EPA-AA-TEB-EF-85-2
MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
February 1985
Mark A. Wolcott
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Dennis F. Kahlbaum
Computer Sciences Corporation
Ann Arbor, Michigan
-------
Table of Contents
Page
I. Background 3
II. Summary 4
III. Inputs 9
A. Vehicle Stock 10
B. Registration Distribution 13
C. VMT 15
D. Diesel Market Penetration 16
E. Leaded Market Penetration 16
F. Fuel Economy 17
G. Fuel Switching 17
H. Urban/Rural VMT 19
IV. Outputs 19
V. Validation . 22
VI. Comparisons 24
Appendixes
A. Model Input-Figures A-l
B. Model Input-Tables B-l
C. Program Code C-l
D. Model Output D-l
-------
The MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
I. Background
The MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption (M3FC) model was developed
to estimate gasoline and diesel fuel used by motor
vehicles. It is based on the MOBILES mobile source
emissions model1 and predicts the amount of leaded,
unleaded, and diesel fuels consumed for each of fourteen
vehicle classes.
Several such fuel consumption models have been
developed over the years2'3'". None, however, is
consistent with MOBILE3. Since MOBILES is the emission
model used to evaluate present and potential motor vehicle
regulations, it is desirable to estimate the benefits from
these regulations with a model for which the underlying
assumptions are the same.
While the primary concern behind the Agency's
regulations are the public's health and welfare, these
quantities are difficult to measure. Tons of pollutants
eliminated and ambient concentrations reduced tend to be
easier to estimate. In the past, MOBILES, in combination
with Rollback and EKMA,5 were sufficient to estimate the
surrogates to health and welfare.
MOBILE3 itself estimates grams of carbon monoxide (CO),
hydrocarbons (HC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emitted for
each mile a vehicle travels. In general, these pollution
estimates are not particularly sensitive to fuel economy.
This is particularly true with respect to light duty
vehicles (LDV) and light duty trucks (LOT).
Refueling emission losses, however, depend on total
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and fuel economy (MPG), as well
as many other factors. Further, the benefits from
controlling fuel volatility are in part a function of the
total volume of gasoline consumed. Also, the amount of lead
emitted into the atmosphere is a function of gasoline
volume. A fuel consumption model based on MOBILES lends
itself to calculating the information required more readily
than MOBILES used by itself.
The principle of computing fuel consumption is
basically simple. Total fuel consumed is a function of the
total number of vehicles, the number of miles each vehicle
travels, and each vehicle's fuel economy. Therefore, the
more vehicles there are and the more miles they travel, the
more fuel they will consume. On the other hand, the greater
the fuel economy these vehicles obtain, the less fuel they
-------
will consume. In practice, these basic inputs are refined
in most models to calculate what their authors believe to be
more accurate estimates.
This author is no exception. Accordingly, after a
brief summary, a detailed description of each model input is
presented. Registrations, VMT, and MPG for each vehicle
class are presented. In addition, leaded and diesel market
penetration rates and fuel switching rates are included.
This discussion of inputs is followed by a presentation of
the model's outputs. These outputs are used to validate the
model by benchmarking it against published results for the
years 1975-1983. The model's predictions are also compared
with estimates from three other models. Differences with
one of the models are addressed by describing the effect of
four major input assumptions. Finally, the appendixes
contain all of the input data, the program computer code,
and the detailed output tables.
II. Summary
Total gasoline consumed by all motor vehicles peaked in
1978 at 7.41 million barrels per day (MBL/Day) .6 Since
that time, gasoline consumption has declined. By the year
2000, according to M3FC, gasoline use will be only 4.87
MBL/Day. On the other hand, diesel fuel consumed by highway
motor vehicles* has increased every year for each of the
last ten years7 and is expected to continue to increase
through the year 2000. However, since gasoline use will at
first decline more quickly than diesel fuel use will
increase, total fuel consumed will decline until 1994 and
then very slowly increase. Also, leaded fuel use will
decline as older, pre-catalyst vehicles are scrapped and
replaced by newer vehicles designed to run on unleaded fuel.
[Figure 1]
Estimating diesel fuel consumed by off-highway motor
vehicles, such as farm and construction equipment, is
beyond the scope of this report.
-------
Figure 1
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Total Fuel Consumed
130
a,
V)
§
m
1975 1980 1985 1990
Calendar Year
1995
2000
Underlying these total fuel consumption curves are the
total number of vehicles registered, total vehicle miles
traveled, and the average on road fuel economy.
The total number of vehicles registered is expected to
increase from 120 million in 19758 to 203 million in the
year 2000. The compound annual growth rate of this increase
is 2.1 percent per year (as compared to the historical
growth rate of 4.0 percent per year between 1952 and 1975).
[Figure 2]
-------
220
Figure2
MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
Total Highway Registrations
220
1975
1980
1985 1990
Calendar Year
1995
A larger vehicle stock naturally results in a greater
fleet VMT. Both the number of passenger cars and the total
miles they travel will increase at a compound annual rate of
1.8 percent per year from 1975 to the year 2000. Light
trucks will increase at an annual rate of 3.2 percent per
year and heavy trucks will increase at a rate of 3.0 percent
per year. [Figure 3]
-------
2200
FigureS
MOBILES Riel Consumption Model
Total Highway Vehicle Miles Traveled
2200
fe
(X
w
CQ
1975 1980 1985 1990
Calendar Year
1995
2000
Since fuel economy also improves during this same time,
total fuel consumption will decline. The average passenger
car fuel economy will improve from 12.6 mpg in 19759 to
27.6 mpg by the end of the century, for an annual
percent. Similarly, light truck
at a rate of 2.5 percent per year,
20.7 mpg (2000). Finally, heavy
improve from 5.4 mpg (1975)10 to
annual improvement. [Figure 4]
of 3.2
improve
improvement rate
fuel economy will
from 11.0 mpg (1975)" to
truck fuel economy will
7.7 mpg (2000), a 1.5 percent
-------
26-
24-
22-
20-
18-
3 16H
ex
CO
14-
12-
10-
8-
6-
4-
2-
0
Figure 4
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Fleet On Road Fuel Economy
x—-
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Calendar Year
2000
The interactions of these changes in number of
vehicles, vehicle miles traveled, and fuel economy mean that
passenger car fuel use will decline relative to truck fuel
use. In 1975 passenger cars used 62.8 percent of all motor
vehicle fuel. By the end of the century that use is
expected to drop to 48.3 percent. At the same time the
light truck share will increase moderately, from 17.5
percent to 21.8 percent, while the heavy truck share will
increase somewhat more, from 16.5 percent to 26.4 percent.*
[Figure 5]
* These numbers do not add up to 100 percent.
consumption accounts for the difference.
Off-highway
8
-------
130
Figure 5
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Total Fuel Consumed
1975 1960 1985 1990
Calendar Year
1995
2000
III. Inputs
As noted in the introduction, the principle of
computing fuel consumption is basically simple. Total fuel
consumed is a function of the total number of vehicles, the
number of miles each vehicle travels and each vehicle's fuel
economy. In mathematical notation it is represented by the
following equation:
Fuel Consumption=[Number of Vehicles]*[VMT]/[Fuel Economy]
However, this equation assumes that all vehicles have the
same age, VMT, and fuel economy. In reality, the vehicles
operating in any given calendar year are a mixture of model
years. Different model years have different fuel economy
-------
characteristics and vehicles of different ages have
different travel characteristics. Since diesel fuel has a
higher heating value than gasoline fuel, fuel type also is a
factor in fuel economy estimates. Thus, a more accurate
equation is
Fuel Consumption(i,j,k)=[Number of Vehicles(i,j,k)]*
[VMT(i,j,k)]/[Fuel Economy(i,j,k)]
where i=age, j=fuel type, and k=vehicle class. This is the
form of the equation used by the M3FC model. In M3FC age
(i) ranges from 1 to 30 years; fuel type (j) represents
either unleaded gasoline, leaded gasoline, or diesel fuel,
and (k) represent one of fourteen vehicle classes.
Further, M3FC is capable of computing fuel consumption
estimates from 1975 to 2020. Since at least a few vehicles
are assumed to remain operational for up to 30 years, most
input data must be available from 1946 through 2020.
Operationally this has often meant that the time series of a
variable remains constant at one level for some very early
years and, in most cases, remains constant at a different
level for all years beyond the year 2000.
III.A. Vehicle Stock
The first element of the fuel consumption equation is
referred to as the vehicle stock, the total number of
vehicles operating in a given calendar year. Vehicle stock
estimates are required for each vehicle class for every
projection year from 1975 through the year 2020.
The initial step of estimating vehicle stock is to
obtain historical total stock estimates. Historical
estimates are available principally from two sources, the
R.L. Polk Company8 and the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA)ll
Although the truck stock estimates from these two
sources are similar for all years, car registrations differ
markedly. Figures A-l and A-2 and Table B-l show the
vehicle stock estimates from these two sources.
, According to Oak Ridge National Laboratories
(ORNL),12 there are several reasons for these differences:
1. The FHWA count includes all vehicles that have been
registered throughout the calendar year. Therefore, their
number includes vehicles retired during the year and double
counts vehicles that have been registered twice in different
or the same states. The Polk count only includes vehicles
10
-------
that are registered on July 1, thus factoring in scrappage,
to some degree, and avoiding double counting.
2. Polk counts are restricted to passenger cars, while
FHWA figures may include light duty trucks for some states.
3. Beginning with the 1980 estimate, Polk counts vans
as light trucks, rather than passenger cars. The FHWA count
includes vans as passenger cars or trucks, depending on
individual state classifications.
It is for these reasons that the Polk estimates appear
to be a better indicator of the average automobile stock
during a calendar year than are the FHWA estimates.
While these same reasons apply to estimates of truck
registrations, the two groups' truck estimates are closer,
probably because the scrappage rate of trucks is lower than
that of cars. Also, since a truck is less likely to be
reregistered in a second state within a given calendar year,
double counting in the FHWA figures is reduced. The M3FC
model therefore, uses the Polk values as the basis for its
pre-1984 car and truck vehicle stocks.
In order to extend these estimates to the year 2020,
ordinary least squares regressions were applied separately
to the 1950-1983 car and truck registration time series.
The slopes of these regression lines were than extrapolated
from the 1983 Polk data.8 These results are also
presented in Figures A-l and A-2 and Table B-l.
Thus, the historic and extrapolated Polk car
registrations directly provide the stock estimates for LDVs.
As for trucks, a method was needed to apportion the Polk
numbers among the numerous M3FC truck classes. To
accomplish this task, a special run was made of the Energy
Environmental Analysis, Inc. (EEA) 10th Quarterly Report13
model using 1977 calibration data. The stock obtained from
that run are shown below.
1977 EEA 10th Quarterly Report Registrations
LDV LDT1 LDT2 Class 2B
99.904 15.388 7.339 0.887
Classes 3-5 Class 6 Classes 7-8B
1.245 1.688 1.686
11
-------
The 1977 Truck Information and Use Survey (TIUS)
report14 was then used to separate grouped Classes 3-5 and
7-8B into individual weight classes.
1977 TIUS Baseline Registration Fractions by Class
Class 3 Class 4 Class 5 Class 6
.099 .068 .122 .198
Class 7
.089
ClassSA
.090
Class 8B
.172
All Other
Trucks
.162
By using these functions as weighting factors, the
grouped classes were split. For example, in 1977 Class 3
comprised .099/ (.099 + .068 + .122) or 34.3% of the grouped
Classes 3-5 registration total or 0.427 million vehicles.
Applying this procedure to the remaining classes yields the
baseline registration distribution used in the M3FC model.
M3FC 1977 Baseline Registration Distribution
LDV
99.904
Class 5
0.527
LDT1
15.378
Class 6
1.688
LOT 2
7.339
Class 7
0.426
Class 2B
0.887
Class 8A
0.433
Class 3
0.427
Class 8B
0.827
Class 4
0.291
This distribution forms the basis for all past and
future truck stock estimates used in the M3FC model. From
this, an iterative process was used to obtain future vehicle.
stock estimates.
Starting with 1977 as a base year, a constant scrappage
rate was applied to each vehicle class. The assumed LDV
scrappage rate was 7.9 percent while that for LDT1 through
Class 8B was 5.0 percent. These scrappage rates are
averages from the 1969 to 1983 values published in MVMA
Motor Vehicle Facts and Figures, 1984.1S After scrappage
each class were added.
the Data Resources, Inc.
was applied, sale projections
The sales figures were derived
(DRI) Trendlong report5 and
with other regulatory analyses.
for
from
sales
percentages consistent
After the scrapped vehicles were removed from the fleet
and sales were added, the resulting totals for cars and
trucks were compared to the projected Polk figures. By
renormalizing these series by vehicle class, the overall
totals not only reflected Polk figures but also followed
12
-------
vehicle stock trends projected by DRI. This process was
repeated until the year 2020 using the following recursive
formulas:
Step 1
Vehicle Stock by Class(year+l)=[Stock by Class(year)]*
[Scrappage Rate]+[Modified DRI Sales(year+l)]
Remove buses from Class 6
Step 2
Compute car and truck totals
Step 3
Vehicle Stock by Class(year+l)=
[Vehicle Stock by Class(year+l)]*[Polk Sum]/Computer Sum]
Go to Step 1
The resulting vehicle stock by class estimates are shown in
Table B-2.
III.B. Registration Distribution
In any calendar year, the total vehicle stock consists
of vehicles of different vintages. Since each vintage has
its own unique blend of fuel economy and VMT, it is
necessary to know how many vehicles there are of each age.
The MOBILES registration distributions form the basis upon
which these estimates were made for M3FC. (For an
explanation of these distributions, see Fleet
Characterization Data Used in MOBILES.16)
However, before the MOBILES distributions could be used
in the fuel consumption model, certain modifications were
needed. The MOBILES registration estimates are assumed to
be as of July 1 of each year, before the first model year's
sales are complete. In addition, all vehicles older than 19
years of age are added together and placed in the 20+ age
group. To adjust for these differences the original MOBILES
registration equations, covering ages 2 to 19 years, were
extrapolated forward, to a full first year and extended
backward to 30 years of age. The resulting series was then
renormalized so that the total adds up to 100 percent.
Since there are seven vehicle classes in MOBILES and
essentially fourteen in the M3FC model, the following
mapping scheme was used:
13
-------
M3FC
Vehicle
Class
LDV
LDT1
LDT2
Class 2B
Class 3
Class 4
Class 5
Class 6
Class 7
Class 8A
Class 8B
School Buses
Public Buses
Off-Highway
MOBILES Registration
Distribution Used
Gas
LDGV
LDGT1
LDGT2
LDGT2
LDGT2
HDGV
HDGV
HDGV
HDDV
HDDV
HDDV
*
*
*
Diesel
LDDV
LDDT
LDDT
LDDT
LDDT
HDGV
HDGV
HDGV
HDDV
HDDV
HDDV
Classes 4-6 are primarily gasoline vehicles so those
fueled by diesel are assumed to be used like their gasoline
counterparts. Therefore, they were assigned the adjusted
MOBILES HDGV distributions. Also, since diesel engines
predominate Class 7-8B trucks, these classes were assigned
the adjusted HDDV distributions. The registration
distributions used in the M3FC model are shown in Figures
A-3 through A-6 and listed in Table B-3.
To actually obtain the number of vehicles of a certain
age, the calendar year dependent vehicle stock was
multiplied by the fraction of vehicles at that age:
Number of Vehicles (age)=[Vehicle Stock]*
[Registration Distribution(age)]
where age ranges from 1 to 30.
With the exception of buses and off-highway vehicles, this
methodology was used for each year and vehicle class
analyzed by the model. The data for buses and off-highway
vehicles are calendar year dependent rather than age
The treatment 'of these vehicle categories is slightly
different than the others. Only total VMT and fleet MPG
are available for buses. Therefore, individual model year
distributions are not included in the model. Further,
off-highway gasoline use is entered directly into the
model.
14
-------
dependent and so did not require registration distributions
in their calculations.
III.C. VMT
The number of miles traveled per year by a vehicle is
dependent on age as well as class. M3FC uses most of the
VMT age curves found in the MOBILES model as shown in the
listing below. (For a detailed discussion of these curves,
see Fleet Characterization Data Used for MOBILES.2l) The
mapping scheme is nearly the same as that used for
registration distributions.
MOBILES VMT
M3FC Distribution Used
Vehicle
Class Gas Diesel
LDV LDGV LDDV
LDT1 LDGT1 LDDT
LDT2 LDGT2 LDDT
Class 2B LDGT2 LDDT
Class 3 LDGT2 LDDT
Class 4 HDGV HDGV
Class 5 HDGV HDGV
Class 6 HDGV HDGV
Class 7 HDGV
Class 8A HDGV
Class 8A HDGV
Class 8B HDGV
This scheme is fairly straightforward except for
Classes 2B and above. The LDGT2/LDDT distributions were
assigned to Class 2B because this class behaves more like
LDT2 than either HDG or HDD vehicles. Since Class 3
vehicles are being slowly phased out and replaced by Class
2B vehicles, they were also assigned the LDT2 distribution.
Diesel Classes 7-8B use separate VMT distributions
derived from the 1977 Truck Inventory and Use Survey.'4
While these distributions formed the basis for the single
MOBILES HDDV distribution, using the separate distributions
yields somewhat greater accuracy in calculating fuel
consumption for these heavy truck classes.
For all distributions it was assumed that vehicles over
20 years of age travel annually the same distance as age 20
vehicles. Figures A-7 through A-12 and Table B-4 summarize
the VMT distributions used.
15
-------
III.D. Diesel Market Penetration
Each model year, a certain number of gas and diesel
vehicles are produced. The fraction of diesel vehicles
compared to the total produced for a given class is referred
to as the diesel market penetration rate. In the M3FC
model, these rates are used to estimate the number of gas
and diesel vehicles operating in each model year. This is
accomplished by using the following formulas:
Number of Diesel Vehicles(year)=[Number of Vehicles(year)]*
[Diesel Penetration(year)]
Number of Gas Vehicles(year)=[Number of Vehicles(year)]*
[1-Diesel Penetration(year)]
The diesel penetration rates used in the M3FC model
were prepared by EPA.17 Generally rates were available
from 1960 to 1995. Because the M3FC model requires data
from 1946 to 2020, it was assumed that the rates prior to
1960 were the same as those in 1960 and rates after 1995
were the same as those in 1995. The diesel penetration
rates are shown in Figures A-13 through A-18 and listed in
Table B-5.
At present, the future dieselization of the LDV and LOT
fleets is uncertain. To allow for this uncertainty, the
model has a provision to place a maximum limit on the LDV
and LOT diesel penetration rates after 1983. This rate can
be set in the range from 0 to 11.5 percent for LDVs and from
0 to 33.9 percent for LDTs.
III.E. Leaded Market Penetration
Similarly, in a given model year a certain number of
gasoline vehicles are designed to run on leaded or unleaded
fuel. The proportion of vehicles designed to run on leaded
fuel is referred to as the leaded market penetration rate.
In M3FC, the number of vehicles designed to use gasoline of
a given type is estimated with the following two equations:
Number of Leaded Gas Vehicles(year)=
[Number of Gas Vehicles(year)]*
[Leaded Market Penetration(year)] .
Number of Unleaded Gas Vehicles(year)=
[Number of Gas Vehicles(year)]*
[1-Leaded Market Penetration(year)]
The LDV through LDT2 rates used in the M3FC model were
obtained from the data files used to produce EEA's 10th
16
-------
Quarterly Report.13 Classes 2B-3 were assumed to be 100
percent leaded up through 1986 and 100 percent unleaded
thereafter. Classes 4-8B and buses were assumed to be 100
percent leaded for all years. Table B-6 lists the leaded
market penetration rates used in the model.
III.F. Fuel Economy
Fuel economy estimates were obtained from a variety of
sources. An internal EPA memorandum Fuel Consumption Model
Inputs9 provided new vehicle fleet road MPG for LDVs and
LDTs. These estimates were not distinguished by fuel type
but instead a diesel advantage factor was included to
indicate the degree to which diesel fueled vehicles obtain
fuel economy greater than their gasoline counterparts.
These two estimates, along with the model year specific
diesel penetration rates for each model year, were combined
to estimate separate gasoline and diesel fuel economy. The
two equations used are:
Gas MPG=[Fleet MPG]*([1-Diesel Penetration]
+[Diesel Penetration]/[Diesel Advantage Factor])
Diesel MPG=[Gas MPG]*[Diesel Advantage Factor]
The LDV and LOT available estimates cover the 1962 to
2000 model years. It was assumed that MPG values prior to
1962 were the same as the 1962 figure and those after the
year 2000 would be the same as the year 2000 figure. No
distinction was made between LDT1 and LDT2.
The Fuel Economies of Heavy Duty Vehicles report18
provided separate gas and diesel road MPG values for 1962
to 2000 model years in Classes 2B-8B. As with the light
duty classes, MPG values prior to 1962 were assigned the
1962 values. Figures A-19 through A-26 show the MPG values
while Table B-7 show the MPG values and diesel advantage
factors used in the model.
III.G. Fuel Switching
Unfortunately not all gasoline vehicles consistently
use the type of fuel for which they were designed. Indeed,
fuel switching is defined as using a type of fuel in a
vehicle other than the type for which it was designed.
There are, therefore, two types of fuel switching:
illegal and discretionary. Illegal fuel switching is using
leaded fuel in vehicles designed for unleaded fuel.
Discretionary fuel switching is using unleaded fuel in
vehicles designed for leaded fuel.
17
-------
The illegal fuel switching rates used in the M3FC model
are based on those found in MOBILES.1 Two types of
tampering are used to indicate illegal fuel switching.
These are labeled as "fuel inlet tampering" and "other
misfueling" in MOBILE3. The rates are given by the
following equations:
LDV
Fuel Inlet Tampering = -0.0143*0.02022*(10K miles)
Other Misfueling = 0.0165+0.0559*(10K miles)
LDT1, LDT2, and Classes 2B-3
Fuel Inlet Tampering =0.1101+0.02022*(10K miles)
Other Misfueling = 0.0696+0.00559*(10K miles)
Since the M3FC model performs its calculations based on
vehicle age, these mileage based equations were transformed
to age based equations using the VMT by age distributions
discussed earlier. The inlet tampering and other misfueling
rates were then combined to form a single, illegal
misfueling rate. These are shown in Figure A-27.
However, these rates do not reflect the amount of fuel
misused but only the frequency of misuse. A multiplicative
adjustment factor of 0.417 was included in the model to
account for the amount of fuel misused. This factor was
calculated by dividing the purchased volume misfueling rate
(7.5 percent) by the vehicle involvement misfueling rate*
(18.0 percent) in the Department of Energy's report,
Patterns of Vehicle Misfueling in 1981 and 1982: Where,
When, What Vehicles and How Often?1*
Discretionary fuel switching rates, on the other hand,
are based on the Supplementary Guidelines for Lead
Implementation Plans report.2 ° These rates are applied to
LDV through Class 2B and depend entirely on model year. For
all model years up through 1975 the rate is 7.1 percent.
Thereafter, it increases to 27.5 percent. Since these
The purchased volume misfueling rate equals the gallons of
leaded fuel used by vehicles designed to operate on
unleaded gasoline divided by the total amount of fuel used
by these vehicles. It is a misfueling rate based on
gallons. On the other hand, the vehicle involvement
misfueling rate is a rate based on frequency. It equals
the number of times an owner misfuels his/her vehicle
divided by the total number of times that vehicle is
refueled.
. 18
-------
values refer directly
adjustment factor is
discretionary misfueling
to the amount of fuel used, no
needed. Figure A-28 shows the
rate used in the model.
The following formulas
amount of fuel switched:
are used to calculate the total
Number of Illegally Misfueled Vehicles=
[Number of Unleaded Vehicles]*[Illegal Misfueling Rate]*
[Misfueling Adjustment Factor]
Number of Discretionally Misfueled Vehicles =
[Number of Leaded Vehicles]*[Discretionary Rate]
III.H. Urban/Rural VMT
The amount of VMT traveled in an urban or rural
environment is also dependent on vehicle class and model
year. Urban VMT estimates are included in M3FC to provide
one of several inputs to air quality models. The
urban/rural rates used in the M3FC model are summarized in
Figures A-29 through A-34 and Table B-8.
1 0
IV. Outputs
The M3FC model outputs fuel consumption estimates for
fourteen different vehicle classes. These classes and their
composition are summarized below:
LDV
LDT1
LDT2
Classes 2B-5
Class 6
Classes 7-8A
Class 8B
School Buses
Public Buses
Off-Highway
Light Duty Vehicles (passenger cars)
Light Duty Trucks 1, 0-6000 Ibs GVW
Light Duty Trucks 2, 6001-8500 Ibs GVW
Light to Medium Duty Trucks, 8501-19500 Ibs
GVW
Light Heavy Duty Trucks, 19501-26000 Ibs GVW
Heavy Heavy Duty Trucks, 26000-50000 Ibs GVW
Heavy Heavy Duty Trucks, 50000+lbs GVW
Agricultural, industrial/commercial,
construction and marine/recreation vehicles
Table 1 is a copy of the 1983 model output. Tables for
all, years are available in the Appendix D of this report.
For each year fuel consumption and supporting statistics
are provided. The top one-half of the table lists the
diesel and gasoline fuel consumed by light duty vehicles
(LDV), light duty trucks (LDT1, LDT2) and by four sets of
heavy duty truck classes. Also listed is consumption by
19
-------
school and commercial buses. Finally, off-highway gasoline
consumption is included.
Gasoline usage is divided into two parts, leaded and
unleaded. Within each part, the portion consumed by
vehicles designed to run on leaded fuel is distinguished
from the portion consumed by vehicles designed to run on
unleaded fuel.
By M3FC definition, the label "pre-control" refers to
vehicles that were designed to run on leaded fuel. The
label "control" refers to those vehicles that generally are
equipped with catalysts and are thus designed to use
unleaded fuel. Each type of usage is listed separately.
Below the fuel consumption estimates are the supporting
statistics. These are new vehicle and fleet road fuel
economy,* gasoline and diesel powered vehicle registrations,
and urban and rural VMT.
The fuel economies listed for LDT1 and LDT2 represent the
average of LDT1 and LDT2.
20
-------
Draft MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
FEB 13. 1985
1983
Fleet Fuel Consumption
(x10**9 Gallons/Year, x10**6 Barrels/Day)
Diesel
Leaded Gasoline
Unleaded Gasoline
Total Gasoline
Grand Total
LDV
LOT1
LDT2
Classes 2B-5
Class 6
Classes 7-8A
Class SB
School Buses
Publ ic Buses
Off-Highway
Total LOT
Total LDV+LDT
Total HDV
Total Highway
Grand Total
Gal Ions
0.9O5
O.271
O- 172
0. 174
O.512
3.316
13.356
O.O13
O.730
NA
O.443
1 .348
18. 1OO
19.447
19.447
BBL/Day
O.O59
O.O18
O.O11
O.O11
0.033
O.216
0.871
O.OO1
0.048
NA
O.O29
O.O88
1 . 181
1 .269
1 .269
Pre-Control
16
4
4
3
2
O
0
O
O
2
8
24.
7.
32.
34.
.499
.258
. 157
.683
.262
.952
.053
.389
.O
.509
415
.914
340
253
762
Control
2.228
1 .491
O.542
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
0.0
2.O33
4.262
0.0
4.262
4.262
Total Pre-Control
18.727
5.749
4.699
3.683
2.262
O.952
0.053
O.389
0.0
2.509
1O. 448
29. 176
7.340
36.515
39.O24
1 .894
O.419
0.854
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
0.743
1 .273
3. 167
0.0
3. 167
3.91O
Control
38.746
8.761
3.722
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
O.O
O.O
0.0
12.482
51 .228
0.0
51 .228
51 .228
Total
4O.64O
9. 179
4.576
0.0
O.O
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
0.743
13.755
54.395
0.0
54.395
55. 138
Gal Ions
59.367
14.929
9.275
3.683
2.262
O.952
O.053
O.389
O.O
3.252
24.203
83.571
7.340
9O.910
94. 162
BBL/Day % Unleaded
3.873
O.974
0.6O5
O.240
0. 148
O.O62
O.OO3
O.O25
O.O
0.212
1 .579
5.451
0.479
5.930
6. 142
68.46
61 .49
49.33
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
O.O
0.0
22.85
56.83
65. 09
0.0
59.83
58.56
Gal Ions
60.
15.
9.
3.
2.
4 .
13.
O.
0.
3.
24.
84 .
25.
1 1O.
1 13.
.272
.200
447
857
.774
268
, 4O9
,4O1
.730
252
.646
918
439
358
610
BBL/Day
3.932
O.991
O.616
0.252
0. 181
O.278
0.875
O.O26
O.O48
0.212
1 .608
5.539
1 .659
7. 199
7.411
New Vehicles
1983
Vehicle Registrations - Vehicle Miles Traveled
(x10**6 Vehicles) (x1O**9 Miles/Year)
Fleet
Road MPG
LDV
LDT1
LDT2
Classes 2B-5
Class 6
Classes 7-8A
Class 8B
School Buses
Publ Ic Buses
Off -Highway
Total LOT
Total LDV+LDT
Total HDV
Grand Total
Gas
22. 13
17.47
17.47
1O.73
5.84
5. 14
O.O
7.73
NA
NA
Diesel
26.77
23.06
23. 06
13.75
8.82
6.27
5.38
1O.75
5.01
NA
nudu
MPG
17. 12
13.82
13.87
9.51
6.27
5.9O
5.O7
7 .82
5.01
NA
13.84
16. 17
6.O5
13.84
Registrations
Gas
1O6.890
18.640
1 1 .268
3.316
1.065
0.382
0.043
O.438
O.O
NA
29.909
136.799
5.245
142.044
Diesel
2.O71
0.387
O.234
0. 137
0.274
O.661
1 . 162
O.O20
O. 116
NA
O.62O
2.691
2.369
5.O6O
Total
108.961
19.027
1 1 . 5O2
3.453
1 .339
1 .043
1 .205
O.458
O. 1 16
NA
3O.529
139.49O
7.614
147. 1O4
Gas
6O2
104
65
. 23
8
3
0
1
0
170
772
37
809
. 13
.81
.33
.75
.75
. 15
. 13
.23
.0
NA
. 14
.27
.01
.28
Urban
Diesel
13.86
3. 14
1 .99
1 .37
1.97
7.45
1 1 .93
O.O6
2.38
NA
5. 13
18.99
25. 15
44. 14
Total
615.99
1O7.95
67.33
25. 12
10.72
10. 6O
12. 06
1 .29
2.38
NA
175.28
791 .26
62. 16
853.42
Gas
406.46
99. 10
61 .78
1O.77
4.20
1.60
0. 10
1 .77
0.0
NA
160.87
567.33
18.44
585.78
VMT
Rural
Diesel
9.36
2.97
1 .88
0.80
2.47
12.96
55.83
0.08
1 .28
NA
4.85
14.21
73.43
87.64
Total
415
102
63
1 1
6
14
55
1
1
165
581
91
673
.82
.07
.66
.57
.67
.56
.93
.85
.28
NA
.73
.54
.87
.41
Gas
1OO8.59
203 . 9 1
127. 11
34 .,53
12.95
4.75
O.23
3.OO
0.0
NA
331 .02
1339.61
55.45
1395.06
Total
'Diesel
23.22
6.11
3.87
2. 17
4.44
2O. 41
67 .76
0. 13
3.66
NA
9.99
33.2O
98.58
131 .78
Total
1031 .80
210.02
13O.98
36. 7O
17.39
25. 16
67.99
3. 14
3.66
NA
341 .01
1372.81
154.O3
1526.83
-------
V. Validation
Comparing the M3FC outputs to historical data for the
nine year period 1975-1983 shows that predicted gasoline
consumption is accurate to within an average of three
percent. [Figure 6] The proportion of gasoline that was
unleaded is predicted accurately to within an average of
four percent. In both cases the comparison is made with the
statistics published in the Petroleum Supply Monthly.6
[Figure 7]
Figure 6
Total Gasoline Consumption
3
JD
to 8-
o
g, 9-
1"
3 3-
.1
8 '
u
_-— ~-"~^^
' — ^^_
*
Legend
& UJFC
X PSU
197S 1978 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983
Calendar Year
Figure?
Total Percent Unleaded
80
55-
SO
49
19-
10-
9-
0
1979 1978 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983
Calendar Year
22
-------
Federal Highway Administration statistics are used as
the basis of comparisons for highway diesel fuel
consumption. During the 1975-1983 period M3FC diesel fuel
estimates were accurate to an average of 20 percent.
[Figure 8]
1.3
•3J. 1.1
% 1
;P 0.9
1°^
C 0.7
It °*
S 0.9
I"
O 0.3
1 0.2
a;
Q 0.1
Figure 8
Fleet Diesel Consumption
1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1988 1983
Calendar Year
The differences between the model predictions and
published reports could be explained by inaccuracies in the
underlying registration, VMT, and/or MPG estimates. They
could also be explained by changes in driving behavior of
the American public. For example, the changing real cost of
owning and operating a car as well as the general level of
economic activity influence the short-term demand for fuel.
While including these economic circumstances is outside of
the model's scope, consider that the unemployment rate fell
from 8.5 percent in 1975 to 6.1 percent in 1978, then rose
again to 9.6 percent in 1982. This trend mirrors the total
gasoline consumption trend shown above.
23
-------
VI. Comparisons
To further evaluate M3FC, we compared the model results
with those from three other models. Both Energy and
Environmental Analysis, Inc. (EEA), in their Tenth Quarterly
Report and in their Eleventh Periodical Report, and Data
Resources, Inc. (DRI), in their Trendlong report, provide
estimates of fleet gasoline consumption.
All four models predict that gasoline consumption will
decline throughout the 1980s. [Figure 9] The decline
predicted by the M3FC model is somewhat steeper than that
predicted by either the DRI model" or the Eleventh
Periodical Report.22 The DRI model also predicts
declining gasoline use through the year, 2000. However,
EEA's Tenth Quarterly Report model predicts that gasoline
consumption will mirror that predicted by M3FC.
Both M3FC and EEA's two models predict that the
percent of gasoline consumed by highway motor vehicles that
is unleaded will increase from approximately 50 percent in
1980 to 87 percent in the year 2000.22[Figure 10] All
three models also expect diesel fuel consumption to increase
at about the same rate, although the M3FC model predicts
that somewhat more diesel fuel will be consumed in the year
2000 than does the EEA model. [Figure 11] This is due
largely to the greater number of diesels predicted by the
M3FC model.
Several factors explain the differences in gasoline
consumption. Figure 12 shows the effect of applying each of
these model changes. Two of the most important deal with
the assumptions about average annual VMT per vehicle and the
diesel penetration rate of new vehicles.
The M3FC model assumes that the average number of miles
accumulated by each vehicle of any given age is constant
within a vehicle class. It makes no difference whether one
is predicting fuel consumption for 1985 or 1995. On the
other hand, EEA, in their Eleventh Periodical Report,
assumes that annual miles traveled per car will increase at
0.75 percent per year through the year 2000. EEA also
assumes that annual light duty truck miles traveled will
increase by 0.5 percent while medium heavy trucks will
increase by 3.0 percent per year. EEA expects annual heavy
heavy truck VMT to remain constant or, decline slightly (0.4
percent).22 Eliminating all of the above growth in annual
VMT per vehicle reduces EEA's projected fleet gasoline
consumption estimate for the year 2000 by 0.509 million
barrels per day to 5.411 million barrels per day.
24
-------
g.
3 3
s
Figure 9
Fleet Gasoline Consumption
1979 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Calendar Year
I
100
90
80
70
so
D 50
•g
o *°
CU 30
20
10
0
Figure 10
Fleet Percent Unleaded
1975 1980 1085 1990 1999 2000
Calendar Year
2.2
1= »
•3? -
t"
to 18
2 1-4
X
I "
! 0.8
§ 0.8
U
"5 0.4
01
01
a °z-
Figure 11
Fleet Diesel Consumption
1979 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Calendar Year
25
-------
The second area of significant difference between the
two models concerns the diesel penetration rate of new
vehicles.
EEA assumes that sales of new domestic diesel passenger
cars will stabilize at 1.5 percent of the passenger car
fleet in 1995. It also expects that 1995 sales of imported
diesel passenger cars will reach 4.0 percent, domestic light
truck diesel sales will reach 3.5 percent, and import light
truck diesel sales will reach 12.0 percent of the total
light truck market.22
On the other hand, M3FC assumes that in 1995 an average
of 11.5 percent of the passenger cars and 33.9 percent of
the light trucks will be diesels.1 Naturally, if diesels
comprise a smaller portion of the fleet, total gasoline
consumption will increase.
Two scenarios were devised to measure the model's
reaction to the assumed diesel penetration rate. The first
scenario kept both passenger car and light duty truck diesel
penetration rates at 1983 levels of 1.9 and 7.7 percent,
respectively.10 In this scenario gasoline consumption
increases by 0.471 million barrels per day in the year 2000.
The second scenario allowed diesel passenger cars to
gain up to 5.0 percent and light trucks to gain up to 15.0
percent of the market. The effect of this is to increase
gasoline consumption by 0.308 million barrels per day in the
year 2000.
A third factor that will affect the amount of highway
gasoline consumed is the proportion of the fleet that
consists of light trucks. Since the fuel economy of light
trucks is substantially less than that of passenger cars, if
more individuals replace their passenger cars with light
trucks (pickups, vans, etc.), fleet fuel consumption will
increase.
To test the reaction of the model to this third factor,
the DRI passenger car projections for year 20004 were
substituted for the model's, original projections. The
difference between the two was then added to the light truck
sto.ck. This increased highway gasoline consumption by 0.081
million barrels per day in the year 2000.
While these factors account for the major differences
between M3FC and EEA's Eleventh Quarterly Report, only M3FC
is fundamentally consistent with the MOBILES emission
factors model. That model, in turn has been extensively
reviewed by industry as well as state and local
26
-------
governments. We believe, therefore, that M3FC estimates
have a greater chance of accurately predicting future fuel
consumption.
Figure 12
Model Differences
(million barrels of gasoline per day)
2000
Low Diesel
Penetration Rates
Constant 1983 Diesel
Penetration Rates
(1.9*LDV/7.7r.LDT
0.163
DRI LDV
Registrations
(1984+)
6.081
Increased Vehicle
Stock (3.5%)
0.162
VMT Growth
75%l
.7M\
590
(3.r.MHT/-.45SHHt)
0.5'
Other Model
Differences
0.063
27
-------
The Mobiles Fuel Consumption Model
February 1985
References
1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile
Sources, User's Guide to MQBILE3, EPA 460/3-84-002,
June, 1984.
2 Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc., The Motor Fuel
Consumption Model, Eleventh Periodical Report, prepared
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, November,
1984.
3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy
Analysis, Costs and Benefits of Reducing Lead in
Gasoline, EPA-230-03-84-005, May 1984.
4 Data Resources, Inc.
5 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
Quality, Planning and Standards, User's Manual for
Modified Rollback/EKMA Strategy Assessment Model,
EPA-450/4-81-025, July, 1981.
6 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information
. Administration, Petroleum Supply Monthly, DOE/EIA-0109
(84/06), June, 1984.
7 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Highway Statistics, 1981, Table MF-2.
8 R.L. Polk and Company, Detroit, MI.
9 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile
Sources, "Fuel Consumption Model Inputs", Note from
Karl Hellman to Ralph Stahman, October 17, 1984.
10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile
Sources, personal communication from Amy Brochu,
December, 1984. .
11 , U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Highway Statistics, 1967 - 1982, Table
VM-1.
12 U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 7,
ORNL-6050, June, 1984.
28
-------
13 Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc., The Highway
Fuel Consumption Model, Tenth Quarterly Report,
prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, November,
1983.
14 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
Truck Inventory and Use Survey, 1977.
15 Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of the United
States, Inc., MVMA Motor Vehicle Facts & Figures, 1984.
1 * U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile
Sources, Fleet Characterization Data Used in MOBILE3,
August, 1984, EPA-AA-TEB-EF-84-6.
17 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile
Sources, personal communication from Amy Brochu,
November 20, 1984 and December and November 23, 1984.
18 - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile
Sources, Fuel Economies of Heavy Duty Vehicles, July,
1984.
u.
Mi
S.
sfue
Depa
ling
rtment
in 1981
of
and
Energy, Patterns
1982:
Where,
When,
of
What
Vehicle
Vehic
les
and How Often?, October, 1984.
20 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Mobile
Sources, Supplementary Guidelines for Lead
Implementation Plans, Updated Projections for Motor
Vehicle Lead Emissions, EPA-450/2-83-Q02, March 1983.
21 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Highway Statistics, 1975-1982, Table
MF-2.
22 Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc., The Motor Fuel
Consumption Model, Eleventh Periodical Report/ prepared
for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, November,
1984.
29
-------
Appendix A
Model Input
Figures
-------
ISO
140
130
120
110
in BO
O 70
"S 60
Figure A-l
MOBILES Kiel Consumption Model
Car Registrations
1950 I960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Calendar Year
140
130
C 110
O
3 l00'
^m 80-
0 70
~% 60
In JO-
S' 40-
°= 30
Figure A-2
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Truck Registrations
...--"
y**
jy^
*•
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Calendar Year
Legend
& ».LPo*. UHt
x PndlcMHirC
ana*
-------
18
18
14
IS 12
_u
c
«. to
o
1 -
O
£ •
4-
Z-
0
Figure A-3
MOBrtJES FUel Consumption Model
LDV Registration Distributions
15
Age
is
18
14
tj 13
^)
.« 10-
o
1 .
f.
4
2
0
Figure A-4
MOB1LE3 Fuel Consumption Model
LDT-Class 3 Registration Distributions
19
Age
Figure A-5
MOB1LE3 Fuel Consumption Model
Classes 4-6 Registration Distributions
id
18
u
t» 13
_«>
C
<8 "
.*)
I"
& •
4
2
0
Figure A-6
MOBILE} Fuel Consumption Model
Classes 7-8B Registration Distributions
10
is
Age
-------
Figure A-7
90-
^~. 80'
a
>. 70-
8 8°
•3 so
0)
TJ
C 40
a
in
§ 30
J20-
10
0
MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
LDV VMT
* ~— — ~________^
a
Legend
A Cat
X Ol«l«l
0 S 10 15 20 25 30
Age
Figure A-8
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
um VMT
80
, 70-
3 80
B
•g 80-
m
^ 40-
10
*^^^
^^~~---__^_^^
^~ ~~ . g
0 S , 10 15 20 28 30 .
Age
Legend
& Got
X Dl«*«t
-
Figure A-9
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
LDT2-Class 3 VMT
^ 80-
LI
id
^ 70
V
3 60-
6
•3 50-
M
C 40-
0 30-
_^
E- 20
10-
•^^^
" ^..^^^
a
Legend
a Cat
X Di»«
0 5 10 IS 20 25 30
Age
-------
Figure A-10
90-
^~. 80"
a
^ ™-
>
5 60-
g
•S so-
to
^ 40
cd
CO
§ 30
J3
J20.
> ,0-
0-
MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
Classes 4-6 VUT
K
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Legend
& Co*
X DI«M(
Age
Figure A-ll
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Class 7 VMT
^ eo-
i*
a
I"
3 60-
6
•S 50-
01
•o
O 40-
s
W
3
. o 30-
jq
^f
H zo
•>
> 10
\
\ . -
\ '
• \
\
^^^^^^ ^^^
-i^;- „
Legend
A G«
x Dili*
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Age
Figure A-13
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
aass 8 VMT
_ 80-
u.
id
I"
^ 90-
•g so-
1,0
S
O 30-
ti.
H 20
>
10-
\
*(
\
\
\ \
\ \
\ v
V \ V-,
^•v^^ ^>s^^ g
^**-~^^^^ ^^^
^ K
Legend
a C«t
* Ctati 8A, OWIM
Qs* .y* "l*i*
0 S 10 15 20 25 30
, Age
-------
E
a
o
'•g
u
0)
C
£
1
3
M
U
Q
Figure A-13
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
LDV Diesel Market Penetration
90
80
70-
80
50-
40
30
20
10
/^-^
1980 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
E
C
o
-jj
u
IU
ti
£
1
id
5
0)
«
Q
Figure A-14
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
LDT1 & LDT2 Diesel Market Penetration
90-
80
70
80-
50
40
30
20
10
—
. .
/
/
/
^-^
1980 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
E
a
o
«i
*j
a
a.
OJ
1
S
"3
OT
i3
Figure A-15
MOBILE3 FUel Consumption Model
Classes 2B-5 Diesel Market Penetration
90
80
70
80
50-
40-
30
20
10
' _ ' „
,-^^
j'
f
/
•* — . /
Legend
& Clan 28
X CtojtMj-S
I960 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
-------
100
90
80
70
60
£ 50
1 40
8
o
30-
Figure A-16
MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
Class 6 Diesel Market Penetration
I960 1965 1970 I9T5 1980 1985 1990 199} 2000
Model Year
Figure A-17
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Class 7 Diesel Market Penetration
100
90-
80
•a
.10-
0
I960 1965 1970 197S 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
100
90
Figure A-18
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Class 8 Diesel Market Penetration
f
o
"« 60
0
O. 50
I
a
3
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1965 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
-------
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
O 22
3 20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
Z
0
•a
§.
Figure A-19
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
LDV Road MPG
1960 1985 1970 1975 I960 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
Figure A-20
MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
LOT Road MPG
I960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
Figure A-21
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Class 2B Road MPG
34-
32
30-
28-
26-
24
0 22
2 20-
•5 '"
g 16
OZ 14-
12-
'10 •
8
. 6
4
2-
-~"
— • — - "
' ' . •' ,' • *
Legend
A Gal
X Ol«l*
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
36 •
34
32-
30
28
26
24
0 22
S 20
-a 18'
o 18
K 14-
12
10-
8-
6-
4
2
0 -
Figure A-32
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Classes 3-5 Road MPG
. x
»=— — ' ~~* .
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
Legend
& Cos
X Dl««l
-------
36 -
34-
32
30-
28
26-
24
O 22-
s *°
-o ">•
™ 16 •
& M
12-
10
8
6 •
4
2
0 J
Figure A-Z3
MOBILE3 Fuel Consumption Model
Class 6 Road MFC
x
A . A
I960 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
Legend
& Cos
X Ol«5«l
£
a
•o
a
o
QJ
Figure A-24
MOBILEX3 Fuel Consumption Model
Class 7 Road MFC
34-
32-
30
ae
28-
24
22
20-
18
16
14
12
10
8-
6
4-
2-
f, ^ — - — a
Legend
a Gol
X Di»«l
I960 1965 1970 197S 1980 1985 1990 199S 2000
Mode! Year
Figure A-25
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Class 6 Road MFC
34-
32-
30-
28
26-
24-
0 22-
a zo'
1R -
•a 1B
(0 ] A ,
. &. M-
12 :
. 10
a
6 -
4 •
2-
0 •
' ,
x ^.B
I960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Legend
6 Co
X Cteli 6«. Ql«.<
a cton sa. m.i*
Model Year
1
•o
1
Figure A-26
MOBILE3 FUel Consumption Model
Bus Road MFC
34
32
30-
28
26
24-
22-
20-
16
16
14
12-
10
8
6
4-
2-
— **
x —
A__ *
Q
0
Legend
a School. Go«
X School. Dl«i«l
0 Pi*llc. OUltl
1980 1965 1970 1975 1980 I98S 1990 1995 2000
Calendar Year
-------
80
g
i"
Figure A-27
MOBILES Fuel Consumption Model
Illegal Misfueling Rates
g
10 IS 20
Age
Figure A-Z8
70-
60-
g
„ so
1
-Switching
8 S
I20
10
0-
MOBILE) Fuel Consumption Model
LDV It LOT Discretionary Fuel-Switching Rate
f
1940 19SO 1900 1B70
I960 1990 ZOOO
Model Year
-------
90
BO-
6? ?°
O 60
"o
S. 50
b
2 40
a 30
u
3 20
10
0
Rgure A-29
MOBILES FViel Consumption Model
IDV & IDT Urban VMT Fractions
Legend
a LDV
x tor
I960 1965 1870 197S 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
figure A-30
MOBILES FViel Consumplion Model
Classes 3B-5 Urban VMT Fraclions
80
f? 70
0 60-
0
E
£.-,
a 40
!.*•
P. 20
10
B
"" "" '
/
' ' .
1960 1965 1970 1975 I960 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
Legend
A CkM«».C«N
X Cta*« 11, Ota**
D Chnm 1-S, CM
• SSSff'iJlKt
Rgure A-31
MOBILES FUel Consumplion Model
Class 6 Urban VMT Fraclions
80
S? 70
o 60-
o
£. 50
£
t-
5 30-
3 20
10
^~
^^^^
&
. .- — x
.. J, •
Legend
x Dlasal
1960 1B65 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
-------
Figure A-33
MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
Class 7 Urban VMT Fractions
80-
T 70-
6s,
0 60
t!
I 5°
| 4°
S ^o
J3
i;
3 20
10
^
^-^
f x
* - -. — — '
Legend
& Gas
X Ol«s«l
I960 1985 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
Figure A-33
90-
80
g 7°
§ 60
1 5°
s 4°-
>
fl 30
J3
U
3 20
10
0-
MOBILE3 FUel Consumption Model
Class 8 Urban VMT Fractions
/
/
' /~~^\l
~*~ x
x-. r .
\^ /
Legend
a Ckni B, Co*
x Cto» 84, OUs.4
a Ck»t ee. »*•<*
I960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Model Year
90
O 60
4-*
I 50
Figure A-34
MOBILES FUel Consumption Model
Bus Urban VMT fractions
Legend
X Public Buses
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Calendar Year
-------
Appendix B
Model Input
Tables
-------
Table B-l
Historical and Predicted Vehicle Stock
(millions of vehicles)
Year
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
195B
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1966
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
Polk
Cars
39
42
44
47
49
51
52
55
57
58
60
63
66
68
71
72
75
78
80
83
86
89
92
95
97
99
102
104
104
105
106
108
.772
.203
.384
.380
.802
.434
.495
.085
. 103
.854
.920
.384
.051
.940
.264
.968
.358
.495
.449
. 138
.439
.805
.608
. 241
.818
.904
.957
.677
.564
.839
.867
.961
80
83
86
89
92
96
101
104
106
1 10
1 13
1 16
120
121
123
123
FHwA
Cars
. 414000
.693000
.861000
. 280000
.799000
.860000
.762000
.856300
.712600
. 188640
.6961 1 1
.574999
. 247990
.723650
. 29 14 1 1
.697863
M3-FC
Cars
39.
42.
44.
47.
49.
51 .
52.
55.
57.
58.
60.
63.
66.
68.
71 .
72.
75.
78.
80.
83.
86.
89.
92.
95.
97.
99.
102.
104 .
104.
105.
106.
108.
111.
113.
116.
1 18.
1 20.
123.
125.
1 27 .
130.
132.
134.
137.
139.
141.
144 .
146.
148.
772
203
384
380
802
434
495
085
103
854
920
384
051
940
264
968
358
495
449
138
439
805
608
241
818
904
957
677
564
839
867
961
310
660
009
358
708
057
406
755
105
454
803
153
502
851
201
550
899
Polk
Trucks
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
1 1
1 1
1 1
12
13
14
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
23
24
26
28
30.
32
35.
36
36.
38
.567
.065
.420
.693
.800
. 162
.544
.776
.056
.532
.803
.043
.464
.899
.445
. 127
.357
.988
.685
.586
.686
.465
.773
.412
.312
.813
.560
.222
.565
.583
.268
.069
.987
. 143
FHwA
Trucks
16,
17,
18.
19.
20,
21 .
23.
25.
26.
28.
30.
32.
33.
34.
34.
35.
.530900
346800
.235300
. 127000
. 199600
646000
.233000
.077200
,237800
257220
,054159
202966
,870109
166042
,995004
81 1962
M3-FC
Trucks
7.
a.
8.
8.
8.
9.
9.
9.
10.
10.
10.
1 1 .
1 1 .
1 1 .
12.
13.
14.
14,
15.
16.
1 7 .
18.
19.
21 .
23.
24.
26.
28.
30.
32.
35.
36.
36.
38.
39.
39,
40.
41 .
42,
43,
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51 ,
51 .
52.
53.
567
065
420
693
,800
162
544
776
056
532
803
,043
,464
,899
,445
, 127
,357
.988
685
.586
686
.465
773
,412
,312
,813
560
,222
,565
.583
,268
.069
.987
. 143
,065
.986
.908
.829
.751
.673
.594
.516
,437
.359
. 281
.202
. 1 24
.046
.967
.889
.810
-------
Table B-2
Vehicle Stock
(millions of vehicles)
Year LDV
1975 95.241
1976 97.818
1977 99.904
1978 102.957
1979 104.677
1980 104.564
1981 105. B39
1982 106.867
1983 108.961
1984 1 1 1 .309
1985 113.656
1986 1 16.008
1987 118.355
1988 120.707
1989 123.055
1990 125.406
1991 127.754
1992 130. 101
1993 132.453
1994 134.801
1995 137.152
1996 139.500
1997 141 .851
1998 144. 199
1999 146.546
2000 148.898
2001 151 . 246
2002 153.598
2003 155.946
2004 158.293
2005 160.645
2006 162.992
2007 165.344
2008 167.691
2009 170.043
2010 172.390
201 1 174.738
2012 177.090
2013 179.437
2014 181 .790
2015 184. 137
2016 186.489
2017 188.836
2018 191 . 184
2019 193.536
2020 195.883
-LDT1
14.631
15.216
15.378
15.617
16. 145
17.392
17.766
18.287
19.027
19.750
20.578
21 .497
22.525
23.530
.24.502
25.444
26.361
27.250
28. 1 14
28.958
29.782
30.584
31 .368
32, 135
32.888
33.628
34.359
35.079
35.789
36.493
37. 190
37.879
38.561
39.239
39.914
40.581
41 .245
41 .906
42.561
43.213
43.862
44.507
45 . 149
45.788
46.426
47.061
LDT2
5. 120
6. 155
7 .338
9.016
10. 105
10.967
.111
. 288
.502
.524
.429
. 237
10.947
10.681
10.453
10. 258
10.092
9.950
9.830
9.730
9.647
9.585
9.541
9.513
9.497
9.493
9.499
9.514
9.537
9.567
9.604
9.646
9.693
9.745
9.801
9.861
9.925
9.992
10.062
10.. 134
10.210
10.287
10.367
10.449
10.533
10.618
Class
2B
0.574
0.651
0.887
1 . 123
1 .349
1 .663
1 .866
2.099
2.343
2.605
2.846
3.065
3.264
3.462
3.651
3.834
4.010
4. 178
4.344
4.501
4.654
4.802
4.945
5.084
5.219
5.352
5.482
5.609
5.734
5.858
5.980
6. 100
6.219
6.336
6.453
6.568
6.682
6.795
6.907
7.019
7. 129
7. 239
7.348
7.457
7.565
7.672
Class
3
0.437
0.435
0.427
0.477
0.474
0.486
0.479
0.479
0.459
0.427
0.395
0.366
0.339
0.314
0.291
0. 270
0.251
0. 234
0.218
0.203
0. 189
0.177
0. 166
0. 156
0. 147
0. 139
0.131
0. 124
0.117
0.111
0. 105
0. 100
0.095
0.090
0.086
0.082
0.078
0.074
0.071
0.068
0.064
0.062
0.059
0.056
0.054
0.051
Class
4
0. 331
0.310
0. 291
0.281
0. 271
0. 272
0.259
0. 247
0.237
0. 220
0.204
0. 189
0. 175
0. 162
0. 150
0. 139
0. 129
0. 120
0.112
0. 105
0.098
0.091
0.086
0.081
0.076
0.072
0.068
0.064
0.061
0.057
0.054
0.052
0.049
0.047
0.044
0.042
0.040
0.038
0.037
0.035
0.033
0.032
0.030
0.029
0.028
0.026
Class
5
0.594
0.562
0.527
0.496
0.473
0.475
0.453
0.432
0.414
0.385
0.356
0.330
0.306
0.283
0.262
0.243
0. 226
0.211
0. 196
0.183
0.171
0. 160
0. 150
0.141
0. 33
0. 25
0. 18
0. 12
0. 06
0. 100
0.095
0.090
0.086
0.082
0.078
0.074
0.070
0.067
0.064
0.061
0.058
0.055
0.053
0.051
0.048
0.046
Class C
6
.058 C
.126 C
.196 C
. 272 C
.340 C
.408 C
.394 C
.367 C
.339 C
.285 C
1. .232 C
1.181 C
1 . 126 C
1 .074 C
1.026 C
0.983
0.942
0.906
0.873
0.845
0.819
0.796
0.777
0.761
0.746
0.733
0.722
0.712
0. 703
0.696
0.689
0.683
0.679
0.674
0.671
0.668
0.666
0.664
0.662
0.661
0.661
0.661
0.661
0.661
0.662
0.663 i
:iass
7
1.426
1.425
1.426
1.444
1.478
1.544
1.585
1.615
1.639
1.680
1.737
1.803
1.875
1.939
1.996
.046
.091
. 134
. 175
.215
. 253
. 290
.325
.359
.392
.425
.457
.489
.520
.551
.581
.612
.641
.671
.700
.730
.758
.787
.816
.844
.872
.900
.928
.956
.983
2.01 1
Class Class
BA BB
0.465 0.715
0.447 0.755
0.433 0.827
0.425 0.913
0.422 .006
0.438 . 134
0.429 . 183
0.416 .198
0.404 .205
0.384 .214
0.366 .235
0.350 .265
0.335 .297
0.321 .327
0.309 .356
0.298 .384
0. 289 .411
0.281 .440
0.274 .469
0.267 .499
0.262 .531
0.257 .562
0.253 .593
0.249 .624
0.246 .655
0.244 .686
0.242 .716
0.240 .747
0.239 .777
0.238 .B07
0.237 .837
0.236 .867
0.236 .897
0.236 .927
0. 235 1 .956
0. 236 1 .986
0.236 2.015
0.236 2.045
0.237 2.074
0.237 2. 103
0.238 2. 133
0.239 2.162
0. 240 2.191
0.241 2.220
0.242 2.249
0.243 2.278
Schoo 1
Buses
0.368
0.381
0.394
0.399
0.415
0. 382
0.437
0.446
0.458
0 .47 1
0.484
0.49B
0.512'
0.526
0. 54 1
0.556
0 . 57 1
0.587
0.604
0.621
0 .638
0.656
0.674
0. 693
0.713
0.733
0 . 753
0.774
0. 796
0.818
0.841
0.865
0.889
0.914
0 .939
0.966
0.993
.021
.049
.079
. 109
. 140
. 172
.205
. 238
.273
Publ ic
Buses
0 . 094
0.097
0 . 09B
0 . 102
0. 105
0.107
0. 107
0. 13
0. 16
0. 19
0. 23
0. 26
0. 29
0. 32
0. 36
0. 139
0.143
0.147
0. 50
0. 54
0 . 58
0 . b3
0. 67
0.171
0 . 176
0. 180
0. 185
0. 190
0. 195
0 . 200
0. 205
0.210
0.216
0.221
0. 227
0. 233
0. 239
0. 245
0. 25 1
0. 258
0. 265
0. 272
0 . 279
0 . 286
0 . 293
0. 301
-------
Table B-3
Registration Distributions
Classes 2B-3 Classes 4-6 Classes 7-BB
Age
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LDV
. 104
.098
.093
.087
.081
.075
.069
.063
.058
.052
.046
.040
.034
.028
.022
.017
.01 1
.008
.006
.004
.003
.001
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LOT
.087
.083
.079
.075
.071
.067
.063
.059
.055
.051
.047
.043
.040
.036
.032
.028
.024
.020
.016
.012
.008
.004
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
Gas
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
087
083
079
075
071
067
063
059
055
051
047
043
040
036
032
028
024
020
016
012
008
004
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Oi ese 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
087
083
079
075
071
067
063
059
055
051
047
043
040
036
032
028
024
020
016
012
008
004
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Gas
. 147
. 126
. 107
.092
.078
.067
.057
.049
.042
.036
.030
.026
.022
.019
.016
.014
.012
.010
.009
.007
.006
.005
.005
.004
.003
.003
.002
.002
.002
.002
Diesel
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 147
. 126
. 107
.092
.078
.067
.057
.049
.042
.036
.030
.026
.022
.019
.016
.014
.012
.010
.009
.007
.006
.005
.005
.004
.003
.003
.002
.002
.002
.002
Gas
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
167
139
1 16
097
081
067
056
047
039
032
027
023
019
016
013
01 1
009
008
006
005
004
004
003
003
002
002
001
001
001
001
Di ese 1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
167
139
1 16
097
081
067
056
047
039
032
027
023
019
016
013
01 1
009
008
006
005
004
004
003
003
002
002
001
001
001
001
-------
Table B-4
VMT Distributions
(thousands of miles/year)
LDV
Age
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
1B
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Gas
12.818
12. 102
1 1 .427
10.789
10. 187
9.619
9.082
8.575
8.096
7.645
7.218
6.815
6.435
6.076
5. 737
5.416
5.114
4.829
4.559
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
Diesel
12.818
12. 102
1 1 .427
10.789
10. 187
9.619
9.082
8.575
8.096
7 .645
7.218
6.815
6:435
6:076
5.737
5.416
5.114
4.829
4.559
4.305
4.305
4.305
-4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
4.305
LDT1
Gas
17.394
16. 132
14.961
13.876
12.869
1 1 .935
1 1 .069
10.266
9.521
8.830
8. 189
7.595
7.044
6.533
6.059
5.619
5.211
4.833
4.483
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
4. 157
.Diesel
17.552
16.262
15.068
13.961
12.936
1 1 .986
1 1 . 105
10.290
9.534
8.833
8. 185
7.583
7.026
6.510
6.032
5.589
5. 179
4.798
4.446
4
4 .
4.
4.
4.
4.
4.
4 .
4.
4.
4.
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
LDT2-
Gas
18.352
16.946
15.648
14.449
13.342
12.320
1 1 .376
10.504
9.700
8.956
8. 270
7.637
7.052
6.511
6.012
5.552
5. 126
4.734
4.371
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
4.036
Class 3
Di ese 1
17.552
16.262
15.068
13.961
12.936
1 1 .986
1 1 . 105
10. 290
9.534
8.833
8 . 185
7.583
7 .026
6.510
6.032
5.589
5. 179
4.798
4.446
4. 19
4 . 19
4. 19
4 . 19
4. 19
4. 19
4. 19
4.119
4.119
4.119
4.119
Classes 4-6
Gas
19.967
18.077
16.365
14.815
13.413
12. 143
10.993
9.952
9.010
8. 156
7 .384
6.685
6.052
5.479
4.960
4.490
4.065
3.680
3. 332
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
D iese 1
19.967
18.077
16.365
14.815
13.413
12. 143
10 .993
9 .952
9.010
8 . 156
7 .384
6.685
6.052
5 .479
4 .960
4 .490
4 .065
3.680
3 .332
3.016
3.016
3.016
3 .016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
3.016
Class 7 Class 8A Class 8B
Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel
19.967 49.249 19.967 49.112 19.967 86.259
18.077 43.238 18.077 44.022 18.077 78.005
16.365 37.953 16.365 39.470 16.365 70.519
14.815 33.315 14:815 35.388 14.815 63.751
13.413 29.243 13.413 31.729 13.413 57.633
12.143 25.669 12.143 28.448 12.143 52.102
10.993 22.532 10.993 25.507 10.993 47.101
9.952 19.778 9.952 22.869 9.952 42.581
9.010 17.361 9.010 20.505 9.010 38.494
8.156 15.239 8.156 18.384 8.156 34.800
7.384 13.376 7.384 16.483 7.384 31.460
6.685 11.741 6.685 14.779 6.685 28.441
6.052 10.306 6.052 13.251 6.052 25.711
5.479 9.047 5.479 11.881 5.479 23.244
4.960 7.941 4.960 10.652 4.960 21.013
4.490 6.969 4.490 9.551 4.490 18.996
4.065 6.117 4.065 8.565 4.065 17.173
3.680 5.370 3.680 7.679 3.680 15.525
3.332 4.713 3.332 6.885 3.332 14.032
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3,016 6. 73 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
3.016 4.137 3.016 6.173 3.016
2.685
2.685
2.685
2.685
2.685
2 .685
2.685
2.685
2 .685
2.685
2 .685
-------
Table B-5
Diesel Penetration Rates
Year
1960-
1 Q C 1
i y o i
1962
1 Q C O
i yo.3
1964
1 f\ C C
1 ybb
1966
1 Q R~>
i y b /
1968
1 Q CO
i y by
1970
1 Q "7 1
i y / i
1972
1 Q "7 1
i y / o
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
I960
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000+
LDV
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
,
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
000
n n n
DDL)
000
A n A
uuu
000
A A n
UUU
000
A A n
UUU
000
n n n
UUU
000
nn i
UU 1
002
nm
UU^
003
003
003
003
009
026
045
060
039
019
023
028
032
037
041
046
050
063
076
089
102
1 15
1 15
1 15
1 15
1 15
1 15
LOT
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0 .
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
000
n n r\
UUU
000
A A n
UUU
000
r\nn
OUU
000
000
000
n nn
UUU
000
nnn
UUU
000
nnn
UUU
000
001
001
001
006
013
024
056
071
077
080
090
100
1 10
120
130
150
188
226
263
300
339
339
339
339
339
339
Class
2B
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
000
Ann
UUU
000
00 1
001
002
003
003
002
002
001
nn A
uou
000
nnn
UUU
000
000
000
000
000
041
081
122
162
180
197
215
232
250
260
270
280
290
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
C 1 asses
3-5
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
010
A 1 A
U I U
014
A 1 Q
U 1 b
022
A O C
U2b
029
03 1
022
n i o
U 1 2
003
n n *3
UU J
003
n r\ A
U04
004
005
003
000
000
041
081
122
162
180
197
215
232
250
260
270
280
290
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
300
Class
6
0.
.
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
.
0.
.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
021
n o 1
U £. 1
042
nc Q
Do J
084
1 05
100
094
088
082
076
054
031
n *5 /I
Uo4
038
041
071
100
106
174
242
309
377
388
398
409
419
430
444
458
472
486
500
510
520
530
540
550
550
550
550
C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1 ass
7
. 426
,t Q C
.4^0
.426
/I O C
. 4 Jb
.442
. 44 7
.413
. 379
.364
Q /I Q
. o4o
.333
*3 A 1
. J4 1
.348
O Q O
. Jo 2.
.415
.449
.514
.578
.615
.606
.598
.589
.580
.584
.588
.592
.596
.600
.610
.620
.630
.640
.650
.660
.670
.680
.690
.700
.700
.700
.700
Class Class
8A 8B
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
.609 0.547
. 609 0 . 547
.609 0.547
.616 0 . 595
.624 0.642
. 632 0 . 690
.583 0.721
.535 0.751
.514 0.809
. 492 0 . 867
.470 0.925
A Q O n Q O T
. 4o £. U . y to
.492 0.921
K A n n Q o i
. b4U U . a *: 1
.586 0.920
.634 0.920
.726 0.960
.770
.794
.818
.841
.865
.889
.886
.883
.881
.878
.875
.888
.901
.915
.928
.941
.953
.965
.976
.988
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
School
Buses
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000'
.000
.023
.043
.067
.089
. 108
. 127
. 144
. 160
. 175
. 189
.203
.215
.226
.236
.244
.252
.259
.265
.270
Publ ic
Buses
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
-------
Table B-6
Leaded Fuel Penetration Rates
Year
1960-
1961
1962
1 Q A Q
i y o j
1964
1 OAR
i yoD
1966
1967
» Q f* n
1 ybb
1969
1970
1 Q ~I 1
i y / i
1972
1973
1 Q "7 A
i y / **
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000*
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
LDV
.000
.000
.000
nnn
. UUU
.000
f\f\(~i
. uuu
.000
.000
r\r\f\
. UUU
.000
.000
r\f\r\
. uuu
.000
.000
nnn
. uuu
.097
. 1 19
. 1 19
. 100
.069
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
«
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Classes Classes
LDT1 LDT2 2B-3 4-8B
.000 1.000
.000
.000
. 000
.000
r\f\f\
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
n r»r\
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.076
.063
.014
.000
.000
nnr\
. uuu
.000
f\f\f\
. uuu
.000
.000
r\r\r\
. uuu
.000
.000
f\r\r\
. uuu
.000
.000
r\ f\ f\
. DUO
.000
.000
.000
.010 1.000
.011 0.000
.007 0.000
.011 0.000
.014 0.000
.017 0.000
.000 0.000
.000 0.000
.000 0.000
.000
.000
.000
r\nr\
. uuu
.000
f\r\r\
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
nn r\
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
r\n r\
. uuu
.000
r\f\f\
. uuu
.000
.000
n n n
. uuu
.000
.000
nrm
. uuu
.000
.000
. 000
.000
.000
.000 i.ooo
.000 1.000
.000 1.000
.000 1 .000
.000 1.000
. 000
. 000
.000
. 000
.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000 0.000 0.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
School Publ ic
Buses Buses
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1.000
1.000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
1 .000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
-------
Table B-7
Road MPG and Diesel Advantage Factors
Class 28 Classes 3-5 Class 6 Class 7 Class 8A Class 8B School Buses Public Buses
LDV Diesel LOT Diesel
Year Fleet Factor Fleet Factor Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel Gas Diesel
1976
1979
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000+
14.90
17.30
21 .50
22.30
22.20
22.70
23.30
23.80
24. 10 1
24.50 1
24.80 1
25.20 1
25.70 1
26.20
26.70
27. 10
27.60
28. 10
28.50
28.90
29.40 1
29.70 1
.62
.35
. 23
.22
. 21
.20
.20
.20
. 20
.20
. 20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
.20
12.30
12.60
17. 20
17.50
17.80
17.90
18. 10
18.30
18.60
18.80
19.00
19.30
19.60
19.90
20.20
20.40
20.80
21 .20
21 .40
21 .80
22.00
22.30
. 42
• 42
.42
.40
. 38
.36
.34
.32
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30
.30'
10.12
10.12
10.12
10.12
10.12
10.12
10.12
10.12
10.12
10.34
10 . 45
10.55
10.66
10.73
10.80
10.87
10.94
1 .02
1 .09
1 .16
1 .23
1 .30
1 .38
1 1 .45
11 .53
1 1 .60
1 1 .68
1 1 .75
1 1 .83
1 1 .90
1 1 .98
13.12 7.48 8.1 6.21 8.25 5.54 6.60 4.48 6.13
13.12 7.39 8.1 6.04 8.25 5.44 6.60 4.39 6.02
13.12 7.27 8.1 5.82 8.25 5.28 6.60 4.25 5.82
13.12 7.22 8.1 5.75 8.25 5.23 6.60 4.20 5.75
13.12 7.16 8.1 5. 68 8.25 5.19 6. 60 4.15 5. 68
13.12 7.21 8.1 5.57 8.25 5.12 6.63 4.09 5.59
13.12 7.40 8.1 5.50 8.25 5.05 6.70 4.05 5.54
13.12 7.52 8.1 5.58 8.25 5.08 6.82 4.10 5.37
13.12 7. 63 8.1 5. 60 8.40 5.10 6.93 4.15 5.20
13.34 7.79 8.24 5.68 8.52 5.18 7.15 4.26 5.27
13.44 7.88 8.31 5.72 8.58 5.22 7.16 4.27 5.31
13.55 7.96 8.38 5.75 8.64 5.25 7.17 4.28 5.34
13.66 8.04 8.44 5.79 8.70 5.28 7.17 4.28 5.38
13.75 8.09 8.50 5.84 8.82 5.32 7.27 4.31 5.45
13.84 8.14 8.55 5.89 8.95 5.36 7.38 4.33 5.53
13.93 8.20 8.61 5.94 9.07 5.39 7.48 4.36 5.60
14.01 8.25 8.66 5.98 9.20 5.43 7.59 4.38 5.68
14.10 8.30 8.72 6.03 9.32 5.47 7.69 4.41 5.75
14.29 8.36 8.84 6.05 9.40 5.49 7.76 4.43 5.80
14.49 8.41 8.95 6.07 9.48 5.51 7.82 4.45 5.86
14.68 8.47 9.07 6.09 9.56 5.53 7.89 4.46 5.91
14.87 8.52 9.19 6.11 9.64 5.55 7.95 4.48 5.97
15.06 8.58 9.31 6.13 9.72 5.57 8.02 4.50 6.02
15.29 8.63 9.45 6.15 9.80 5.59 8.09 4.52 6.07
15.52 8.69 9.60 6.17 9.88 5.61 8.15 4.53 6.12
15.76 8.74 9.74 6.20 9.96 5.63 8.22 4.55 6.17
15.99 8.80 9.88 6.22 10.04 5.65 8.28 4.56 6.22
16.22 8.86 10.03 6.24 10.11 5.68 8.35 4.58 6.27
16.45 8.92 10.17 6.26 10.19 5.70 8.42 4.60 6.32
16.68 8.97 10.31 6.29 10.27 5.72 8.48 4.61 6.37
16.92 9.03 10.56 6.31 10.35 5.74 8.55 4.63 6.42
4 . 57
4 . 39
4 . 25
4.15
4 . 09
4. 10
4. 26
4. 28
4. 28
4.31
4.33
4.36
4.38
4.41
4.43
4.45
4.46
4.48
4.50
4.52
4.53
4.55
4.56
4.58
4.60
4.61
4.63
4 . 22
4 . 25
4.57
4 .98
5.21
5.33
5. 38
5.44
5.49
5.55
5.60
5.65
5. 70
5.76
5.81
5.86
5.96
6.07
6.17
6.28
6.38
6. 48
6.59
6.69
7.34
7 .36
7 .65
7 .68
7 .73
7 .78
7 .83
7 .88
7 .94
7 .99
8.04
8 .09
8.14
8.19
8 . 24
8.29
8.34
8.40
8.45
8 .50
8.55
8 .60
0.62
0.75
0.87
.00 ----
.13
.25
.38
.51
.63 '-
1 . 76
1 .89
2.01
2.14
2.27
2.39
2.52
2.65
2.77
2.90
5.05
5.06
4.98
4.96
5.01
5 .06
5.12
5.17
5.22
5. 27
5.33
5. 38
5.43
5.48
5.53
5.59
5.64
5.69
5.74
5.80
5.85
5.90
-------
Table B-8
Urban VMT Fractions
Class 2B
Classes 3-5
Class 6
Class 7
Class 8A
Class SB
School Buses Public Buses
Year
LDV
LOT
Gas Diesel
Gas Diesel
Gas Diesel
Gas Diesel
Gas Diesel
Gas Diese I
Gas D i eseI
Gas D iese1
1977
1979
1980
1981
1984
1988
1990
1992
1994
•^nnn*.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
.597
.597
.597
.597
.597
.597
.597
.597
.597
COT
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.514
.514
.514
.514
.514
.514
.514
.514
.514
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
690
689
689
688
689
691
698
701
703
706
707
710
0,
0
0.
0,
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0,
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0 .
,630
.631
.632
.632
. 633
.633
. 633
. 633
.633
. 633
633
633
633
,633
633
633
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
!
.690
. 690
.689
.689
.688
. 689
.691
. 693
. 695
.698
. 699
.701
. 702
.703
. 704
.706
. 707
.710
.710
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0 .
0 .
550
590
630
63 1
631
632
632
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
633
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 660
. 660
.660
. 660
.667
.674
.680
. 687
. 698
.709
.721
. 732
. 743
.750
. 757
. 765
. 772
.779
. 789
.799
. 809
.819
. 829
. 829
. 829
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 430
. 430
.428
. 432
.436
.439
.443
. 448
.449
. 450
. 45 1
. 452
.453
. 454
.454
. 455
.456
. 459
.463
. 466
. 470
.4/3
. 473
. 473
0 .
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0 .
0.
0 .
0 .
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0.
0 .
0 .
0 .
0 .
0 .
630
630
640
650
660
670
68 1
689
698
706
7 1 5
723
725
728
730
733
735
743
751
759
775
775
775
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 370 '
.377
. 379
.380
.382
.383
. 385
. 385
.386
. 386
. 387
. 387
. 388
. 389
. 390
. 39 1
.392
. 393
.394
. 394
. 395
. 396
. 396
. 396
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
. 580
.630
. 650
.669
.689
.708
. 752
.777
. 80 1
. 826
. 850
.850
. 850
.850
. 850
.850
. 850
.850
. 850
. 850
. 850
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.358
.358
.359
.359
. 359
.359
. 359
. 359
. 359
.360
. 362
.363
. 365
.366
. 372
.377
. 382
. 394
. 394
0.
0,
0.
0.
0 .
0.
0 ,
0.
0 ,
0.
0 .
0.
0,
0
,630
.669
.689
.708
.777
.850
,850
,850
.850
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
176
176
176
176
176
176
176
176
17b
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0,
0.
0
280
.310
.300
.400
.410
.410
.410
.410
.410
0.
0.
0.
0 .
0 ,
0
0
0 ,
0
280
310
300
.400
.410
.410
.410
.410
.410
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0,
620
62U
640
650
.650
.650
.650
.650
.650
Acrn
------- |