Light-Duty Automotive Technology,
Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel
Economy Trends:
1975 Through 2012
Executive Summary
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
Light-Duty Automotive Technology,
Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel
Economy Trends:
1975 Through 2012
Executive Summary
Transportation and Climate Division
Office of Transportation and Air Quality
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
NOTICE
This technical report does not necessarily represent final EPA decisions or
positions. It is intended to present technical analysis of issues using data
that are currently available. The purpose in the release of such reports is to
facilitate the exchange of technical information and to inform the public of
technical developments.
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA-420-S-13-001
March 2013
-------
I. Executive Summary
Introduction
This report summarizes key trends in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, fuel economy, and CO2- and fuel
economy-related technology for gasoline- and diesel-fueled personal vehicles sold in the United States, from model
years (MY) 1975 through 2012. Personal vehicles are those vehicles that EPA classifies as cars, light-duty trucks, or
medium-duty passenger vehicles. The data in this report cover the MY 1975-2012 timeframe, supersede the data in
previous reports in this series, and, for many important reasons, should not be compared with data from previous
years' editions of this report. Most CO2 emissions and fuel economy values in this report have been adjusted to
reflect "real world" consumer performance and therefore are not comparable to CO2 emissions and fuel economy
standards.
CO2 emissions rates and fuel economy values reflect a very favorable multi-year trend beginning in MY
2005. Data for MY 2011 are final, whereas data for MY 2012 are preliminary and based on projected vehicle
production values provided to EPA by manufacturers. The fleetwide average real world MY 2011 personal vehicle
CO2 emissions value is 398 grams per mile (g/mi) and average fuel economy is 22.4 miles per gallon (mpg), both
slightly worse relative to MY 2010. Preliminary projections for MY 2012 are 374 g/mi CO2 emissions and 23.8
miles per gallon, which, if realized, would be all-time records and amongst the largest annual improvements since
1975.
One factor which almost certainly contributes to both the apparent slight worsening in MY 2011 and the large
projected improvement in MY 2012 is the reduction in MY 2011 car and car parts production in Japan in the
aftermath of the March 2011 earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disasters. While it is impossible to project the precise
impact, EPA estimates that the fleetwide average MY 2011 CO2 emissions and fuel economy values would likely
have been similar to or slightly better than MY 2010 levels if car production from major Japan-based manufacturers
had not been constrained by the tragedies. Likewise, the improvement projected for MY 2012 would be somewhat
smaller.
For more discussion of the key conclusions of this report, see the Highlights below.
What's New This Year
One change to this year's report is the addition of Section VIII on Alternative Fuel Vehicle Trends. Previous
reports in this series have only included data for vehicles that are dedicated to or are expected to operate primarily on
petroleum fuels, i.e., gasoline and diesel, and the primary Trends database that is the subject of this report (with the
exception of Section VIII) continues to include data only from vehicles operated on petroleum fuels. Since 1975,
these vehicles have represented well over 99 percent of all light-duty vehicles sold in the U.S. But, the number of
vehicles dedicated to (or designed to operate frequently on) nonpetroleum fuels is increasing, and Section VIII
provides relevant data from electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and compressed natural gas vehicles.
For the first time, EPA presents data on technology penetration rates by individual manufacturers, to
complement the industry-wide data that have been included in the report for many years. For each manufacturer, data
are presented for the maximum increases in technology deployment over 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year intervals for five
"mature" technologies (fuel injection, lockup transmissions, front wheel drive, multi-valve engines, and variable
-------
valve timing) and three emerging technologies (6-speed transmissions, continuously variable transmissions, and
gasoline direct injection engines). These new data are presented near the end of Section VI.
Vehicle footprint data are of increasing interest, of course, because greenhouse gas emissions and corporate
average fuel economy (CAFE) standards are now footprint-based. This series of reports has included footprint data
since MY 2008, the first year that manufacturers could optionally comply with footprint-based light truck CAFE
standards. EPA received formal, comprehensive footprint data from all manufacturers, for the first time, in the final
CAFE compliance reports for MY 2011, the first year footprint-based CAFE standards became required for all
vehicles, and these data are included in this report. EPA will continue to receive, and report, formal footprint data
from manufacturers in future years as well. It is important to note that, while some of the footprint data that EPA
reports for MY 2008-2010 came from formal manufacturer submissions, EPA supplemented this with informal data
from manufacturer websites and commercial websites, and EPA cannot be certain that the data from MY 2008-2010
is comparable, with respect to both precision and consistency, to the formal footprint data from MY 2011 and future
years. For purposes of footprint trends over time, EPA has a higher level of confidence in data from MY 2011 and
future years, and a lower level of confidence in data from MY 2008-2010.
The one change to manufacturer definitions in this year's report is that, due to new corporate financial
relationships, Chrysler has been combined with Fiat, Ferrari, and Maserati to form the Chrysler-Fiat manufacturing
group. Consistent with this new manufacturer definition and the long-standing approach of propagating current
manufacturer definitions backwards in the historical database in order to protect the integrity of long-term trends, all
historical Chrysler data now reflect production for the U.S. market for Fiat, Ferrari, and Maserati as well.
Two important changes initiated in the 2011 report have been retained in this year's report: 1) all car/truck
classifications throughout the historical database are consistent with the regulatory definitions used by the
Department of Transportation's (DOT) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for CAFE
standards beginning in MY 2011, and by EPA and NHTSA for the greenhouse gas emissions and CAFE standards for
MY 2012-2025, and 2) medium-duty passenger vehicles (MDPVs), which include larger sport utility vehicles
(SUVs) and passenger vans, but not the largest pickup trucks, in the 8500-10,000 pound gross vehicle weight rating
(GVWR) range, are included beginning with MY 2011 data.
Finally, on November 2, 2012, EPA announced that Hyundai and Kia would lower their fuel economy
estimates for many vehicle models as the result of an EPA investigation of test data. Hyundai and Kia submitted
corrected MY 2011-2013 fuel economy and CO2 emissions data to EPA and re-labeled the majority of their model
year 2012 and 2013 vehicle models on the market. The database for this report includes all Hyundai and Kia
vehicles, including the corrected fuel economy values submitted by Hyundai and Kia for four MY 2011 vehicles and
for a majority of Hyundai and Kia vehicles for MY 2012. The magnitude of the changes between the original fuel
economy label values and the corrected fuel economy label values ranges from 1 mpg to 6 mpg. For the changes in
fuel economy label values for individual vehicles, see http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/labelchange.htm. Since
EPA's investigation into Hyundai and Kia data submissions is continuing, Hyundai and Kia-specific values are
excluded from tables that list the fuel economy and CO2 emissions performance for individual manufacturers, but are
generally provided in footnotes associated with the tables.
11
-------
Highlight #1: COz emission rates and fuel economy values reflect a very favorable multi-year trend,
beginning with MY 2005.
MY 2011 adjusted composite CO2 emissions are 398 g/mi, a 4 g/mi increase relative to the record low set in
MY 2010. MY 2011 adjusted composite fuel economy is 22.4 mpg, 0.2 mpg lower than the historic high set in MY
2010. Preliminary MY 2012 values are 374 g/mi CO2 emissions and 23.8 mpg fuel economy, which, if achieved, will
be all-time records and amongst the largest single year improvements since 1975.
One factor which contributes to both the apparent slight worsening in MY 2011 and the large projected
improvement in MY 2012 is the reduction in MY 2011 car and car parts production in Japan in the aftermath of the
March 2011 earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disasters. For example, MY 2011 car production by Toyota and Honda
was over 500,000 units lower relative to MY 2010, while the rest of the industry, collectively, increased car
production in MY 2011. While it is impossible to project the precise industry-wide impact, since some of this lower
car production was likely captured by other manufacturers, EPA estimates that the fleetwide average MY 2011 CO2
emissions and fuel economy values would likely have been similar to or slightly higher than MY 2010 levels if car
production from major Japan-based manufacturers had not been constrained by the tragedies. Likewise, the
improvement projected for MY 2012 would be somewhat less had the final MY 2011 fuel economy value been
greater.
While year-to-year changes often receive the most public attention, annual values can be volatile for many
reasons and the greatest value of the historical trends database is the identification and documentation of longer-term
trends. For example, there have been three major factors that have contributed to year-to-year volatility since 2009:
the economic recession in MY 2009; rising and volatile gasoline and diesel fuel prices; and the impact of the tsunami
aftermath on Japan-based manufacturers. Using a 5-year timeframe (2006 and 2007 are good base years since there
was little market volatility), CO2 emission rates have decreased by 10 percent and fuel economy values have
increased by 11 percent from MY 2006-2011. Based on preliminary estimates, CO2 emission rates have decreased by
13 percent and fuel economy values have increased by 16 percent from MY 2007-2012. The improvements have
been even greater since the "inflection point" year in 2004.
Adjusted COz Emissions
700
o
o
SI
CD
600
500
400
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Model Year
0
0.
^
T!
21
in
Adjusted Fuel Economy
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Model Year
in
-------
Highlight #2: Many new technologies are rapidly gaining market share.
New technologies are continually being introduced into the marketplace, replacing older and less effective
technologies. Technological innovation is a major driving force behind the recent improvements in CO2 emissions
and fuel economy, and the majority of the carbon and oil savings from current vehicles is due to new gasoline vehicle
technologies.
Two engine technologies first introduced over 20 years ago—variable valve timing and multi-valve—are
projected to be used on 90 percent or more of all MY 2012 vehicles. Through the mid-1980s, most vehicles relied on
carburetors to deliver fuel to the engine. Carburetors were replaced by fuel injection systems in the late 1980s. Now,
in some vehicles, conventional fuel injection systems are being replaced by more sophisticated gasoline direct
injection systems, the use of which has grown from essentially zero in MY 2007 to a projected 24 percent of the
market in MY 2012. The use of turbochargers/superchargers has tripled from about 3 percent in MY 2007 to a
projected 9 percent in MY 2012, while the use of cylinder deactivation has remained in the 8-9 percent range. Both
conventional hybrids and diesel vehicles have increased market share slightly since MY 2007.
Light Duty Vehicle Technology Penetration Share
100%
01
i_
2
in
M-
o
4-1
c
a
u
-------
Highlight #3: Consumers have an increasing number of high fuel economy/low COz vehicle choices.
The U.S. personal vehicle market is diversifying, and consumers now have a much broader range of vehicle
choices with respect to fuel economy/CO2 emissions performance and powertrain technology. The number of SUV.
pickup, minivan, and van models that have combined EPA label values of 20 mpg or more have increased by 71%,
from 38 in 2007 to 65 in 2012. There are almost 3 times more SUVs with combined labels of 25 mpg or more and 6
times more cars with ratings of 30 mpg or more. The number of cars with 40 mpg (or higher) labels have increased
from 2 in 2007 to 15 in 2012.
91
•a
o
91
.a
E
3
IMY2007
IMY2012
SUVs, Pickups, Minivans, and
Vans >=20MPG
SUVs >=25MPG
Cars >=30MPG
Cars >=40MPG
There are also many more advanced technology vehicle choices. In MY 2007, the only advanced technology
for which there were meaningful choices was conventional hybrids (and, to a lesser degree, diesel vehicles). Today,
not only are there about twice as many conventional hybrids and diesels in the market, but growing numbers of
electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, natural gas vehicles, and fuel cell vehicles as well. Some of these
alternative fueled vehicles have limited consumer availability. For example, the two fuel cell vehicles are only
available to some consumers in selected California markets.
I MY 2007
I MY 2012
Hybrid vehicles Diesel vehicles Electricvehicles Plug-in hybrid electric Compressed natural
vehicles gas vehicles
Fuel cell vehicles
For this analysis, the authors used engineering judgment to differentiate between those configurations that are
generally marketed and perceived by consumers to be the same model (e.g., 2WD/4WD, different engine sizes and/or
pickup truck wheelbases, and different trim levels were treated as one model) versus those configurations that are
generally marketed and perceived by consumers to be unique vehicle choices (e.g., vehicles which are marketed
separately and have distinct vehicle sizes such as the Prius, Prius v, and Prius c). This same approach was used for
both MY 2007 and MY 2012. All fuel economy values in this highlight are consistent with label values and
classifications. For more detail on this analysis, see the brochure and technical support memorandum at
http://www.epa.gov/nvfel/showcase.htm. See fueleconomy.gov for formal EPA label values for individual vehicles.
-------
Highlight #4: Manufacturers are selling many vehicles today that can meet future
targets.
emsson
EPA evaluated MY 2012 vehicles against future footprint-based CO2 emission targets to determine which
vehicles could meet or exceed the targets in model years 2016-2025, based on current powertrain designs and
assuming improvements in air conditioner refrigerants and efficiency. It is important to note there are no CO2
emissions standards for individual vehicles. Rather, manufacturers are subject to corporate average standards for
both their passenger car and light truck fleets. The standards are derived from the footprint-based CO2 emissions
target curves, and the production volume-weighted distribution of vehicles produced for sale in the U.S.
Nearly 25% of projected MY 2012 vehicle production already meets the MY 2016 CO2 targets, or can meet
these targets with the addition of expected air conditioning improvements. The bulk of this production share is
accounted for by non-hybrid gasoline vehicles, although other technologies, including hybrids, electric vehicles, and
diesel vehicles are also represented. These 25% represent approximately 80 MY 2012 vehicle models that are in
showrooms today, and include a wide range of vehicle segments, including cars, SUVs, minivans, and pickup trucks.
Looking ahead, there are about 20 vehicle models (3% of projected 2012 production) that could meet the MY
2025 CO2 targets. Vehicles meeting the MY 2025 CO2 targets are comprised solely of hybrids, plug-in hybrids,
electric vehicles, and fuel cell vehicles. Since the MY 2025 standards are over a decade away, there's considerable
time for continued improvements in gasoline vehicle technology.
MY 2012 Vehicle Production Share (Projected) That Meets Future CO2 Targets, by Technology
o
3
•o
O
O
CN
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
CNG
IEV
| Fuel Cell
IPHEV
IHEV
I Diesel
I Gasoline
2016
2017
2020
2025
EPA assumed the addition of only air conditioning improvements since these are considered to be among the
most straightforward and least expensive technologies available to reduce CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions.
See the "Regulatory Context" section below for more information on CO2 and fuel economy standards.
VI
-------
Highlight #5: Most manufacturers continue to increase fuel economy, resulting in lower
emission rates.
Seven of the 1 1 manufacturers shown below increased fuel economy from MY 2010 to MY 201 1, the last
two years for which we have definitive data. Preliminary MY 2012 values suggest that all manufacturers will
improve in MY 20 12, several by 20 g/mi CO2 or more and 1.5 mpg or more, though these projections are uncertain
and EPA will not have final data until next year's report.
In MY 201 1, for the 1 1 manufacturers shown, Volkswagen had the lowest fleetwide adjusted composite CO2
emissions and highest adjusted fuel economy performance, followed by Mazda and then a tie between Honda and
Toyota. All of these manufacturers have average footprint values lower than the industry average. Daimler had the
highest CO2 emissions (and lowest fuel economy), followed by Chrysler-Fiat and GM. VW had the biggest
improvement in adjusted CO2 (and fuel economy) performance from MY 2010 to MY 201 1, with a 14 g/mi reduction
in fleetwide CO2 emissions (and 1.0 mpg fuel economy improvement), followed by Ford (13 g/mi reduction in CO2
emissions and 0.7 mpg improvement). The higher CO2 and lower fuel economy values for Honda and Toyota in MY
201 1 are at least partially explained by the lower car production in Japan due to the March 201 1 tsunami. Section VII
has greater detail on the fuel economy and CO2 emissions for these manufacturers (e.g., for individual manufacturer
car and truck fleets), as well as for these manufacturers' individual makes (i.e., brands).
MY 2010-2012 Manufacturer Fuel Economy and CO2 Emissions1
Manufacturer MY2010
MPG
VW
Mazda
Toyota
Honda
Subaru
Nissan
BMW
Ford
GM
Chrysler-Fiat
Daimler
All
25.0
24.4
25.4
24.9
23.4
23.1
22.1
20.4
21.3
19.5
18.9
22.6
MY2010 MY2011
CO2 MPG
(g/mi)
363
364
350
357
379
384
404
435
418
455
471
394
26.0
25.0
24.1
24.1
23.9
23.3
22.7
21.1
20.7
19.4
19.1
22.4
MY2011 MY2012
CO2 MPG
(g/mi)
349
356
369
369
372
381
393
422
429
458
469
398
26.2
25.9
25.6
26.4
25.2
24.6
23.1
23.2
21.4
20.6
21.4
23.8
MY2012
C02
(g/mi)
346
343
347
337
353
361
386
382
415
431
418
374
1 Two manufacturers, Hyundai and Kia, are not included in the table above due to a continuing investigation. On November 2,
2012, EPA announced that Hyundai and Kia would lower their fuel economy estimates for many vehicle models as the result of
an EPA investigation of test data. This report uses the corrected fuel economy values submitted by Hyundai and Kia for four MY
2011 vehicles and for a majority of Hyundai and Kia vehicles for MY 2012. Based on these corrected data, Hyundai's 2011
values are 27.2 mpg and 327 g/mi CO2, Hyundai's preliminary 2012 values are 28.8 mpg and 309 g/mi CO2, Kia's 2011 values
are 25.8 mpg and 345 g/mi CO2, and Kia's preliminary 2012 values are 26.7 mpg and 333 g/mi CO2.
Vll
-------
Highlight #6: Truck market share continues to be volatile.
Light trucks, which include pickup trucks, minivans/vans, and most SUVs, accounted for 42 percent of all
light-duty vehicle production in MY 2011. This represents a 5 percent increase over MY 2010. The MY 2012 light
truck market share is projected to be 36 percent, based on pre-model year production projections by automakers,
which, if realized, would return truck market share to slightly below the MY 2010 level and to the second lowest
level since 1993.
Truck market share has been very volatile in recent years, decreasing by 8 percent in MY 2009, and
increasing by 4 percent in MY 2010 and by 5 percent in MY 2011. Three factors that have likely contributed to the
volatility in truck share include: 1) MY 2009 was a particularly unusual year due to the serious economic recession
that led to much turmoil in the automotive market and almost certainly led to an artificially low truck production
share in that year, which then results in an apparently larger truck production share increase since MY 2009; 2) the
Car Allowance Rebate System (CARS), commonly referred to as Cash for Clunkers, managed by NHTSA, which
provided incentives of up to $4500 for the trade-in of a vehicle with lower fuel economy and purchase of a new
vehicle with higher fuel economy, that resulted in 677,081 new vehicle purchases in 2009, and 3) the earthquake,
tsunami, and nuclear tragedies in Japan in March 2011 almost certainly decreased the supply of cars from Japan
(possibly trucks as well, but likely more cars than trucks), which likely contributed to the truck share increase in MY
2011 (as well as to the projected truck share decrease in MY 2012).
Production Share by Vehicle Type
1 00%
80%
CD
co 60%
o
'4—'
o
"§ 40%
20%
0%
Cars (Including Non-Truck SUVs)
1975
1980
1985
1990 1995
Model Year
2000
2005
2010
Vlll
-------
Highlight #7: Vehicle power is at a record high, while the vehicle weight trend is generally flat.
MY 2011 vehicle weight averaged 4127 pounds, an increase of 125 pounds compared to MY 2010. The
average car weight increased 81 pounds and truck weight increased 40 pounds, and the remaining difference was due
to higher truck market share. In MY 2011, the average vehicle power was 230 horsepower, an increase of 16
horsepower since MY 2010. Car power increased by 10 horsepower and truck power increased by 18 horsepower,
and the remaining difference was due to higher truck market share. Estimated MY 2011 O-to-60 acceleration time
decreased to 9.4 seconds. Preliminary MY 2012 values suggest that average vehicle weight and power will both
decrease, though these projections are uncertain and EPA will not have final data until next year's report. While the
preliminary MY 2012 weight value is lower than all but one year since 2001, the preliminary MY 2012 power value
would still be the second highest value ever, exceeded only by MY 2011.
Weight, Horsepower and O-to-60 Performance
Weight (Ib)
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Horsepower
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
1 7
1 9
1 1
1 n
q
S\. S
^*s
— ^^
^\
^v
N
"•s^^
^N
^^
^^^^
^^
* —
O-to-60 Time
(seconds)
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Model Year
Vehicle weight and performance are two of the most important engineering parameters that help determine a
vehicle's CO2 emissions and fuel economy. In general, all other factors being equal, higher vehicle weight (which
supports new options and features) and faster acceleration performance (e.g., lower O-to-60 mile-per-hour
acceleration time), both increase a vehicle's CO2 emissions and decrease fuel economy. From MY 1987 through MY
2004, on a fleetwide basis, automotive technology innovation was generally utilized to support market-driven
attributes other than CO2 emissions and fuel economy, such as vehicle weight, performance, and utility. Beginning in
MY 2005, technology has been used to increase both fuel economy (which has reduced CO2 emissions) and
performance, while keeping vehicle weight relatively constant.
ix
-------
Regulatory Context
CAFE standards have been in place since 1978. NHTSA has the responsibility for setting and enforcing
CAFE standards. EPA is responsible for establishing fuel economy test procedures and calculation methods, and for
collecting data used to determine vehicle fuel economy and manufacturer CAFE levels.
For MY 2012 through 2025, EPA and NHTSA have jointly developed a coordinated National Program which
established EPA greenhouse gas emissions standards and NHTSA CAFE standards that allow manufacturers to build
a single national fleet to meet requirements of both programs while ensuring that consumers have a full range of
vehicle choices. The National Program has been supported by a wide range of stakeholders: most major automakers,
the United Auto Workers, the State of California, and major consumer and environmental groups.
In 2010, the agencies finalized the first coordinated standards for MY 2012-2016 (75 Federal Register 25324,
May 7, 2010). The standards for MY 2012 are now in effect, and are projected to require average fleetwide CO2
emissions compliance of about 295 g/mi and average CAFE compliance of about 29.3 mpg (actual fleetwide
compliance levels will depend on the mix of vehicle footprint levels). By MY 2016, the average industry-wide
compliance levels for these footprint-based standards are projected to be 250 g/mi CO2 and 34.1 mpg CAFE. The
250 g/mi CO2 compliance level would be equivalent to 35.5 mpg if all CO2 emissions reductions are achieved
through fuel economy improvements. In 2012, the agencies finalized additional coordinated standards for MY 2017-
2025 (77 Federal Register 62624, October 15, 2012). By MY 2025, the average industry-wide compliance levels are
projected to be 163 g/mi CO2 and 48.7-49.7 mpg CAFE.2 The 163 g/mi CO2 compliance level would be equivalent to
54.5 mpg if all CO2 emissions reductions are achieved solely through improvements in fuel economy. For both MY
2012-2016 and MY 2017-2025, the agencies expect that a portion of the required CO2 emissions improvements will
be achieved by reductions in air conditioner refrigerant leakage, which would not contribute to higher fuel economy.
Automaker compliance with both CO2 and CAFE standards is based on unadjusted laboratory CO2 and fuel
economy values, along with various regulatory incentives and credits. Neither unadjusted laboratory nor adjusted
composite CO2 and fuel economy values reflect various incentives (e.g., for flexible fuel vehicles for both CAFE and
CO2 standards) and credits (air conditioner and other off-cycle technologies for CO2 standards) that are available to
manufacturers for regulatory compliance. With real world (i.e., 5-cycle label) adjustments, alternative fuel vehicle
credits, and test procedure adjustments, fleetwide CAFE compliance values are a minimum of 25 percent higher than
EPA adjusted (5-cycle) fuel economy values. See Appendix A for a detailed comparison of EPA adjusted and
laboratory fuel economy values and CAFE compliance values.
Notes on Data Contained in This Report
This report supersedes all previous reports in this series. Users of this report should rely exclusively on data
in this latest report, which covers MY 1975 through 2012, and not make comparisons to data in previous reports in
this series. There are several reasons for this.
One, EPA revised the methodology for estimating "real-world" (i.e., label) fuel economy values in December
2006. Every adjusted (ADJ) fuel economy value in this report for 1986 and later model years is lower than given in
2 NHTSA CAFE standards for model years 2022-2025 are not final, and are augural. NHTSA is required by Congress to set
CAFE standards for no more than five years at a time. NHTSA will conduct a new and full rulemaking in the future to establish
standards for model years 2022-2025. NHTSA projects the augural standards would require a combined fleetwide fuel economy
of 48.7-49.7 mpg.
x
-------
reports in this series prior to the 2007 report. See Appendix A for more in-depth discussion of the current
methodology and how it affects both the adjusted fuel economy values for individual models and the historical fuel
economy trends database. This same methodology is used to calculate adjusted CO2 emissions values as well. Two,
beginning with the 2011 report, all car/truck classifications in this database are consistent with determinations made
by NHTSA for CAFE standards beginning in MY 2011 and by EPA for CO2 emissions standards for MY 2012 and
later, which means that many small and midsize 2-wheel drive SUVs have been reclassified from trucks to cars for
the entire MY 1975-2012 database.. Three, when EPA changes a manufacturer or vehicle make definition to reflect a
change in the industry's current financial structure, EPA makes the same adjustment in the historical database as well.
This maintains a consistent manufacturer/make definition over time, which allows the identification of long-term
trends. On the other hand, it means that the database does not necessarily reflect actual past financial arrangements.
For example, the 2012 database, which includes data for the entire time series MY 1975 through 2012, accounts for
all Chrysler, Fiat, Ferrari, and Maserati vehicles in the 1975-2012 timeframe under the Chrysler-Fiat manufacturer
designation, and does not reflect that Chrysler was combined with Daimler for several years nor that there was no
historic relationship between Chrysler and Fiat/Ferrari/Maserati.
The great majority of the CO2 emissions and fuel economy values in this report are EPA adjusted composite
(ADJ COMP) city/highway real-world estimates provided to consumers and based on EPA's 5-cycle test
methodology (which represents city, highway, high speed/high acceleration, high temperature/air conditioning, and
cold temperature driving) that was first implemented in MY 2008. Appendix A provides a detailed explanation of the
method used to calculate these adjusted fuel economy and CO2 values, which last changed with the 2007 version of
this report. All adjusted composite city/highway fuel economy values in this report use a 43 percent city/57 percent
highway weighting to be consistent with the national driving activity analysis underlying EPA's 5-cycle fuel
economy label methodology. In 2011, EPA and NHTSA revised the fuel economy and environment label to include,
among other things, grams of CO2 emissions per mile and a fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions rating (76
Federal Register 39478, July 6, 2011).
In some tables, the report also provides unadjusted EPA laboratory (LAB) values, which are based on a 2-
cycle test methodology (city and highway tests only) and are the basis for automaker compliance with CO2 emissions
and CAFE standards. All combinations of adjusted or laboratory, and CO2 emissions or fuel economy values, may be
reported as city, highway, or, most commonly, as composite (combined city/highway).
Because the underlying methodology for generating unadjusted laboratory CO2 emissions and fuel economy
values has not changed since this series began in the mid-1970s, these values provide a basis for comparing long-term
CO2 emissions and fuel economy trends from the perspective of vehicle design, apart from the factors that affect real-
world driving that are reflected in the adjusted values. Laboratory composite values represent a harmonic average of
55 percent city and 45 percent highway operation, or "55/45" (the historic 55 percent city/45 percent highway
weighting is still used for both CAFE compliance and the combined value on individual fuel economy labels). For
2005 and later model years, unadjusted fleetwide laboratory composite CO2 emissions values are about 20 percent
lower than adjusted composite CO2 values, and unadjusted fleetwide laboratory composite fuel economy values are
about 25 percent greater than adjusted composite fuel economy values. Neither unadjusted laboratory nor adjusted
composite CO2 and fuel economy values reflect various incentives and credits that are available to manufacturers for
regulatory compliance.
Through MY 2011, the CO2 emissions, fuel economy, vehicle characteristics, and vehicle production volume
data used for this report were from the formal end-of-year submissions from automakers obtained from EPA's fuel
economy database that is used for CAFE compliance purposes. For preliminary MY 2012 data, EPA has exclusively
used confidential pre-model year production volume projections from automaker label submissions. Accordingly,
xi
-------
MY 2012 projections are uncertain. Historically, as shown in Table A-l, the differences between the initial
unadjusted laboratory fuel economy estimates based on vehicle production projections and later, final values have
typically been within a few tenths of a mile per gallon. But, the market turmoil in MY 2009 was a major exception in
this regard, as the final MY 2009 unadjusted laboratory fuel economy value from the 2010 report was 1.8 mpg higher
than the preliminary unadjusted laboratory value for MY 2009 from the 2009 report based on projected production
volumes. The final MY 2011 unadjusted laboratory fuel economy value is 0.5 mpg lower than the preliminary
unadjusted laboratory fuel economy value for MY 2011 in the 2011 report based on projected production volumes.
The primary database in this report includes data only from vehicles certified to operate on gasoline or diesel
fuel, from laboratory testing with test fuels as defined in EPA test protocols (e.g., with zero ethanol). It includes data
from ethanol flexible fuel vehicles, which can operate on gasoline or an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend
or any mixture in between, operated on gasoline only. Data from the small number of vehicles that are certified to
operate only on alternative fuels or are expected to operate frequently on alternative fuels (such as plug-in hybrid
electric vehicles or dual-fuel compressed natural gas vehicles) are not included in this primary database because they
represented less than 0.2 percent of all production in MY 2011 and because the emissions and fuel economy data
from alternative fuel vehicles raise issues with respect to the metrics that are used in this report. See the new Section
VIII for relevant data from these alternative fuel vehicles.
Vehicle population data in this report represent production delivered for sale in the U.S., rather than actual
sales data. Automakers submit production data in formal end-of-year CAFE compliance reports to EPA, which is the
basis for this report. Accordingly, the production data in this report may differ from sales data reported by press
sources, because not all vehicles produced for sale in a given model year will necessarily be sold in that model year.
In addition, the data presented in this report are tabulated on a model year, not calendar year, basis.
xn
-------
For More Information
Light-Duty Automotive Technology, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 through 2012
(EPA-420-R-13-001) is available on the Office of Transportation and Air Quality's (OTAQ) Web site at:
www.epa.gov/otaq/fetrends.htm
Printed copies are available from the OTAQ library at:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Transportation and Air Quality Library
2000 Traverwood Drive
Ann Arbor, MI 48105
(734)214-4311
A copy of the Fuel Economy Guide giving city and highway fuel economy data for individual models is available at:
www.fueleconomv.gov
or by calling the U.S. Department of Energy at (800) 423-1363.
For information about EPA's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards, see:
http: //epa. gov/otaq/climate/regulations .htm
For information about the EPA/Department of Transportation (DOT) Fuel Economy and Environment Labels, see:
http: //epa. gov/otaq/carlabel
For information about DOT's Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program, including a program overview,
related rulemaking activities, and summaries of the fuel economy performance of individual manufacturers since
1978, see:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/fuel-economy
Xlll
------- |