advanced clean cars (acc) workshop september 2020 [updated]
TRANSCRIPT
Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II WorkshopMay 6 2021
bull Workshop is being recordedbull Slides and other downloads are available
in the handouts section of your GoToWebinar control pane
bull All handouts and recording will also be posted httpsww2arbcagovadvanced-clean-cars-ii-meetings-workshopsbull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on
website postings
Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
2
bull Break for questions after each of the five sections
bull All attendees will remain mutedbull Questions can be sent via the GoToWebinar
question boxbull Please include slide numbers in your
questionbull Written comments and additional questions
may be submitted after today to cleancarsarbcagov
Workshop Questions
3
Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
4
2017 Statewide GHG EmissionsTotal = 424 MMTCO2e
Light-Duty
28
Medium-Duty2
Heavy-Duty7
Off-Road Mobile4
Other Sectors59
2017 Statewide NOx EmissionsTotal = 1294 tons per day
Light-Duty13 Medium-Duty
6
Heavy-Duty26Off-Road
Mobile35
Other Sectors20
5
All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
bull PHEVs BEVs and FCEVs have less smog-forming and GHG well-to-wheel emissions
2020 Mobile Source Strategyhttpsww2arbcagovsitesdefaultfiles2021-04Revised_Draft_2020_Mobile_Source_Strategypdf
6
Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
1 LEV Criteria Updates2 ZEV Regulation Proposal
--- BREAK ---
3 ZEV Technology Cost Update4 ZEV Assurance Measure Updates5 Battery Labeling Proposal6 Next Steps
Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
7
LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
8
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Workshop is being recordedbull Slides and other downloads are available
in the handouts section of your GoToWebinar control pane
bull All handouts and recording will also be posted httpsww2arbcagovadvanced-clean-cars-ii-meetings-workshopsbull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on
website postings
Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
2
bull Break for questions after each of the five sections
bull All attendees will remain mutedbull Questions can be sent via the GoToWebinar
question boxbull Please include slide numbers in your
questionbull Written comments and additional questions
may be submitted after today to cleancarsarbcagov
Workshop Questions
3
Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
4
2017 Statewide GHG EmissionsTotal = 424 MMTCO2e
Light-Duty
28
Medium-Duty2
Heavy-Duty7
Off-Road Mobile4
Other Sectors59
2017 Statewide NOx EmissionsTotal = 1294 tons per day
Light-Duty13 Medium-Duty
6
Heavy-Duty26Off-Road
Mobile35
Other Sectors20
5
All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
bull PHEVs BEVs and FCEVs have less smog-forming and GHG well-to-wheel emissions
2020 Mobile Source Strategyhttpsww2arbcagovsitesdefaultfiles2021-04Revised_Draft_2020_Mobile_Source_Strategypdf
6
Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
1 LEV Criteria Updates2 ZEV Regulation Proposal
--- BREAK ---
3 ZEV Technology Cost Update4 ZEV Assurance Measure Updates5 Battery Labeling Proposal6 Next Steps
Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
7
LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
8
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Break for questions after each of the five sections
bull All attendees will remain mutedbull Questions can be sent via the GoToWebinar
question boxbull Please include slide numbers in your
questionbull Written comments and additional questions
may be submitted after today to cleancarsarbcagov
Workshop Questions
3
Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
4
2017 Statewide GHG EmissionsTotal = 424 MMTCO2e
Light-Duty
28
Medium-Duty2
Heavy-Duty7
Off-Road Mobile4
Other Sectors59
2017 Statewide NOx EmissionsTotal = 1294 tons per day
Light-Duty13 Medium-Duty
6
Heavy-Duty26Off-Road
Mobile35
Other Sectors20
5
All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
bull PHEVs BEVs and FCEVs have less smog-forming and GHG well-to-wheel emissions
2020 Mobile Source Strategyhttpsww2arbcagovsitesdefaultfiles2021-04Revised_Draft_2020_Mobile_Source_Strategypdf
6
Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
1 LEV Criteria Updates2 ZEV Regulation Proposal
--- BREAK ---
3 ZEV Technology Cost Update4 ZEV Assurance Measure Updates5 Battery Labeling Proposal6 Next Steps
Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
7
LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
8
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
4
2017 Statewide GHG EmissionsTotal = 424 MMTCO2e
Light-Duty
28
Medium-Duty2
Heavy-Duty7
Off-Road Mobile4
Other Sectors59
2017 Statewide NOx EmissionsTotal = 1294 tons per day
Light-Duty13 Medium-Duty
6
Heavy-Duty26Off-Road
Mobile35
Other Sectors20
5
All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
bull PHEVs BEVs and FCEVs have less smog-forming and GHG well-to-wheel emissions
2020 Mobile Source Strategyhttpsww2arbcagovsitesdefaultfiles2021-04Revised_Draft_2020_Mobile_Source_Strategypdf
6
Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
1 LEV Criteria Updates2 ZEV Regulation Proposal
--- BREAK ---
3 ZEV Technology Cost Update4 ZEV Assurance Measure Updates5 Battery Labeling Proposal6 Next Steps
Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
7
LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
8
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
5
All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
bull PHEVs BEVs and FCEVs have less smog-forming and GHG well-to-wheel emissions
2020 Mobile Source Strategyhttpsww2arbcagovsitesdefaultfiles2021-04Revised_Draft_2020_Mobile_Source_Strategypdf
6
Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
1 LEV Criteria Updates2 ZEV Regulation Proposal
--- BREAK ---
3 ZEV Technology Cost Update4 ZEV Assurance Measure Updates5 Battery Labeling Proposal6 Next Steps
Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
7
LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
8
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
6
Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
1 LEV Criteria Updates2 ZEV Regulation Proposal
--- BREAK ---
3 ZEV Technology Cost Update4 ZEV Assurance Measure Updates5 Battery Labeling Proposal6 Next Steps
Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
7
LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
8
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
1 LEV Criteria Updates2 ZEV Regulation Proposal
--- BREAK ---
3 ZEV Technology Cost Update4 ZEV Assurance Measure Updates5 Battery Labeling Proposal6 Next Steps
Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
7
LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
8
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
8
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
Overview of UpdatesTodayrsquos Workshop1 NMOG+NOx fleet average2 SFTP emission standards3 Intermediate soak cold-start emissions4 Quick-drive away emissions 5 PHEV high power cold-start emissions6 Evaporative emission standards7 Robust emission control for heavier vehicles
Future Workshop US06 PM emission control
9
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
10
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg001
002
003
004
005
012
000
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
Scenario to avoidNon-ZEV fleet gets dirtier
as ZEV sales increase
Current ACC ProgramAnnual Reduction
~ 0007 gmile
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
11
2025 203020202015Model year
Flee
t A
vera
ge
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
Includes ZEVs
Non-ZEV Fleet Avg
001
002
003
004
005
012
000
Make slight adjustment for 1-2 years to take out ZEVs
0030 gmilewith ZEVs
0030 gmileNon-ZEV Fleet Avg
2025 Non-ZEV Fleetgt0030 gmile
Then hold non-ZEVs to constant average-Provides more certainty for non-ZEV fleet
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
RemoveLEV160
12
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20002
004
006
008
010
012
000
014
016
018
SULEV30
ULEV50
ULEV70
ULEV125
LEV160
Current BinsPhase outULEV125
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
13
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV20
001
002
003
004
005
006
000
007
008
009
SULEV30
ULEV50
Add lower emission bins Need to coordinate changes with EPA
ULEV40
SULEV10
ULEV70
ULEV60
Proposed Bins
Existing Bins
SULEV15
SULEV25
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
14
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxCurrent method used by most OEMs Weighted average of three cycles
SC03 CycleUrban with
Air-Con
FTP Cycle Urban Driving
Composite Standard
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
002
004
006
008
010
012
000US06 CycleAggressive
Driving
US06
SC03
FTP
Current composite standard allows for poor calibration for aggressive driving
Currentstand-alone
standards
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
000
001
002
003
004
005
006
007
008
009
BMW X3 Honda Civic Mazda 3 BMW 430i HondaAccord
VW Passat Ford Fusion Lexus GS350 ChevyEquinox
Honda CR-V
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
SULEV30
ULEV70
15
2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
Proposal Require certification to new stand-alone US06 NMOG+NOx standard US06 standard set to identical numerical value as FTP standard
Proposed Standard
Test-to-test variations
Proposed Standard2017-2020 Model Year Vehicles
Emission values represent full useful life
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
16
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
5-10 min 20 min - 5 hour 6+ hour
Occ
urre
nce
[]
Vehicle Soak Time
More than 40 of real-world vehicle starts follow intermediate soaks
0 100 200 300 400
10
Vehicle Soak Time (min)
NO
x +
HC
Em
issi
ons
Rat
io
Overnight Cold Soak
10 Minute Warm Soak
Typical OEM Calibration
Excess Emissions
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
17
3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
SULEV30Standard
Excess Emissions
CARB tested new 2020 model year vehicles with new calibration
All showed improved performance but some were better than others
ACC II Proposal Do not exceed overnight soak
emissions for soaks greater than 3 hours
Require emission linearity between 10 min soak and 3 hour soak Cost-effective emission
reductions can be gained
Data points include test variability and durability factor adjustments
0
001
002
003
004
005
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
NM
OG
+N
Ox
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
Soak Duration [minutes]
LEV2 SULEV30
2020 Toyota
2020 BMW
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
Real-World Data CARB analyzed recent data from UC Davis
Household Contract Large portion (61) of in-use trips had
quicker drive-away than FTP lab test cycle Median time was 14 sec
Confidential data analysis shared by OEMs indicated Median idle was 16-23 sec 25th percentile was 8-10 sec
Separately analyzing aggressiveness of initial drive-away
18
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Port
ion
of T
rips
[]
Initial Idle [s]
FTP TestMedian14 sec
5 sec or less24
47521 Total Trips
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
ACCII Proposal Status Continue to evaluate in-use driving and emission data Data analysis will help determine whether new standard or
guidance language will provide more robust emission control 19
000
002
004
006
008
010
012
Dart Elantra Altima Mazda3 430i Camry 20 X3 MB C300 Fusion Tahoe Camry Wrangler
NM
OG
+N
Ox
[gm
ile]
5 sec Idle 20 sec Idle
3 Bag Weighted EmissionsEmission values represent full useful life
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
00
10
20
30
40
50
60
Ford Toyota Audi Honda Mitsubishi Volvo Chrysler
Em
issi
ons
Rel
ativ
e to
Sta
ndar
d
Certification Cycle High Power Cold Start Cycles
5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
20
Car PHEVsTrending to stronger electric powertrains so can complete many high power cycles without using ICE
2013 CarPHEV
2017-2018 Car PHEVs 2018-2019 SUV PHEVs
SUVMinivan PHEVsHigh cold-start emissions observed on nearly all high power cycles
No engine start at all
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
000
005
010
015
020
025
030
035
040
Honda Mitsubishi Volvo FCA Ford Prius PHEV Hyundai Prius Prime
Co
ld U
S06
Em
issi
ons
[gm
ile]
21
5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
ACC II cold-start US06 proposal
ACC II Proposal Develop cold-start US06 standard based on best performers US06 all electric capable PHEVs are exempt
Test Vehicles2017-2019 Model Year
SULEV30 PHEVs
NMOG+NOx EmissionsCold-Start Bag
Non-Default Mode
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
bull Last workshop Change standard from 005 to 0010 gmilebull Most vehicles meeting this now but some higher emittingbull Eliminate dirtiest ensure good designs remain the norm
bull New proposal 001 gmilebull Rounding gives some flexibility
but nominally still designed as clean
Running loss emissions are the evaporative emissions which occur when the vehicle is driven primarily due to fuel vapors escaping the fuel system
22
Proposed Standard
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Unique to special sealed NIRCOS gasoline tanks common on PHEVs (and some HEVs)bull ~6 of total vehicles in CA fleet and growing
bull Specific sequence of driving on hot day + refueling can overwhelm canister and create a lsquopuffrsquo of HC emissionsbull Vent tank vapor to canister to allow refueling then push
more vapor through during refueling
23
6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
NIRCOS Non-Integrated Refueling Canister Only System
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Problem Current test procedures donrsquot capture this worst case eventbull Allows undersized canisters that let vapors breakthrough during
refuelingbull ~80-90 vehicles with NIRCOS tanks have large enough canister
bull Proposal Specify minimum canister size in regulationbull OEMs would demonstrate compliance using CARB-defined evap
modelcalculation with vehicle specific parametersbull High confidence puff emissions will be accounted for without adding
test burden
24
6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
lt 85k lbsPCLDT
Class 3 10k-14k lbsGasoline (26)Diesel (65)
Class 2b 85k-10k lbsGasoline (54)
Diesel (36)
LDV Chassis CertificationHD Engine Certification
Percentages based on MY 2026 from EMFAC 2021
Light Duty Vehicles Medium Duty Vehicles Heavy Duty
Engines
gt14k lbs
25
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Last Workshop bull We were exploring the
effects of higher loads (full payload) and towing on emissions
bull Evaluate a lsquoHD-likersquo in-use standard for this categorybull 3 Bin Moving Average
Window (MAW) method using PEMS
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
26
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Per
cent
Max
Tor
que
[]
Percent Max Engine Speed []
HD Engine Test Cycle LDVMDV Chassis Test Cycle
PEMS Portable Emission Monitoring System used to measure tailpipe emissions while driving on-road
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
27
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Per
cent
Max
To
rque
[]
Engine Speed
Half Payload Chassis FTP
Full Payload Chassis FTP
Half Payload Chassis US06
Full Payload Chassis US06
Half Payload Oxnard - PEMS
78 GCWR Payload Oxnard Towing PEMS
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
28
000010020030040050060070080090100
2019 GM Silverado K2500ULEV250
Diesel34k miles
NM
HC
+N
ox
(gm
ile)
FTP Dyno Emissions
Half Payload Full Payload
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
2019 GM Silverado K250034k miles
DieselN
MH
C+
No
x(g
mile
)
On-Road Emissions
DTLA Mt Baldy Oxnard Oxnard towing
No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads
on Dyno
Emissions On-Road Are Higher Than
Dyno
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
Conclusions from Testingbull Full Payload during chassis dyno testing does not lead to increased
emissionsbull PEMS on-road testing is showing that emissions increase on-road and it
increases even more with towingbull Furthermore chassis dyno testing can not cover the full range of engine
operation that occurs on-road
Updated Proposalbull Align all MDVs same in-use testing procedures and standards from HD
Omnibus Rulemaking for both engine and chassis certified products
7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
29
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
30
7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
Idle bin Low Load bin
MedHighLoad Bin
Otto bin
Diesel le6 Engine Load
gt6 and le 20 Engine Load
gt 20 Engine Load
Gasoline 0-100 Engine Load
bull Data is collected on-road with a PEMS
bull Data is analyzed using continuous 5 minute overlapping windows for the entire test
bull Each window is binned by average engine load
bull Emissions for each bin is calculated using the equations in the HD regulation
bull Each bin is compared to the standard specific to that bin in the HD regulation
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
DTLAMt BaldyOxnardOxnard towing
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
2019Silverado
K2500Diesel
2019Cummins
2500Diesel
2020SprinterDiesel
2018Cummins
2500Diesel
2020 FordF350Diesel
NO
x g
hp
-hr
Reaches 13 ghp-hr
7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
bull All diesel chassis certified MDVs we tested could meet the idle bin standard for 2030bull We are still evaluating the Otto bin for gasoline MDVs
HD 2024 Std
HD 2030 StdHD 2024 Std
HD 2030 Std
ldquoLowrdquo load operation Bin
ldquoMedHighrdquo load operation Bin
31
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
32
8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
bull Currently MDVs must certify to a composite supplementalFTP standard similar to LD vehiclesbull Like LD vehicles good emission control during the US06 cycle is not
guaranteed with this approachbull Now have tested several current model year MDVs on the
US06 cycle
bull Proposal Adopt new stand alone US06 standard for MDVs toensure robust control under broader conditions
US06 For Class 2b MDVs the aggressive high speed US06 test cycle is used For heavierslower-accelerating Class 3 MDVs the Unified test cycle is used
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
000
020
040
060
080
100
2019 FordTransit 350
Gasoline8k miles
2019 GMSilverado K2500
Diesel34k miles
2019 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel10k miles
2018 CumminsRAM 2500
Diesel13k miles
2017 CumminsTitanDiesel
215k miles
2020 Ford F350Diesel
7k miles
2020 SprinterDiesel
155k miles
2019 RAM 1500PromasterGasoline
55k miles
gm
ile
US06 - Class 2b
000
010
020
030
040
050
060
2019 Cummins RAM 3500Diesel
37k miles
2019 Ford F350Gasoline30k miles
gm
ile
Hot 1435 UC - Class 3
Emissions 003
Newer MDVs can readily meet lower stand-alone SFTPstandards even before considering future aftertreatment changes like HD Omnibus is expected to require
Emissions 003
Existing Composite Standard
Proposed stand alone standard
fully aged after treatment system or DF applied
Proposed stand alone standard
Existing Composite Standard
33
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Soliciting feedback on the proposed In-use emissions calculations and standards
bull Continue to test more vehicles to propose new SFTP standardsbull Finish PEMS on-road testingbull Develop MDV regulation languagebull Assess environmental justice impacts
34
MDV Proposal Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
35
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
36
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
-
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
350000
400000
450000
500000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2021 2023 2024 2025
Reg
ulat
ion
Cre
dit
s
California ZEV Requirement Vs Actual (Credits)
CA TZEV Requirement CA ZEV Requirement
Actual TZEV Credits Produced Actual TZEV + ZEV Credits Produced
Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
37
Cumulative Sales (Through MY2019)
FCEV 8500
BEV 371200
PHEVs 245000
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
38
ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
MY 2020 MY 2021 MY 2022 MY 2023 MY 2024 MY 2025
2021-2025 Model Year (MY) ZEV and PHEV OEM Reported Values
Industrywide PHEV Industrywide ZEV Total ZEV + PHEV
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull EV owner base is solid and growingbull Most EV owners are intent on repurchasing (JD Power)
bull ~70 of CA car buyers may consider EVs in the future still concerns among skeptics remainbull ~25 surveyed are actively considering EVs for their next purchase
(UCD)
bull Other studies focused on US show 30-44 may consider future EV purchase
bull Educationexperience translates to EV interest
39
A market continues to emerge
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
40
Automakers are going Electric
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
41
Electrification Commitments Worldwide
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Federal (US) commitment to cut GHG emissions 50 by 2030
bull EPA directed to revisit greenhouse gas rulesbull US rejoins Paris Climate Agreementbull Proposed $174 billion to promote electric vehicles and
EV charging stations
42
Federal Support Growing
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
2634
4351
60
7682
8894
100
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
N
ew Z
EV
and
PH
EV
Sal
es
43
Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
44
Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
New ZEV Market Shares Over TimeASAP Slow Phase Delayed Fuel Cell Deployment Proposed ZEV Requirement
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Treatment of ZEVs bull Treatment of PHEVsbull Historical Credits
45
Regulatory Considerations
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Credits are still the currency of the regulationbull Increase assurance around vehicle numbers to achieve
ultimate goalbull Proposal
bull One ZEV credit per ZEV (BEV or FCEV)bull 5 year credit life
bull Example 2026 model year ZEV could satisfy obligation through 2030 model year
46
New ZEV Treatment
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Midterm Review findingsbull Electric miles traveled is highly consumer dependentbull Real world emission can be higher than shown on test cycles
bull Increased consumer choice and model diversity remains important when achieving 100
bull PHEVs may remain an important choice among lower income consumers
bull PHEVs have been preferred over BEVs in CARBrsquos Clean Cars 4 All program
bull New controls proposed earlier will ensure benefits
47
The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull 50 miles all-electric range (label)bull US06 all electric capable throughout charge depleting
modebull Existing qualifications that are maintained
bull SULEV 30bull Zero evaporative emissionsbull 15150000 warranty on emission related partsbull 10150000 on traction battery
48
Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Even with higher minimum qualifications for PHEVs increased emission reduction assurance needed for light duty
bull Proposal bull 20 cap any year on number of PHEVs allowed to fulfill OEMs
obligationbull 5 year credit lifebull Continue separate tracking of PHEV credits and limit credit
usage to only the portion allowed to be met with PHEVs
49
New PHEV Treatment
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Manufacturers will continue to amass credits through 2025bull Sufficient credits already exist in the bank to satisfy industryrsquos
obligations through 2025
bull To achieve 100 historical credit usage will need to be limited
bull Proposal bull Pre-2026 credits expire after 2030 MYbull Cap on usage of historical credits of no more than 15 of each
category (ZEVs and PHEVs)
50
Historical ZEV Credits
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
bull Divide the 2025 Model Year credit banks by the maximum credit per vehicle by technology type
51
55 mil ZEV Credits4 credits
= 1375000 converted ZEV credits
146000 PHEV Credits11 credits
= 137200 converted PHEV credits
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
PHEV Sales After Caps Historical PHEV Credits ZEV Sales (after Caps) Historical ZEV Credits
52
Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
bull Should BEVs have any minimum criteria to qualify Should minimum requirements change over time
bull How can we meaningfully ensure equitable outcomes from the ZEV regulation How can we increase accessibility to ZEV technology
bull Should PHEVs remain capped given higher minimum requirements Should the cap remain at 20 or change over time Should the minimum requirements (eg range criteria pollutant certification allowable vehicle class) change over time Are further options available to encourage high charging frequency
bull Are the caps for historical credits reasonable
53
Staff Seeking Input
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
54
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
Will Resume at 1110 amWe are on a short break -
55
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
ZEV Cost Projections
56
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
ZEV Costs Overview
bull Costs Covered in the Presentationbull Technology Updates and Sourcesbull Modeling the Fleetbull Incremental Cost Example bull Consumer Preferences and Cost Projections for Additive
Technologybull Additional Data and Next Steps
57
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-
Vehicle Design
Incremental Vehicle Costs
Component Cost
BEV
PHEV
FCEV H2
Costs Covered in the Presentation
58
Technology Updatesbull Technology trend updates
bull Cheaper batteriesbull Smaller longer lasting and cheaper fuel cell stacksbull Smaller more efficient and more powerful non-battery
componentsbull Cost updates since last workshop
bull Refined non-battery costs based on additional tear-down data
bull Adjusted battery costs downward based on updated modeling with higher battery volumes and carrying forward cost reduction rate out to 2035
bull Developed BEV FCEV PHEV incremental technology costs
59
Vehicle Cost Modules
BEV
Battery Cost
Non-BatteryComponent Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
FCEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
Delete Engine Cost
ZEV Assembly Cost Reductions
PHEV
Battery Cost
Non-Battery Component Cost
60
Battery Pack Costs
61
2026 $100 2030 $81 2035 $63
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1000
2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035
$kW
h
Year
BEV PHEV FCEV
Fuel Cell System Costs
62
bull Autonomie 2020 model results for vehicle attributes
bull Strategic Analysis (SA) cost models for fuel cell and hydrogen tank systems
bull SA 2020 cost models consider high-durability fuel cell systems
bull CARB method accounts for cost reductions due to technology learning and production capacity
$210
$55
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
$350
1000 10000 100000 1000000
Fuel
Cel
l Sys
tem
Co
st ($
kW
)
Annual Production Volume
60kW 70kW 80kW 90kW 100kW
Today 2030-2035
Modeling the California Fleet
Small Car26
MedLg Car16Small SUV
35
MedLg SUV10
Pickup13
Model Year 2019 ndash California Sales
63
Technology Range (mi)
BEV 300
PremiumHigh Performance BEV 400
PHEV Car amp Small SUV (2025 2030) 50 70
PHEV Bigger SUV amp Truck (2025 2030) 50 60
FCEV 320
Modeled ranges are EPA label all-electric-range equivalent
Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
64
$4588
$8480
$4853
PHEV50 $5414
$2592
$5717
$2545
PHEV60 $4970
$616
$2991
$629
PHEV60 $4079
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
BEV300 BEV400 FCEV320 PHEV
Incr
emen
tal C
ost
(202
1$)
Dire
ct M
anuf
actu
ring
Co
sts
2026 2030 2035
Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
bull A single vehicle of each ZEV technology (PHEV FCEV or BEV) in each vehicle class is not representative of the market
bull Consumer preferences and accompanying technology packages have additional cost implications
65
Additive Technology Package Required for
Cold Weather BEVs in colder climates
Towing Larger BEVs with towing capability
AWD4WDBEVs FCEVs and smaller PHEVs where ICE equivalent had AWD4WD
Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
66
Small Car
Medium amp Large Cars
SmallSUV
2WD 07AWD 05AWD+Cold 01
2WD 35
AWD 25
AWD+Cold 03
Towing 14
AWD+Tow 10AWD+Tow+Cold 01
Pickup
Medium amp Large SUVs10 Premium
Package
Base Package
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
67
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2030BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
68
$0
$2000
$4000
$6000
$8000
$10000
$12000
BEV FCEV PHEV
Incr
emet
nal C
ost
(202
1$)
Medium and Large SUVs - 2035BaseColdAWD + ColdTowTow + AWDTow + AWD + Cold
Staff Seeking Additional Data
bull Avoided conventional powertrain costs for a BEV and FCEV (engine delete cost)
bull ZEV assembly cost reductionsbull Projections for efficiency improvements across all ZEV
platformsbull Cost accounting for ZEV assurance measures
69
Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
bull FCEVs and BEVs having fewer moving components and are simpler to assemble
bull Both ZEV technologies do not utilize ICEs so those costs must be removed
70
ZEV Assembly CostReductions
BEVs ($-1600)
FCEVs ($-800)
ICE and Transmission Delete Cost
Cars and Small SUVs ($-5300)
Bigger SUVs and Trucks ($-7500)
bull Release ZEV cost modeling workbook for feedbackbull Refine packages and costs based on updated databull Overall costs and benefits to society and consumers as
part of total cost of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
bull Develop fleet-wide costs from proposed ZEV stringency as inputs to total costs of the proposed regulation (Future Workshop)
71
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
72
Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
73
bull Protecting Emission Reductions Assuring ZEVs can fully replace gasoline vehicles for a consumer
bull Keeping All Consumers In Mind Ensuring ZEVs meet unique needs for affordability durability and charging over the vehiclersquos life
bull Transparency Requires disclosure in battery health and warranty coverage to build consumer confidence
bull Transitioning to new technology Bringing independent repair industry into the fold
bull Simple Charging Standardizes fast charging for ease of use
The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
74
bull Durability (or Full Useful Life) standardbull Ensures robust design of components to nominally meet standardbull Relies on In-Use Compliance Testing to evaluate
bull Warrantybull Ensures individual emission-related part failures are OEMrsquos
responsibilitybull Partnered with warranty reporting to CARB
bull Currently these regulations do not apply to ZEVs
Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
75
Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
2020 Tesla Sustainability report Model SX Batteries retaining gt90 capacity past 150000 miles
Nissan says its Leaf batteries will outlast the car by 10-12 years looks for reuse solutionshttpselectrekco20190524nissan-leaf-batteries-outlast-car
A Wide Range of Testing Results on an Excellent Lithium-Ion Cell Chemistry to be used as Benchmarks for New Battery Technologiesldquocells of this type should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 16 million kilometers (1 million miles)rdquo - Harlow J E et al 2019 A wide range of testing results on an excellent lithium-ion cell chemistry to be used as benchmarks for new battery technologies J Electrochem Soc 166 A3031
76
bull US DOE reports current technology status can maintain approximately 4100 hours of operation with less than 10 loss in system output power1
bull US DOE near-term and long-term goals to enable estimated 150000 mile durability arebull Near-Term 5000 hours with less than 10 power lossbull Long-Term 8000 hours with less than 10 power loss
77
Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
1 httpswwwhydrogenenergygovpdfsreview20fc135_borup_weber_2020_opdf (slide 12)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Powertrain Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Year
s
Mileage
Battery and FC Warranties (sales weighted)
(Unlimited)
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Toyota Mirai Honda Clarity
Hyundai NexoHyundai Nexo
78
Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
bull Applies to 2026 and subsequent model yearsbull BEVs must be designed to maintain 80 of certified UDDS
range for 15 years150000 milesbull FCEVs must be designed to maintain at least 90 fuel cell
system output power after 4000 hours of operation
bull In development Corresponding in-use compliance testing regulations
Draft Durability Requirement
79
bull BEVs and FCEVs Defined minimum warranty for powertrain components for 3yr50k (7yr70k high-priced) excluding batteries for traction power
bull BEVs Require warranty term of 10yr150k for batteries bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM required to explicitly disclose threshold and tie it to
customer readable state of health metric bull BEVs and PHEVs OEM to determine threshold for warranty failure
bull BEVs and FCEVs Emulate warranty reporting requirement of gasoline and PHEVs
bull All existing requirements for PHEVs remain
Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
80
bull In California there are over 10000 independent repair shopsbull Compare to less than 2000 new vehicle dealers
bull What is the purpose of Californiarsquos service information regulationsbull Requires emission-related repair information to be available for
non-dealer techniciansbull Requires tooling to be able to access on-vehicle information to be
available to non-dealer technicians
81
Service Information
bull Require same access amp disclosure for ZEVs throughout CCR 1969 California Service Information Regulation
bull For ZEVs require information disclosure for all propulsion-related components
bull Require standardized tooling to reprogram ECUs (SAE J2534)bull Require standardization for some vehicle data
bull Vehicle to tool connector (SAE J1962)bull Communication protocol of info from vehicle to tool (UDS on CAN)bull Propulsion related component fault codesbull Minimal vehicle usage data
82
Draft Service Information Proposal
bull Require OEM to calculate a State-of-Health (SOH) of batterybull Minimum accuracy (+5) tied to remaining amount of lsquoUsable
Battery Energyrsquo (as measured by SAE J1634 lab test methods)bull Readable by driver without a toolbull Normalized (100 equals new on all cars)
bull Require OEM to define and disclose SOH value that qualifies for warranty repair
Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
83
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
84
Battery Recycling Proposal
85
bull Large scale retirements of EV batteries will begin to occur within the next 5 to 10 years (~30 GWh of early EVs in US)
bull Mineral resources are unlikely to limit battery manufacturing over the short term but recycling is critical in the long term
bull Logistics infrastructure and knowledge sharing are key barriers for end-of-life (EOL) management
bull Low-value of recovered materials could be a barrier to capitalinvestment
bull Battery reuse is a promising strategy to increase the value of batteries
86
Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
87
Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
httpsenwikipediaorgwikiElectric_vehicle_batteryhttpscircuitdigestcomtutoriallead-acid-battery-working-construction-and-charging-discharging
bull Lead acid batteries have a high percentage of recycled contentbull Lead battery recycling has been associated with significant and
negative environmental impacts particularly to local communities
EV batteries contain fewer hazardous substances and pose lower toxicity risks
bull Current EV Batteries rely on a short list of key materialsbull 7 of 35 elements on US Department of Critical Minerals List
88
Critical Energy Minerals
Platinum Group and Precious Metals
Rare Earth Elements
Battery Critical Energy Materials
89
Lithium hellip
Lithium (2020)
Cobalt (2010)
Cobalt (2020)
Nickel (2010)Nickel (2020)
Manganese (2010)
Manganese (2020)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Stat
ic D
eple
tio
n R
ate
(Yea
rs)
Geographic Concentration
Static depletion rate is the estimated global reserves divided by the annual production from that year Geographic concentration is the largest identified reserves by country divided by the estimated global reserves for the year Data from the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries (2019)
Lots of places Few places
Increasing Rate of Exhaustion
Critical Energy Minerals
bull US could meet more than half of material demand for new batteries with recycled materials by 2040
90
Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
Dunn J Slattery M Kendall A Ambrose H amp Shen S (2021) Circularity of Lithium-Ion Battery Materials in Electric Vehicles Environmental Science amp Technology
bull Batteries need to be recycled to support continued deployment of ZEVs
bull Future ZEV batteries should increasingly rely on recycledsecondary electrode materials
bull A mixed chemistry waste stream is a barrier to promising high value recycling technologies
bull Critical information must be included with the battery system throughout the value chain to enable sorting tracking and promote responsible design
91
Problem Statement ndash Why a label
bull Enable efficient sorting
bull Improve the economic efficiency of material recovery
bull Enable reuse or second life applications including repurposing
bull Prevent improper disposal or exposure to hazards
92
Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
Chemistry NCARated 1000 cycles 200ASpecifications 288V Composition (8 x 365V 563Ah)
OEM
Applies to Pack and Module Components
For illustrative purposes only
Requirement Standard This Proposal
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE2936)
European Union (EU) Directive
Peoplersquos Republic of China RoHS
Manufacturer Chemistry Voltage
PerformanceCapacity
Product Alert StatementsHazards
CompositionProcess Related Information
Electronic Information ExchangeDigital Identifier
93
Label Comparison
bull CARB is continuing to evaluate potential actions to support EV battery recycling and reuse
bull Staff will continue to work with other State agencies (CEC CalRecycle and DTSC) to develop further policy conceptsbull CA Lithium Battery Recycling Working Groupbull Multi-agency white paper on end of life management
bull Staff plan to participate in SAE standard setting process
94
Next Steps
Please use GoToWebinar pane to askQUESTIONS(include a slide number in yourquestion if possible)
95
Updated ACC II Timeline
Board Hearing
June 2022
Workshop Fall
2021
Workshop Summer
2021
Workshop May 2021
Workshop September
2020
96
bull Proposals to increase ZEV accessibility to priority communitiesbull ZEV test procedure modification for BEV range certificationbull ZEV credit reporting modificationsbull Air-conditioning refrigerant updatesbull Other updates on proposals discussed todaypreviously
bull Written comments may be submitted through June 11 2021 to cleancarsarbcagov
bull Subscribe to the Clean Cars email list for updates on document availability and future workshops
Other Opportunities for Comments
97
- Advanced Clean Cars (ACC) II Workshop
- Todayrsquos Workshop Logistics
- Workshop Questions
- Californiarsquos climate and air quality challenges still require deep reductions from light-duty vehicles
- All paths to long term targets require transition to ZEVs
- Governorrsquos Executive Order N-79-20
- Todayrsquos Workshop Agenda
- LEV Criteria Emission Proposals
- Overview of Updates
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageRecap from Previous Workshop
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageProposal Remove ZEVs from NMOG+NOx Fleet Average
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 1 NMOG+NOx Fleet AverageChanges to Certification Bins
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOx
- 2 Aggressive Driving NMOG+NOxProposal
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIn-use Driving Patterns for Soak Time
- 3 Cold-Start EmissionsIntermediate Soak Proposal
- 4 Cold-Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away
- 4 Engine Start EmissionsQuick Drive-Away Emission Testing
- 5 Cold-Start Emissions PHEV High Power Starts
- 5 Cold-Start EmissionsPropose Standard for PHEV High Power Starts
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsTighten Running Loss Standard
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsProtect for ldquoPuffrdquo Emissions
- 6 Evaporative EmissionsPuff Emissions Proposal
- 7 Medium-Duty Vehicle (MDV) Background
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 MDV Engine Operation on Chassis Dyno Different from On-Road
- No Change in Emissions for Different Payloads on Dyno
- 7 Update on Emission Control for MDVs
- 7 Heavy-Duty (HD) In-Use Method for Chassis Certified MDVs
- 7Current Chassis Certified MDV Performance Compared to Proposed Standards
- 8 New MDV Proposal New Standard for US06 Test Cycle
- 8 Proposed SFTP MDV Standards
- MDV Proposal Next Steps
- Slide Number 35
- ZEV Credit Requirement Proposal
- Manufacturers continue to comply with the ZEV Regulation
- ZEV and PHEV Sales Projections
- A market continues to emerge
- Automakers are going Electric
- Electrification Commitments Worldwide
- Federal Support Growing
- Starting Stringency Real Vehicles
- Proposed ZEV requirement plausible with aggressive ZEV model rollouts
- Regulatory Considerations
- New ZEV Treatment
- The Role of Plug-in Hybrids
- Proposed Post-2026 Model Year Minimum PHEV Qualifications
- New PHEV Treatment
- Historical ZEV Credits
- Converting the bank for 2026 and beyond
- Potential CA ZEV Requirement Outcome
- Staff Seeking Input
- Slide Number 54
- Will Resume at 1110 am
- ZEV Cost Projections
- ZEV Costs Overview
- Costs Covered in the Presentation
- Technology Updates
- Vehicle Cost Modules
- Battery Pack Costs
- Fuel Cell System Costs
- Modeling the California Fleet
- Medium SUV Incremental Cost Example
- Capturing Consumer Preferences for Certain Technology Attributes
- Example of Tech Package Distribution in Medium and Large SUVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Additional Tech Packages Have Greater Cost Impacts on BEVs
- Staff Seeking Additional Data
- Other Costs ndash ZEV Reductions
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 72
- Update on ZEV Assurance Measures
- The Importance of Assuring Consumers about ZEVs
- Current Approach to Vehicle Durability
- Growing Indications of Battery Longevity in Vehicles
- Fuel Cell Durability is Improving
- Current ZEV Warranty Offerings
- Draft Durability Requirement
- Draft Minimum Warranty Requirements
- Service Information
- Draft Service Information Proposal
- Draft Battery State of Health Standardization Proposal
- Slide Number 84
- Battery Recycling Proposal
- Key Issues for Battery Recycling and Reuse
- Lead Battery Recycling A Good Example
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Critical Energy Minerals
- Battery Recycling and Material Recovery
- Problem Statement ndash Why a label
- Battery Labelling Improving the flow of information down the value chain
- Label Comparison
- Next Steps
- Slide Number 95
- Updated ACC II Timeline
- Other Opportunities for Comments
-