the particular levels of electric car use
hypothesized in Sec. 8. The impact valuations are then assessed in rela-
tive importance, so that the most desirable future levels of electric car
use may be selected.
Table 9.1 summarizes the major quantitative impacts of the hypothe-
sized levels of electric car use on air pollution, energy, and the econo-
mic situation in the Los Angeles region. It also includes subjective
assessments of impacts on national markets for requisite battery materials,
and the prospective degree of intervention required in the free market to
bring about the indicated electric car use.
The air pollutants Included in Table 9.1 (oxidant and sulfur dioxide)
are the most important in the Los Angeles region among those for which
national air quality standards have been promulgated: in the baseline
case of this study, their concentrations are projected to remain in excess
of the national standards even after expected major reductions. Ozone
concentration changes in Table 9.1 were obtained from Table 4.8 for the
given levels of use by simple linear interpolation. S02 concentration
changes in Table 9.1 are expected to be near zero because the indicated
usage levels require almost no petroleum-fired recharge, as Fig. 5.7 indi-
cates, in every case but one. The exception, 30% usage of nickel-zinc
battery cars in 1990, requires only about 10% of the petroleum-fired re-
charge energy implicit in the 80% usage level for 1990 of Table 4.8;
accordingly, Table 9.1 shows a change in SO* level for this case which
is only 10% of the figure in Table 4.8.
The petroleum use figures in Table 9.1 were taken from Fig. 5.7.
Except for the lead-acid battery car cases and the case of 30% nickel-
zinc battery car use in 1990, very little recharge power is expected to
be generated by petroleum-fired power plants, so that the savings in auto-
motive petroleum use are nearly equal to the fractional electric car use.
96
-------
TABLE 9.1
IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVE LEVELS OF USE OF ELECTRIC CARS IN THE LOS ANGELES REGION
(Sources: Tables 4.8, 6.1, 7.2, 7.6, 8.3; Fig. 5.7)
Situation
Electric
Year Car Use,
Percent
1980
1990
2000
5
15
15
15
30
30
30
60
60
Battery Type
Lead-Acid
Lead-Acid
Nickel-Zinc
Zinc-Chlorine
Nickel-Zinc
Zinc-Chlorine
Lithium-Sulfur
Zinc-Chlorine
Lithium-Sulfur
Percentage Changes
Air Pollutant Auto Travel
Worst-Case Petroleum
Concentrations Use
Ozone
0.0
-1.9
-1.9
-1.9
-3.8
-3.9
-3.9
-7.8
-7.8
so2
.0
.0
.0
.0
1.4
.0
.0
.0
.0
- 1
-13
-15
-15
-25
-30
-30
-60
-60
In Regional Baselines
Auto Travel
Cost
0.0 to 1.9
0.2 to 5.6
2.0
-3.8
3.9
-7.5
-4.5 to -6.3
-15.0
-9.0 to -12.6
Direct
Employment
-0.01 to -0.04
-0.03 to -0.11
-0.13
-0.18
-0.26
-0.36
-0.34 to -0.38
-0.73
-0.69 to -0.75
Implementation Problems
Providing
Incentives
Major
Major
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Minor
Moderate
Moderate
Providing
Resources
Minor
Minor
Minor
Minor
Moderate
Minor
Moderate
Minor
Moderate
-------
These figures in Table 9.1 assume that electric cars replace average cars
in Los Angeles; if electric cars instead replaced subcompacts, savings
would be reduced correspondingly.
The auto travel costs in Table 9.1 were obtained by linear extrapo-
lation from the relative costs of Table 7.2. It should be noted that
cost changes are shown relative to the total for all auto travel, Includ-
ing both conventional and electric cars, again under the assumption that
electrics replace average conventional cars. Depending on the methods
used to encourage electric car use, cost Increases or decreases may be
spread over all auto travelers, or concentrated on electric car users.
At the lower usage levels, it is possible for electric cars to replace
only subcompacts, in which case the cost increases in Table 9.1 would be
larger, and the cost decreases smaller.
The changes in regional transportation employment in Table 9.1 were
obtained by linear interpolation for each usage level and year in Table
7.6. Employment changes overall are small relative to normal unemploy-
ment, and would develop slowly over periods of 5 to 10 years.
The evaluations of resource problems in Table 9.1 follow the judg-
ments presented in Table 6.1. Impacts on US demand would be minor except
in the case of high nickel-zinc battery car usage, where moderate Increases
in US imports would result, and in the case of the lithium-sulfur battery
cars, where major expansion of facilities for production of lithium metal
would be required.
Finally, the incentives problems noted in Table 9.1 were judged
according to the extra dollar cost of particular electric cars, the ex-
tent to which their daily range is limited, and the level of use assumed.
Where high costs and low daily ranges are involved and high levels of
use are sought, implementation Incentives pose more difficult problems.
98
-------
Overall, loss of auto capability is probably the most important im-
pact of electric cars not shown directly in Table 9.1. This loss—measured
in terms of low acceleration, limited range, and small capacity relative
to what conventional automobiles offer—would reduce opportunities now
available to auto travelers more than it would actually curtail travel
itself; opportunities, however, are often important considerations in
consumer decisions and in benefits which must be imputed to resultant
selections.
The most important potential benefit of electric car use shown in
Table 9.1 is reduced petroleum consumption. The most important costs of
electric car use are loss of auto capability and the expense, inequities,
and rigidities of government intervention in free markets necessary to
bring about the indicated levels of use. Both these costs are subsumed
in the incentives problems assessments of Table 9.1, as are the extra
dollar costs of lead-acid and nickel-zinc battery cars, which are also
important.
Relative to these impacts, reductions in air pollution due to elec-
tric car use are unimportant. Even at the highest levels of use in
Table 9.1, reductions in ozone concentration are small, and are not ade-
quate to reach compliance with Federal standards. Impacts on employment
are similarly small: the affected fractions of regional employment are
much less than typical regional unemployment; furthermore, these impacts
would appear gradually over a period of years. Materials resources for
regional application could be provided with relatively little difficulty,
and consequently pose no major barrier to implementation.
In this light, the basic issue in selecting the most desirable
level of electric car use is whether the potential petroleum savings
would justify the associated sacrifice of auto function and government
intervention in the auto market. Behind this issue are major uncertain-
ties, among which the most important is the extent to which nuclear and
99
-------
coal-fired electric power plants will actually be built in Los Angeles.
The petroleum savings shown in Table 9.1 assume that regional utilities
will construct major new nuclear plants, but as yet the necessary appro-
vals for construction of such plants have not been issued. In fact, there
is intense debate over the overall desirability of nuclear power, and its
resolution is not yet clear. If nuclear plants are not constructed for
Los Angeles, and if electric cars were then recharged from oil-fired
power plants, the petroleum savings in Table 9.1 would be reduced by fac-
tors of 3 and 4 or more.
Moreover, the significance of any given level of petroleum saving is
also uncertain, because it will depend greatly on future US dependence on
foreign oil sources. In the baseline projections of this study, indepen-
dence of foreign sources was projected for the late 1980s, partly due to
Improved fuel economy of conventional automobiles, partly due to much-
increased use of nuclear electric power. To the extent that this inde-
pendence is thus achieved, additional petroleum savings due to electric
car use may not hold the same significance.
Given these uncertainties in both the magnitude and significance
of petroleum savings in Table 9.1, the benefits of future electric car
use do not now appear to warrant the loss of auto capability and the mar-
ket intervention problems involved. Accordingly, it seems preferable
to accept the free-market level of electric car use for the Los Angeles
area until important net benefits can be confidently foreseen for higher
levels of use.
Among the individual cases of Table 9.1, those involving lead-acid
battery car use seem least desirable. In 1980, impacts are trivial and
the costs of attaining them considerable. In 1990, potential energy sav-
ings could be significant, but costs would remain high. Use of nickel-
zinc battery cars in 1990 would be much preferable: energy savings would
be greater, dollar costs no more unfavorable, and auto capability much
100
-------
less impaired due to the much greater daily driving range. Use of the
zinc-chlorine and lithium-sulfur battery cars would be better still,
largely due to lower anticipated costs. Of these two cars, the zinc-
chlorine battery car appears preferable for its lower energy consumption
and costs; but these estimates are uncertain, and the lithium-sulfur
battery's projected higher energy density offers greater driving range
and performance potential.
101
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-460/3-74-020-a
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION>NO.
PB 238-877/AS
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE
Impact of Future Use of Electric Cars in The Los Angelesj October 1974
Region: Volume I-Executive Summary and Technical Report e. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
W.F. Hamilton
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
General Research Corp.
P.O. Box 3587
Santa Barbara, California 93105
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-01-2103
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air and Waste Management
Office of Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Alternative Automotive Power Systems Div.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final Report
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
16. ABSTRACT
Impacts of the use of electric cars in the Los Angeles region in
1980-2000 were projected for four-passenger subcompact elecric cars
using lead-acid and advanced batteries, with urban driving ranges of
about 55 and 140 miles, respectively. Data from Los Angeles travel
surveys shows that such cars could replace 17-74 percent of future
Los Angeles autos with little sacrifice of urban driving. Adequate
raw materials and night-time recharging power should be available
for such use in the Los Angeles Region. Air quality improvements
due to the electric cars would be minor because conventional
automobile emissions are being drastically reduced. The electric
cars would save little energy overall, as compared to conventional
subcompacts, but would save a considerable amount of petroleum if
they were recharged from the nuclear power plants that are planned.
The electric subcompacts would be 20-60% more expensive overall
than conventional subcompacts until battery development significantly
reduces battery depreciation costs.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/Group
Electric Vehicles
Air Pollution
Batteries
Conservation
13 B
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
113
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
$5.25
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
102
------- |