Insights on Car Purchase(Energy Consumption)/Geely Auto Competitive Analysis(2025)TengYi Research In.
2025-04-10
33页
5星级
Regional Air MobilityHow to unlock a new generation of mobilityEXECUTIVE SUMMARY1|We expect RAM(Regi.
2025-04-01
20页
5星级
Study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in EuropeMay 19,2021Confidential and proprietary.Any use of this material without specific permission of EASA is strictly prohibited.8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 18A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 119.05.2021 12:55:1619.05.2021 12:55:16This study has been carried out for EASA by McKinsey&Company upon award of a specific contract implementing a running multiple framework contract for the provision of consultancy services.Consequently,it does not necessarily express the views of EASA itself,nor should it be relied upon as a statement,as any form of warranty,representation,undertaking,contractual,or other binding commitment upon EASA.Ownership of all copyright and other IPR in this material including any documentation,data and technical information,remains vested to EASA.All logo,copyrights,trademarks,that may be contained within,are the property of their respective owners.Reproduction of this study,in whole or in part,is permitted under the condition that this Disclaimer remains clearly and visibly affixed in full at all times with such reproduced part.This study has measured the attitude of the EU society towards UAM early 2021,well in advance of future deployment in EU cities foreseen around 2024-2025.The results have been generated with best effort at this point in time,however public perception may change over time once citizens are exposed to actual UAM operations.Further information and the full survey insights are available at easa.europa.eu/UAM8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 28A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 219.05.2021 12:55:1619.05.2021 12:55:16Executive SummaryNew technologies such as the enhancement of battery technologies and electric propulsion as well as major investments made into start-ups are enabling the development of new vertical take-off and landing Urban Air Mobility(UAM)aircraft.Thus,Urban Air Mobility defined as an air transportation system for passengers and cargo in and around urban environments may be deployed in Europe within three to five years,offering the potential for greener and faster mobility solutions.As several projects and demonstrations are under way,it is time for the European Union,and for national and local authorities to prepare the framework that will enable this new mode of transport and give Europe the chance of establishing itself as one of the first movers in this field at a global level.Citizens and future UAM users confidence and acceptance will be critical to success.As part of the preparation of an adequate regulatory framework,the European Union Aviation Safety Agency(EASA)therefore conducted this comprehensive study on the societal acceptance of UAM operations across the European Union.The study was carried out together with the consulting firm McKinsey&Company between November 2020 and April 2021.Full details of the report can be found on the EASA website.Based on thorough research,literature review,local market analysis,surveys and interviews,the study examined the attitudes,expectations and concerns of EU citizens with respect to UAM and revealed interesting insights,some unexpected.The survey results were very homogeneous among all those surveyed across the EU and in all socio-economic categories.They can be clustered into 10 key take-aways:1.EU citizens initially and spontaneously express a positive attitude toward and interest in UAM;it is seen as a new and attractive means of mobility and a majority is ready to try it out;2.The notion of general/public interest is a determining factor for acceptance:use cases for the benefit of the community,such as medical or emergency transport or those connecting remote areas,are better supported than use cases satisfying individual/private needs;3.The main benefits expected from UAM are faster,cleaner and extended connectivity;4.However,when encouraged to reflect upon the concrete consequences of potential UAM operations in their city,EU citizens want to limit their own exposure to risks,in particular when related to safety,noise,security and environmental impact;5.Safety concerns come first,but the study also shows that citizens seem to trust the current aviation safety levels and would be reassured if these levels were applied for UAM;6.Noise is the second main concern expressed;the study indicates that the level of annoyance varies with the familiarity of the sound,with familiar city sounds at the same decibel levels being better accepted;it also confirms that the distance,duration and repetition of the sound impacts its acceptance;7.UAM is seen as a good option to improve the local environmental footprint,through reduced urban traffic congestion and better local air quality;but at the same time citizens express major concerns about UAMs impact on wildlife;8.The results also demonstrate a limited trust in the security and cyber security of UAM,requiring threat-prevention measures;9.The integration of UAM into the existing air and ground infrastructure must respect residents quality of life and the cultural heritage of old European cities;10.Finally,local residents and authorities feel directly affected by the deployment of UAM and want to engage and play an active role in its implementation.3Executive Summary8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 38A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 319.05.2021 12:55:1619.05.2021 12:55:16The study results show that EU citizens are calling for active and pre-emptive measures from competent authorities.In addition to mitigating risks related to safety,security,noise and environmental impact,these measures are expected to ensure that UAM will be a common benefit to all of society by offering affordable,integrated and complementary mobility.By providing transparent and timely information and guidance,the authorities at all levels local,national and European have the chance to consolidate public acceptance of UAM.By 2024-25,UAM may be a lived reality in Europe.The EU has only a few years,and a unique opportunity,to prepare for the smooth transition of European cities,and also of the European aviation system,towards the mobility of the future.48A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 48A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 419.05.2021 12:55:1619.05.2021 12:55:16Table of contentsTable of contentTable of content 5Definitions 6Introduction 71.Research and literature review 11 1.1 Literature review 12 Methodology 13 Summary of insights 14 1.1.1 UAM use cases found in literature 16 1.1.2 Expected challenges identified in literature 16 1.1.3 Societal acceptance factors identified in literature 171.2 Industry status and projection 21 Overview 21 UAM vehicle types 22 1.2.1 Aircraft and Use Cases 22 1.2.2 UAM stakeholder environment 27 1.3 UAM high level societal benefits and risks 30 1.3.1 Benefits based on market models,literature and expert interviews 30 1.3.2 Risks and acceptance based on literature and expert interviews 32 2.Assessment of urban European target markets 35 2.1 Use case prioritisation 36 2.2 Target market identification 42 3.Survey-based assessment of public acceptance of UAM in the EU 49 3.1 Survey methodology 50 3.1.1 Quantitative survey methodology 50 3.1.2 Qualitative survey methodology 57 3.1.3 Noise test methodology 58 3.2 Survey results(10 key findings)61 3.2.1 A positive initial attitude to UAM throughout the EU 61 3.2.2 Strong support for use cases in the public interest 66 3.2.3 Top 3 expected benefits:faster,cleaner,extended connectivity 68 3.2.4 Top 3 concerns:safety,environment/noise and security 70 3.2.5 Safety:existing aviation safety levels are the benchmark 73 3.2.6 Environment:priority is protection of wildlife 75 3.2.7 Noise:acceptable at level of familiar city sounds 79 3.2.8 Security:need to build confidence and trust in citizens 85 3.2.9 Ground infrastructure:must be integrated well 86 3.2.10 Regulatory authorities:must work together at all levels 8858A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 58A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 519.05.2021 12:55:1619.05.2021 12:55:16DefinitionsANSP:air navigation service providerBVLOS:beyond visual line of sightEASA:European Union Aviation Safety AgencyEIS:entry into serviceOEM:Original Equipment manufacturerTransforming vehicle:a vehicle that can drive on the road and fly,e.g.a flying carNASA:National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationUAM:urban air mobilityVTOL:vertical takeoff and landingConjoint analysis:trade-off survey method to evaluate relevance and extend of decision factorseVTOL:electric vertical takeoff and landingUAS:Unmanned Aircraft System,i.e.an unmanned aircraft,i.e.without a pilot on board,and the equipment to control it remotelyManned/unmanned aircraft:an aircraft with a pilot/without a pilot on boardAutonomous aircraft:an aircraft flying without the assistance of a dedicated pilot4.Expectations and options for action 93 5.Conclusions 99Appendix 1 101Appendix 2 103 Detailed information on target market identification 103 Detailed information on questionnaire structure 122 Detailed information on methodology of quantitative survey question types and questionnaire 126Appendix 3 154Bibliography 154A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe68A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 68A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 619.05.2021 12:55:1619.05.2021 12:55:16IntroductionBackground and context of the studyCongested streets and pollution are already a reality in several European cities,as indicated by the TomTom Traffic Index 2020 and the Air quality in Europe 2020 report by the European Environment Agency.With the population of cities in the European Union set to grow to more than 340 million citizens by 2030,there is a risk of increased pollution and congestion.In this context,local authorities are looking at smarter,greener,more integrated and sustainable mobility solutions.Urban Air Mobility(UAM)has the potential to respond to these needs.Air transport of goods and people is no longer science fiction and will become a reality in European Union cities soon.Adding a new dimension to urban transportation will allow air transport of goods and people and may also help to make a leap towards smarter and more sustainable cities.Urban Air Mobility is expected to bring environmental benefits as well as advantages for citizens and businesses notably for commercial or emergency/medical purposes.A key enabler for the development of Urban Air Mobility solutions was the significant reduction in lithium-ion battery cell costs to 110/kWh in 2020 from 1000/kWh in 2010,as well as the increase of cell energy density to approximately 300 Wh/kg from approximately 150 Wh/kg in the same timeframe.1 The experiences gained with the development of electric vehicles in the automotive industry have also influenced the development of UAM globally and in Europe.The European industry has played a leading role in the development of UAM since the first flight of a manned eVTOL proof-of-concept by Volocopter in 2011.There are also several other European companies developing UAM aircraft at the moment,for example Airbus,Ascendance,Lilium,Pipistrel,Quantum Systems,and Tecnalia.Objective of the study This breakthrough in urban mobility needs to be accompanied and supported by relevant measures,in particular an adequate regulatory environment,which would reflect the needs and aspirations of European society and provide a stable and clear framework for the industry.The first step consists in measuring EU citizens willingness to accept this new mode of transport and collating their possible concerns and expectations,for instance related to safety,security,privacy and environmental impact.The European Union Aviation Safety Agency(EASA)launched a comprehensive study on the societal acceptance of UAM across Europe in November 2020.The study included research work,literature review,as well as a survey with around 4000 residents of six European cities.These survey cities Barcelona,Budapest,Hamburg,Milan,Paris and the cross-border region resund were identified as potential target markets for the future deployment of Urban Air Mobility.The quantitative survey was complemented by more than 40 qualitative interviews with focus groups of local,national and European stakeholders as well as by a noise perception study with a group of 20 European residents.EASA ambitionThe study on societal acceptance is only one aspect of EASAs work to support the deployment of UAM in the EU.EASAs ambition is to anticipate this new mode of transport and provide an enabling comprehensive regulatory environment,allowing the EU to establish itself as one of the first global movers in this field.1 Bloomberg NEFDefinitions/Introduction78A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 78A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 719.05.2021 12:55:1619.05.2021 12:55:16Work has started and initial actions have been taken.EASA has prepared a number of regulatory documents,the latest one being the first worldwide regulation on U-Space recently adopted by the European Commission.The SESAR JU defines U-space as follows:“U-space is a set of new services relying on a high level of digitalisation and automation of functions and specific procedures designed to support safe,efficient and secure access to airspace for large numbers of drones.As such,U-space is an enabling framework designed to facilitate any kind of routine mission,in all classes of airspace and all types of environment-even the most congested-while addressing an appropriate interface with manned aviation and air traffic control.”The full overview of these documents is provided in Appendix 1.The results of the study will be considered by EASA in the preparatory work for a future regulatory proposal for the so called high risk operations of the specific category of drones and for operations of the certified category of drones and manned VTOLs in urban environments.They will also serve to raise awareness about UAM across the EU as a means of fostering public adoption.Scope of the studyThe terms Advanced Air Mobility(AAM)and Urban Air Mobility(UAM)are both in common use.As can be seen in Figure 1,AAM covers passenger and cargo transport as well as other aerial missions in urban,regional,and interregional geographies.UAM can be understood as a subset of AAM,which covers transportation systems that move people or cargo by air in and around urban environments.2 In the absence,as yet,of agreed standard definitions,the term“Urban Air Mobility”is used in the context of this study,as it explicitly refers to the specific context of the operations,i.e.in cities and densely populated environments,and is therefore more easily understood by the general public.In this report,“urban”is defined according to the functional urban area concept used by Eurostat:“A functional urban area consists of a city and its commuting zone.Functional urban areas therefore consist of a densely inhabited city and a less densely populated commuting zone whose labour market is highly integrated with the city(OECD,2012)“.2 https:/www.easa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/dfu/easa_drones_section.pdf8A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 88A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 819.05.2021 12:55:1619.05.2021 12:55:16Figure 1:AAM covers a wider scope than UAMIncluded scope in AAM and UAM definitionsUse casesGeographic reachCargoPassengerOperationsUrbanRegionalInterregionalAAMFAANASANASADeakin Uni.UAMNASASESAR JUFAADeakin Uni.Jonkoping Uni.MITRE CorpUC BerkleyTU MunichExplicit mentionNo explicit mention Furthermore,the scope of the study was intentionally limited to:The transportation systems that move people or cargo by air in and around urban environments for commercial or emergency service operations.Other use cases,such as infrastructure assessment,surveillance,5G emissions or state operations(e.g.military,police surveillance)were excluded.The transportation of goods or people is indeed adding an additional risk that may require specific attention;Drones and manned VTOL aircraft with electric propulsion systems were the focus for this study.Other vehicles such as traditional helicopters or transforming vehicles(e.g.flying cars or motorcycles)were excluded as the focus should remain on new types of vehicles intended for use in urban airspace;A 10 year timeframe,i.e.until 2030:for this reason,the study focused on manned VTOL(i.e.with a pilot on board)for the transport of people,as it appears unlikely that unmanned transport of people in urban environments may take place within that timeframe;The European Union,although global developments were taken into account for information purposes.This report was created based on the best knowledge of the involved parties at the time of writing.However,due to the fast pace of this emerging industry the stated content might be subject to change in the future.9Introduction8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 98A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 919.05.2021 12:55:1719.05.2021 12:55:17108A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 108A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1019.05.2021 12:55:1719.05.2021 12:55:171.Research and literature reviewThis first chapter contains information on the literature reviewed and the research done to set up the study on societal acceptance in general.This preparatory work ensured that the starting point was the most up-to-date state of science,research and market development.118A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 118A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1119.05.2021 12:55:1719.05.2021 12:55:171.1 Literature reviewTo lay the foundations for the study on societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility(UAM)as well as to collect initial data and information to build the quantitative and qualitative survey,a thorough literature review from two different perspectives was carried out:1)The UAM market and UAM-related societal acceptance factors2)Insights about relevant societal acceptance factors from adjacent technologies,such as autonomous driving,smart home and other emerging technologies.The review focused on the UAM market and related societal acceptance factors,as core objectives of this study.Literature reviewed included recent publications,i.e.not older than three years,in English and other European languages,from academia or other publicly-accessible sources.12A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 128A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1219.05.2021 12:55:2319.05.2021 12:55:23MethodologyThe methodology used to filter publications was the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses(PRISMA)framework.This framework is a systematic process for filtering publications for duplicates,relevance,and eligibility.Figure 2 shows that this process was applied to all UAM 130 publications identified through search terms(n=60)as well as publications identified through other sources(n=70).As a first step,19 duplicates were removed from further consideration.The next step involved a check for relevance:here 20 publications were excluded,as they were either published before 2017,did not cover the UAM space at least partially,or did not mention UAM use cases or societal acceptance factors.In the last step only publicly available publications,which are available free of charge,passed the eligibility filter;the others(n=15)were excluded.This left a total of 76 publications for consideration during the detailed UAM literature review(see Bibliography).16 publications were identified for the review on societal acceptance factors for adjacent technologies,such as autonomous driving and smart home.There were no duplicates,but three publications did not pass the relevance test as they were either published before 2017 or did not cover societal acceptance factors.Another three publications did not pass the eligibility test as they were not publicly available.This left a total of ten publications for the comparison of societal acceptance factors for smart homes and autonomous driving with UAM.Source:Adapted from The PRISMA Group(2009)RelevancePublications identifiedIncludedEligibleArticles identified through search terms(n=60)Additional research findings identified through other sources(n=70)Articles and research findings after duplicates removed(n=111)Articles and research findings screened on basis of title and abstract(n=111)Articles and research findings excluded(n=20)Articles and research findings included in qualitative synthesis(n=76)Full-text articles and research findings assessed for eligibility(n=91)Full-text articles and research findings excluded,with reasons(n=15)Figure 2:Application of PRISMA framework for UAM literature review131.1 Literature review8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 138A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1319.05.2021 12:55:2619.05.2021 12:55:26Summary of insightsAs shown in Figure 3,a considerable increase in the frequency of UAM-related publications can be observed between the years of 2017 and 2020.Figure 3:Origin and timing of publicationsIt can also be seen in Figure 3 that:More than a third of the publications included are from academia,with contributions from leading entities such as TU Munich,Fraunhofer,Massachusetts Institute of Technology(MIT)and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration(NASA).Consultancies and manufacturers within UAM are the other main contributors of recent publications.More than half of the included publications originate from entities with their headquarters in Europe,indicating that leading authorities in the emerging UAM industry tend to be based in Europe.The region with the second highest number of publications was North America.However,the relatively small number of publications from Asia and Africa could be related to the focus on publications in English and other European languages.201718181920825202147%1CIndustrygroups9AcademiaConsultanciesGovernments18138ManufacturersOther621Europe30NorthAmericaAsia7AfricaOrigin of publications,%HQ region of publishing entity,%Publications increasing significantly in recent yearsA study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 148A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1419.05.2021 12:55:2619.05.2021 12:55:26In order to gain an understanding of the UAM market,literature contributions were evaluated in terms of:use cases,challenges,societal acceptance factors,stakeholders,timelines,target markets.The key results of this evaluation are summarised in Figure 4 and more detailed in the following Figures.The use cases most frequently mentioned in publications are air taxis,drone delivery and rescue drones.The main challenges raised are infrastructure and safety.Noise and safety were listed as the major societal acceptance barriers.Entry into service(EIS)timelines differ significantly between piloted and autonomous vehicles,with most certification or EIS for piloted operations being planned for around 2025.Unmanned or autonomous operations are expected to start entering the market not before 2030,according to statements made by the OEMs in the reviewed literature.Source:Literature review2064202220232025202520302030 20352040PilotedAutonomoususe caseschallenges2societal acceptance barriers311%Infrastructure9%Safety18%Noise17%SafetyDrone delivery Rescue drone1Air TaxiTaxi1.Transporting a first responder to the location of an accident2.Share of the 173 mentions regarding challenges(multiple per publication possible)3.Share of the 188 mentions regarding societal acceptance(multiple per publication possible)Number of mentions with regard to expected start of entering the marketMost often named Figure 4:Key insights from the literature review Interest in UAM increased in recent yearsInitially,130 publications were identified and still 76 of them published since 2017 were analysed and considered in the study.More than half of them originate from entities with their headquarters in Europe.The frequency of publications increased recently,showing a growing interest in the topic.151.1 Literature review8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 158A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1519.05.2021 12:55:2719.05.2021 12:55:271.1.1 UAM use cases found in literatureCases that were found during the literature review can be grouped into five functionally distinct groups.1)Passenger transport The most frequently mentioned passenger transport use case is the air taxi.Here,passengers will initially use UAM aircraft to travel from one vertiport to another.Eventually it may be possible to hire an air taxi in a street or park close to the starting point and land in a street or park next to the destination.Quickly flying an emergency doctor to the site of an accident is the application mentioned second most frequently.2)Delivery The most often described use cases are package and food delivery by drones into private gardens or properties,and package delivery by drones into a central delivery hub.A number of publications also describe the usage of drones for time-critical medical applications,such as the delivery of organs or stored blood.3)Civil surveillance and other operations The autonomous inspection and/or maintenance of bridges and other infrastructure is expected to be the major operations use case.Other operations use cases include precision agriculture and the preliminary visual assessment of incident sites,such as assessing the extent of fires and accidents.4)Sovereign functions The top-ranking application of UAM aircraft in this group is police surveillance.5)Signal emitting Emitting signals for multimedia applications or internet access was only mentioned in two publications.1.1.2 Expected challenges identified in literatureFigure 5 provides details on the expected challenges for UAM.50 of the 76 reviewed publications mentioned challenges,where the leading challenges are related to infrastructure,safety and noise.In this categorisation,while technology covers a large variety of technological solutions,it mostly refers to battery electric propulsion systems and their current limitations in terms of energy density and overall weight.Environmental impact is a term used generically in the reviewed literature and can include a plethora of topics such as noise,visual pollution,air pollution,land use,protection of species and biotopes,climate,natural resources,water and soil.Societal acceptance,the focus of this study,is not listed among the overall top five challenges for UAM,but is an important dimension for EASA as its role is to serve the general public in its actions.Infrastructure named as leading challenge in existing literature Based on literature,biggest challen-ges for UAM are expected to be related to infrastructure,safety and noise.Namely:Finding suitable locations/buildings for Vertiports Aiming for safety level similar/equal to commercial aircraft Achieving low noise level for better social acceptance16A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 168A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1619.05.2021 12:55:2719.05.2021 12:55:271.1.3 Societal acceptance factors identified in literatureAlthough most publications do not mention societal acceptance as a main challenge,61 of the 76 reviewed publications mention social acceptance factors.Figure 6 summarises the main insights from literature.Noise and safety are the leading factors mentioned by a large margin.Combined,they constitute 35 percent of all 188 mentions of an acceptance factor within the publications reviewed.Most of the time,safety refers to the safety of an occupant of an air taxi,but it does also include people on the ground.Environmental impact has the same wide definition in literature as for UAM challenges.Increased travel options refer to the provision of an additional mode of transport for a certain route.This metric has diminishing returns as it provides the highest benefit if there is no other option to travel an intended route without UAM,but only contributes a small benefit if there are,for example,four other modes of transport available.Main societal acceptance factors are comparable to those of other smart technologiesIf comparing acceptance barriers for Urban Air Mobility with those of other smart technologies,it is noticeable that they are similar.Safety is the leading acceptance factor for autonomous driving which is in line with the findings for UAM.Probably because both solutions carry goods and passengers.Privacy on the other hand is also a top concern in the smart home space.1.Share of the 173 mentions regarding challenges(multiple per publication possible);InfrastructureRegulations3.5SafetyAir Traffic ManagementNoise6.9Environmental impactSecurityCertificationCommunicationsCost7.5EconomicsSocietal acceptance8.7TechnologyLegal frameworkOperationsPublic perception11.08.78.14.02.34.03.54.03.52.92.32.32.3Public acceptanceGeneric term used in literature may include noise,visual pollution,air pollution,land use,protection of species&biotopes,protection of water&soil,climate,and natural resources.Challenges for UAM1%Figure 5:Challenges for UAM171.1 Literature review8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 178A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1719.05.2021 12:55:2719.05.2021 12:55:27Comparison with societal acceptance factors for smart home and autonomous drivingAs explained at the beginning of this section,literature for adjacent technologies,such as smart home and autonomous driving,was also reviewed for societal acceptance factors.The literature reviewed is indicated in the Bibliography and the findings are displayed in Figure 7.Safety was a leading acceptance factor for autonomous driving.This is in line with the findings for UAM and could be explained by both topics being mobility solutions carrying goods or passengers.Noise,on the other hand,does not appear as a major topic for autonomous driving,as a level of noise comparable to current passenger cars seems to be acceptable.Privacy is also a top-ranking concern in the smart home space,which potentially explains the lower usage rate for this technology in Western Europe compared to the United States.In the reviewed surveys for the acceptance of autonomous driving,the survey participants openness to and interest in new technologies has a stronger influence than their sociodemographic background,such as age,gender,or employment status.With both autonomous vehicles and smart homes,participants with a positive attitude towards the technology were more likely to use it.18176554333222222222SecurityVisual annoyanceNoiseIncreased travel optionsEnvironmental impactSafetyPrivacyEthicsBenefits for self or communityData concernsAffinity to automationPerceived usefulnessTrustWillingness to share(ride)Job loss concernsLack of experienceMisusePrice1.Share of the 188 mentions regarding societal acceptance(multiple per publication possible)Societal acceptance factors1Generic term used in literature and may include noise,visual pollution,air pollution,land use,protection of species&biotopes,protection of water&soil,climate,and natural resources.%Figure 6:Societal acceptance factors18A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 188A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1819.05.2021 12:55:2919.05.2021 12:55:29Figure 7:Societal acceptance barriers for smart homes and autonomous driving PrivacySmart Home penetration rate in West Europe 15%lower in comparison to the USA.Major adoption barriers in the EU are privacy,interoperability,possibility to control devices in local languages1.2 EU countries(Germany and Belgium)have an option on Google maps for citizens to pixelate the houses.The option was introduced because of the high population privacy concerns in these countries2SafetySafety was mentioned by 4 from 6 publications as a leading acceptance factor for autonomous vehicles.According to literature,people have great concerns about AV safety because the technology is not mature enough and the public does not have enough knowledge about it3.Source:1 Strategy Analytics-2019 Smart Home Forecast,2 Googlemaps analysis,3 Literature research for autonomous driving NoiseNo major concerns about noise of cars or busses in the EU were identified.The level of noise comparable to an average passenger car seems to be acceptable by the population3.Additional insights3Self-reported acceptance of driverless vehicles is more strongly determined by domain-specific attitudes than by sociodemographic characteristics.People in Europe and Asia have substantial differences in attitudes toward AVs.Safety is one of the most concerned factors of AVs by respondents.Risk perception is identified as a major inhibitor to the use intention of smart homes.The use of smart home technology is influenced by positive attitude(perceived newness,societal influence,innovativeness)towards it.1919PrivacySmart Home penetration rate in West Europe 15%lower in comparison to the USA.Major adoption barriers in the EU are privacy,interoperability,possibility to control devices in local languages1.2 EU countries(Germany and Belgium)have an option on Google maps for citizens to pixelate the houses.The option was introduced because of the high population privacy concerns in these countries2SafetySafety was mentioned by 4 from 6 publications as a leading acceptance factor for autonomous vehicles.According to literature,people have great concerns about AV safety because the technology is not mature enough and the public does not have enough knowledge about it3.NoiseNo major concerns about noise of cars or busses in the EU were identified.The level of noise comparable to an average passenger car seems to be acceptable by the population3.Source:1 Strategy Analytics-2019 Smart Home Forecast,2 Googlemaps analysis,3 Literature research for autonomous driving Additional insights3Self-reported acceptance of driverless vehicles is more strongly determined by domain-specific attitudes than by sociodemographic characteristics.People in Europe and Asia have substantial differences in attitudes toward AVs.Safetyis one of the most concerned factors of AVs by respondents.Risk perception is identified as a major inhibitor to the use intention of smart homes.The use of smart home technology is influenced by positive attitude(perceived newness,societal influence,innovativeness)towards it.PrivacySmart Home penetration rate in West Europe 15%lower in comparison to the USA.Major adoption barriers in the EU are privacy,interoperability,possibility to control devices in local languages1.2 EU countries(Germany and Belgium)have an option on Google maps for citizens to pixelate the houses.The option was introduced because of the high population privacy concerns in these countries2SafetySafety was mentioned by 4 from 6 publications as a leading acceptance factor for autonomous vehicles.According to literature,people have great concerns about AV safety because the technology is not mature enough and the public does not have enough knowledge about it3.NoiseNo major concerns about noise of cars or busses in the EU were identified.The level of noise comparable to an average passenger car seems to be acceptable by the population3.Source:1 Strategy Analytics-2019 Smart Home Forecast,2 Googlemaps analysis,3 Literature research for autonomous driving Additional insights3Self-reported acceptance of driverless vehicles is more strongly determined by domain-specific attitudes than by sociodemographic characteristics.People in Europe and Asia have substantial differences in attitudes toward AVs.Safetyis one of the most concerned factors of AVs by respondents.Risk perception is identified as a major inhibitor to the use intention of smart homes.The use of smart home technology is influenced by positive attitude(perceived newness,societal influence,innovativeness)towards it.PrivacySmart Home penetration rate in West Europe 15%lower in comparison to the USA.Major adoption barriers in the EU are privacy,interoperability,possibility to control devices in local languages1.2 EU countries(Germany and Belgium)have an option on Google maps for citizens to pixelate the houses.The option was introduced because of the high population privacy concerns in these countries2SafetySafety was mentioned by 4 from 6 publications as a leading acceptance factor for autonomous vehicles.According to literature,people have great concerns about AV safety because the technology is not mature enough and the public does not have enough knowledge about it3.NoiseNo major concerns about noise of cars or busses in the EU were identified.The level of noise comparable to an average passenger car seems to be acceptable by the population3.Source:1 Strategy Analytics-2019 Smart Home Forecast,2 Googlemaps analysis,3 Literature research for autonomous driving Additional insights3Self-reported acceptance of driverless vehicles is more strongly determined by domain-specific attitudes than by sociodemographic characteristics.People in Europe and Asia have substantial differences in attitudes toward AVs.Safetyis one of the most concerned factors of AVs by respondents.Risk perception is identified as a major inhibitor to the use intention of smart homes.The use of smart home technology is influenced by positive attitude(perceived newness,societal influence,innovativeness)towards it.8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 198A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 1919.05.2021 12:55:3419.05.2021 12:55:34208A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 208A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2019.05.2021 12:55:3619.05.2021 12:55:361.2.Industry status and projectionThis section of the report provides an overview of the industry status,including UAM aircraft types,use case applications for these UAM aircraft and the UAM stakeholder environment.OverviewAs of 2021,the UAM market is still in an early stage,while showing increasing momentum.Many start-ups and companies are emerging across the entire value chain.In particular,the eVTOL manufacturing and Original Equipment Manufacturer(OEM)sector is rapidly evolving.More than 200 eVTOL designs and concepts are currently being investigated and developed with many prominent ones like Volocopter,Joby,Lilium,Airbus,or Kitty Hawk.Some of these air vehicle systems are already in advanced certification stages.Europe is leading with many OEMs such as Volocopter,Airbus,Lilium,Ascendance,and Pipistrel in advanced certification stages and a significant number of pilot regions and projects,for example in Frankfurt,Paris,Cologne and Dusseldorf,Linz,Helsinki,and Ingolstadt(see Figure 8 and Figure 9).Figure 8:Passenger vehicle certification announcements(non-exhaustive)Expected certification,i.e.,commercial rollout possibleFrankfurt,Paris in 2021(test flights)N.a.N.a.Cologne and Dusseldorf in 2025Linz in 2021(test flights),Seville,and LlriaN.a.N.a.N.a.N.a.N.a.ParisAnnouncements made for EUN.a.N.a.N.a.N.a.N.a.Public test flights in Stuttgart Helsinki and SingaporeNo certification for current model in Western countriesCurrently manned test flights in New ZealandTest flight certificationDesign stage2024EuropeanFirst manned flight20162017 2019201820202021202220232024 Design stage2026Design stageDesign stage2024Design stageDesign stage2024211.2 Industry status and projection8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 218A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2119.05.2021 12:55:3719.05.2021 12:55:37Figure 9:Cargo vehicle announcements:(non-exhaustive)Expected certification,i.e.,commercial rollout possibleAnnouncements made for EUEuropeanFirst manned flight20162017 2019201820202021202220232024 Part 135 certified for in the USHelsinki in 2020Ingolstadt in 2022 N.a.Testing in France and AustriaN.a.N.a.Design stageN.a.Design stageUAM vehicle typesIn general,UAM aircraft layouts for vertical take-off and landing(VTOL)can be categorised into three archetypes:i.Vectored thrustThe same propulsion units first provide lift during the hover and then swivel to create thrust in the cruise phase.During the cruise phase,lift is generated by the wings.This layout is better suited to longer-distance flights,as the system is more efficient but more complex than the other concepts.An example can be seen on the left side of Figure 10.ii.Lift cruiseThis layout has separate propulsion units for the hover and cruise phases.Wings create the necessary lift during the cruise phase.Lift cruise is suited to shorter distance flights than vectored thrust,but to longer distances than wingless.It is potentially easier to certify than vectored thrust because the propulsion systems are separate.An example can be seen in the middle of Figure 10.iii.Wingless(multicopter)Here the propulsion units are fixed in position and create lift all the time.This is the option that offers the shortest flight distances and is overall the simplest concept,as it is avoiding any unnecessary movable parts(e.g.thrust vectoring).An example can be seen on the right side of Figure 10.1.2.1 Aircraft and Use CasesIn the following subchapters,the aircraft types and certification timelines of the main use case categories of this study(passenger transport,cargo transport,and emergency)are discussed.Detailed statements related to autonomy levels,22A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 228A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2219.05.2021 12:55:3719.05.2021 12:55:37range,energy consumption and required ground infrastructure are not presented in the following as these are kept confidential by the relevant actors.Passenger transport aircraft The commercial transport of people by UAM aircraft is covered by this segment.This can be,for example,a flight between a city centre and an airport,flights within a metropolitan area,or flights within a city for sightseeing.For the passenger transport use cases,vectored thrust(i)appears to be a preferred solution,with 7 out of 16 of the concepts reviewed opting for this solution(e.g.Bell,Hyundai and Joby).This is followed by lift cruise(5 out of 16,e.g.EVE,BETA and Wisk),and finally wingless(4 out of 16,e.g.Airbus,Volocopter and EHang).Planned passenger numbers range from one to five.Figure 10:UAM vehicle typesFor passenger transport use cases,(i)vectored thrust appears to be the preferred solution for OEMs.Most of them plan to start operations with a pilot on board.First certifications for passenger transport use cases are estimated for 2022.To ensure infrastructure needed,vehicle manufacturers,cities and infrastructure companies are cooperating.Most of this is happening in Europe right now.For cargo transport use cases,(ii)lift cruise is the preferred archetype for OEMs,followed by wingless.Most concepts plan to fly autonomously from the beginning and have a payload between 0.7 to 200 kg.First operational certifications are already achieved.For emergency use cases,(iii)wingless vehicles are preferred,all planned to be remote controlled.They can cover transport of medical emergency personnel to an accident site,patients to a hospital but also e.g.direct firefighting.Hyundai SA1 eVTOLWisk(Kitty Hawk)CoraVolocopter2XThrustersused for lift and cruiseIndependent thrusters used for cruise as for liftThrusters only for lift,cruise via rotor pitch Vectored Thrust Lift CruiseWingless(Multicopter)BenefitsOptimized for both hover and cruiseLift provided by wings for cruise for highest efficiencyHighest cruising speedsRedundancy benefits of multicopterwithout collective or cyclic actuationWing configuration allows for more speed in cruiseHigh redundancy and simple controlsSignificantly quieter than helicoptersLower maintenance and lightweightImplicationsGreater mechanical complexitySuboptimal for both hover or cruiseSlowest cruising speeds/least efficientExamplePassenger,cargo and emergency use cases and potential vehicles238A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 238A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2319.05.2021 12:55:4019.05.2021 12:55:40Most OEMs plan to start operations with vehicles with a pilot on board(e.g.Volocopter,Lilium and Bell).Very few plan to start operations with fully remote controlled or autonomous vehicles(e.g.EHang and Wisk).All concepts are powered by a battery electric propulsion system,except for those from Moog and Ascendance Flight Technologies,which utilise a hybrid electric propulsion system.The earliest estimated certification year for the companies reviewed within the passenger transport use case is 2022(for Volocopter),followed in 2023 by Airbus and Joby.The bulk of players(e.g.Lilium,EHang,Wisk etc.)announced they would expect certification in 2024 or later.The most ambitious timelines were four years from the start of the design phase to planned certification for Vertical Aerospace and Ascendance Flight Technologies.Both companies are currently in the design phase.The European OEMs Lilium and Volocopter were among the first to start development of passenger transport aircraft.UAM ground infrastructureDedicated infrastructure is required for the initial operation of UAM passenger transport.Vertiports will probably appear in different sizes and numbers in different cities,depending on expected traffic volumes.The largest vertiports will be the fewest in number in a city,and the smallest ones will be the most numerous.Figure 11 indicates potential numbers for different city archetypes in mature UAM network state.The number of landing pads is different for the three vertiport types,with vertipads only having one or two,while a vertihub can have around ten landing pads.The number of landing pads per vertiport multiplied by the respective number of vertiports in a city results in the total landing pad number.Medium citiesLarge citiesMedium,less dense,medium income,urban/suburban city,Sevilla,Lisbon,Dusseldorf,Riga,AthensLarge,dense,high-income urban city,e.g.,Paris,Berlin,Madrid,Hamburg,Vienna,Barcelona20-45Total landing pads40-60Major suburban commuting stations,private use for high net worth individuals,or in wealthy suburbs3-5Outposts,areas of interest or private useVertipads3-5Major corporate headquarters,major retail districts,and major commuting stations3-7Near concentrations of high origin and destination pointsVertibases5-10Main airport,downtown,and major work district1-2Major airports,city centres,and major commute corridorsVertihubs2-3Figure 11:Urban Air Mobility infrastructure may come in scalable size types24A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 248A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2419.05.2021 12:55:4019.05.2021 12:55:40Two important factors for locating vertiports will be the ease of access to them,as well as the electricity infrastructure connection.As the energy for the operations of most UAM aircraft will be electricity stored in batteries,the recharging of the batteries will probably happen at the vertiports and therefore a suitable connection to the electricity grid will probably be required.At the moment,the development of vertiports seems to be mostly through collaborations between experienced infrastructure players and UAM aircraft manufacturers,although manufacturers,have also demonstrated development of some of their own concepts.Some infrastructure players have also demonstrated concepts they are developing on their own that would be compatible with various UAM aircraft manufacturers.But at the moment the interoperability of these concepts is difficult to assess.Europe seems to be a leading market for passenger transport,as demonstrated by the announcements of collaborations between UAM aircraft manufacturers,cities,and infrastructure companies by the various regions,as can be seen in Figure 12.Cargo transport aircraftThis segment covers the transport of goods by UAM aircraft for commercial or industrial applications.This can include,for example,last-mile delivery,delivery to a hub,or rural delivery of supplies.The transport of emergency and medical goods,such as organs and blood,is excluded from this category as it is covered by the emergency use case.North AmericaAsiaEuropeAustraliaUSAOEMs without locationOEMs without locationCollaborationPotentially open to all OEMsOEMs without locationFranceChinaSingaporeConcepts for Joby(formerly UBER)GermanyItalyFigure 12:Vertiport announcementsWhat are vertiports?Vertiports are needed to enable take-off and landing of air taxis.They are expected to appear in different sizes.Depending on the traffic of a city,number of vertiports will vary.At the moment,the development of vertiports seems to be mostly through collaborations between experienced infra-structure players and UAM vehicle manu-factures.1.2 Industry status and projection258A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 258A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2519.05.2021 12:55:4019.05.2021 12:55:40The delivery could be lowered via a winch on the UAM vehicle into the garden of the receiving person or organisation,or the vehicle could land on the roof of a multistorey building and the delivery could be picked up from there.Another option is the delivery to a fixed station in the vicinity of the receiving person,similar to the self-service parcel terminals already used today.The lift cruise aircraft is the preferred archetype in this category(with four out of eight OEMs using this concept),followed by wingless(three out of eight)and vectored thrust(one out of eight).The stated payload of the concepts ranges from 0.7 to 200.0 kg.Only two concepts will initially be remote controlled(EHang and Volodrone);the others are already planned to be autonomous during initial operation.Six of the concepts use battery electric propulsion,while two will use hybrid propulsion,which includes two or more sources of propulsion in one design(Pipistrel and AutoFlight).Of the companies reviewed within the cargo use case,Wing and Amazon have already achieved operational certification according to Part 135.From an aircraft point of view,Quantum-Systems is aiming for certification in 2022,while Volodrone and Pipistrel are aiming for 2023.The other players did not state a definite target for aircraft certification and are mostly in the prototype stage.From a European OEM point of view,quantum systems had already started development of a cargo vehicle with 0.7 kg payload in 2017,while Volocopter and Pipistrel announced plans for vehicles with a larger payload(200 and 460 kg respectively)in 2019 and 2020.Emergency aircraftAircraft for emergency-related use cases are summarised in this segment.These can cover applications such as the transport of medical emergency personnel to an accident site,the transport of patients to a hospital,the evaluation of emergency areas,direct firefighting,or the delivery of medical and emergency supplies.The emergency UAM aircraft development does not seem to be a focus for European OEMs so far.Only Volocopter collaborates with ADAC Luftrettung,a German non-profit air medical provider,on the use of Volocopters passenger UAM for flying emergency doctors to accident sites.However,any passenger transport UAM could in principle be used for transport of a doctor,while for a patient transport a dedicated cabin modification would be needed.Thus,aeromedical services are more dependent on the operations regulations.Other aircraft reviewed in this category are all wingless since non-urban applications such as those by Zipline are out of scope.Airobotics,DJI,IAI and Parrot plan to use vehicles for the visual assessment of emergency locations,while EHang plans to use them for extinguishing fires in high-rise buildings.All concepts reviewed were remote controlled and will have an electric propulsion system either powered by batteries or via a tether,for IAI.No certification timelines were found for the five manufacturers reviewed(Airobotics,DJI,EHang,IAI and Parrot)in this segment.-26A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 268A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2619.05.2021 12:55:4019.05.2021 12:55:401.2.2 UAM stakeholder environmentThe emerging UAM industry and ecosystem is influenced by many stakeholders.The main UAM stakeholders can be categorised into four groups along the value chain,as can be seen in Figure 13.Figure 13:UAM vehicle typesGovernments,public institutions®ulatorsSupranational&national:EU institutions and bodies,EASA,air traffic control organizations,EU member state governments,state authorities,military&policeLocal:Local authorities,municipalities,city officials,urban and city planners,public institutions and organizationsMajor influence on societal acceptanceIndirectly affected third partiesPrivate individuals:Residents,communities,real-estate owners,citizensProfessionals:Pilots,academia,innovatorsAssociations:Local environmental protection associations,local travellers associations,unions,lobbies,associations,environmental groupsExtended industry:Airports,aerospace&automotive industry,energy providers,public transport providers,insurance providers,ticket brokers,businesses in other industries potentially interested in entering UAM spaceUAM industryManufacturers,UAM operators,maintenance services,airport operators,service providers,vertiports,communication providers,suppliersPotential usersUrban residents,travellers,commuters,high wealth individuals,car users,emergency services,public transport usersUAM industryPotential usersGovernments,public institutions®ulatorsIndirectly affected third partiesThe following section covers the different stakeholder groups in more detail and lists their motivation,expectations,and concerns.The UAM industry stakeholder group includes all entities directly involved in the development,manufacturing,operation,and servicing of UAM aircraft and services.The main motivation for this group is generating a profit from their activities.They may also be motivated by advancing technologies,keeping or increasing their number of employees,or being a first mover.While working on UAM topics,this group may hope for a stable regulatory framework,minimal levels of bureaucracy,support for building up a new industry,access to a qualified workforce,and beneficial taxation.Their main concerns could be the impact of regulation on the economics of UAM,excessive regulation,public opinion,nimbyism,and environmental issues.For the potential user stakeholder group,time and cost savings,as well as comfort,are some of the main decision criteria for selecting a mode of transport.The expectations of the potential user group for UAM will probably be safety,-Stakeholders at all level are important for societal acceptance of UAMUrban Air Mobility needs to meet expectations of a wide variety of stakeholders.This involves reconciling different social acceptance perspectives.271.2 Industry status and projection8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 278A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2719.05.2021 12:55:4019.05.2021 12:55:40reliability,predictability,affordability,ease of use,and convenience.Topics they may have concerns about are noise,safety,environmental impact,benefit for self and/or the community,automation,and accessibility.From the governments,public institutions,and regulators group viewpoint,three different levels of political structures come into play:supranational,national,and local.The focus for this stakeholder group is the public good,safety of the public,an efficient mobility system,limitation of congestion and pollution,the creation of jobs,supporting and building up an industry in their respective jurisdictions,the environment,and public opinion.The expectations regarding UAM are probably that it should generate a positive contribution to the community,contribute income tax that finances governmental tasks,and that the industry complies with regulations.The main concerns are likely around public opinion,loss of life,impact on voters,prestige for their respective jurisdictions,under-or over-regulation,and environmental issues.Members of the indirectly-affected third-parties group may be impacted by an evolving UAM industry.They can be further divided into private individuals,professionals,associations,extended industry,and potential competitors.UAM will most likely be evaluated by this stakeholder group through the lens of the benefit for oneself and/or for society.Opportunities for growth and development are the probable expectations from this group and becoming irrelevant or losing job security may be some of their concerns.28A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 288A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2819.05.2021 12:55:4219.05.2021 12:55:42291.2 Industry status and projection298A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 298A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 2919.05.2021 12:55:4419.05.2021 12:55:441.3 UAM high level societal benefits and risks The introduction of new technologies comes with benefits and risks for the users,but also for the general public.The following section reflects the high-level societal benefits and risks initially identified through the research and literature review.These elements were then used to build the survey questionnaires and were compared ultimately with the results of the survey(see Conclusion).1.3.1 Benefits based on market models,literature and expert interviewsUAM will have societal benefits for the EU and Europe.These benefits come in a variety of dimensions,as shown in Figure 14.The estimated market size of UAM in Europe,including R&D,vehicle manufacturing,operations and infrastructure construction,will be approximately EUR 4.2 billion in 20303,which represents almost one third of the global market and hints at the opportunity that this industry may offer for Europe.The estimated market size may create or sustain approximately 90,000 jobs in 2030,based on labour spending for constructing related infrastructure and operating the UAM.Manufacturing jobs are not included,as the whole supply chain setup is still uncertain.If we visualise what this market size would mean for the Paris metropolitan area in terms of UAM aircraft,the estimates range from approximately 3,000 to 3,500 UAM aircraft for passenger and cargo transport in 2030.In this estimate,UAM passenger aircraft represent the smallest part with numbers between 160 and 180,whereas the estimates for the UAM cargo aircraft and delivery drones range from 2,840 to 3,300.Local emissions by UAM,in the city environment,could be almost zero if battery electric propulsion systems are used.Most of the reviewed UAM concepts already rely upon this propulsion type,with a minority working on hybrid electric propulsion systems.30A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe3.Source:McKinsey Center for Future Mobility UAM Market Model8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 308A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 3019.05.2021 12:55:4619.05.2021 12:55:464.2 bn market size in Europe in 2030115-40 minsaved in average on travel time by UAM for a city to airport transfer5100%reduction of local emissions for electric propulsion490 000jobs created in the Europe in 203031 500 timesless likely to be involved in a fatal accident compared to road transport on a passenger kilometre basis273ster delivery of organs between city hospitals possible531%of global UAM market to be located in Europe in 20301Figure 14:UAM benefits for the EU and EuropeOne of the major benefits of UAM for users will be time savings.For example,a city-to-airport transfer in Paris by air taxi could 2 to 4 times faster compared to a car journey on a Thursday evening during rush hour.Also,medical transportation of equipment or organs could be performed approximately 73 percent faster by drone than by ambulance,taking the example of a trip in Berlin on a Thursday evening,during rush hour.If UAM passenger transport achieves the same level of safety as aviation did within the EU in 2018(0.01 fatalities per billion passenger kilometers),it would then be approximately 1,500 times safer on a passenger-kilometer basis than road transportation.This number is based on data for road transport and commercial air transport in the EU.As a first step the fatalities per million passenger kilometers for both modes of transport were calculated and in a second step these respective numbers were put in proportion.1.Based on McKinsey VTOL market model2.Assuming same safety level as commercial air transport in the EU3.Based on direct,indirect and induced jobs created by CAPEX and OPEX spend of UAM industry in Europe in 20304.Compared to a helicopter with conventional kerosene propulsion5.Compared to a car drive on a Thursday at 5pmSource:VTOL team,Eurostat,Google Maps 4.2 bn market size in Europe in 2030115-40 minsaved in average on travel time by UAM for a city to airport transfer5100%reduction of local emissions for electric propulsion490 000jobs created in the Europe in 203031 500 timesless likely to be involved in a fatal accident compared to road transport on a passenger kilometre basis273ster delivery of organs between city hospitals possible531%of global UAM market to be located in Europe in 203011.Based on McKinsey VTOL market model2.Assuming same safety level as commercial air transport in the EU3.Based on direct,indirect and induced jobs created by CAPEX and OPEX spend of UAM industry in Europe in 20304.Compared to a helicopter with conventional kerosene propulsion5.Compared to a car drive on a Thursday at 5pmSource:VTOL team,Eurostat,Google Maps 311.3 UAM high level societal benefits and risks8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 318A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 3119.05.2021 12:55:4819.05.2021 12:55:481.3.2 Risks and acceptance based on literature and expert interviewsThere are also a few risks associated with the implementation of UAM in Europe(see Figure 15).Amongst the top concerns in the literature or stated by experts are:Noise:is perceived as a prevalent risk of UAM.This includes the noise generated by the vehicles when they take-off and land,as well as while they are in flight.Safety:Ranks high among the risks of UAM mentioned in the reviewed literature,as an unsafe system could have widespread implications for public acceptance.Privacy:Society may also be concerned about privacy,as UAM aircraft like air taxis and drones may fly above or close to places of residence.Visual pollution:Was mentioned as a potential nuisance,which may hamper public acceptance of UAM and is therefore a risk to its widespread rollout.Job losses:Some jobs may become obsolete due to the introduction of UAM,and this could lead to resentment against it.Affected industries could include logistics and taxi services.Environmental issues:The environmental impact of UAM may be almost zero on a local emissions level for battery electric vehicles,but the required electricity still has to be generated and the vehicle components have to be manufactured,assembled and eventually disposed of.Focus should be placed on reducing the overall environmental impact of UAM aircraft during the design phase.Affordability:Another risk for UAM is the affordability of the services for a large part of society.If the services are only available to more affluent individuals but the disadvantages(like noise)are borne by everyone,this could hamper the acceptance of UAM within society.328A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 328A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 3219.05.2021 12:55:5019.05.2021 12:55:50Figure 15:UAM risks for the EU and EuropeSource:Bibliography ID 20,26,52,53,61,87Noise.there are certain threats that could impede the sustainable and thus successful introduction of UAM to our cities,with noise being a prominent limitation.(26)PrivacyCivil liberties groups have privacyconcerns with widespread UAM adoption.(20)Visual pollutionThe sensitive topic of visualand noise pollution must also be addressed.(52)Environmental impactAir pollution caused by pollutants such as particulate matter,nitrogen oxides and ozone,as well as odour nuisance should be avoided.(53)Obsolete jobsThere is concern that autonomous technology will render jobsobsolete across multiple industries(20)AffordabilityPublic acceptance of these new systems and services is imperative,driven by.and affordability.(61)SafetyThe key areas of discussion to move forward will be to meet,or exceed,the current safety parameters with these new vehicles.(87)338A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 338A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 3319.05.2021 12:55:5219.05.2021 12:55:52348A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 348A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 3419.05.2021 12:55:5219.05.2021 12:55:52An extensive market analysis was performed to identify a list of EU cities where the deployment of local UAM markets appears plausible in the years to come,due to the local conditions and needs.A further objective was to identify six cities from this list where the quantitative survey could be conducted.As respondents to the quantitative survey needed to include sufficient representatives of the cross-sections of the local population,only large cities with a minimum number of inhabitants(300,000 for cities and 2,000,000 for cross-border regions)were pre-selected.This list is only indicative and not exhaustive,and the absence of a city does not imply that UAM would not work well in that location.Since the selection process was very comprehensive,only an overview and its methodology is given below,together with the overall results.Further details can be found in the Appendix.2.Assessment of urban European target markets358A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 358A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 3519.05.2021 12:55:5219.05.2021 12:55:522.1 Use case prioritisation The review of international literature identified six categories of principal use cases for UAM deployment(see Figure 16):Transportation(passenger transfer for commercial applications),delivery(transport of goods for commercial and industrial applications),emergency services(response in case of an accident,fire,disaster etc.),civil surveillance and other operations(manual operations that physically interact with the environment),sovereign functions(surveillance and analytics of areas,objects or people),and emitting(providing multimedia bandwidth by emitting signal/video/sound).For each of these use case categories,societal risks and benefits were evaluated to identify those with the highest risks and benefits,and a framework was created to break down benefits and risks into categories.This allowed us to understand which use cases are likely to be deployed in the EU in the next five to ten years and to include them in the survey.36A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 368A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 3619.05.2021 12:55:5719.05.2021 12:55:57Low Minimal or no benefits for the majority of use casesHigh Significant benefits for the majority of use casesSocietal benefitsSocietal risksLow Minimal or no new risksSovereign functions(Surveillance and analytics of areas,objects or people)Transportation(Passenger transfer for commercial applications)Delivery(Transport of goods for commercial and industrial applications)Operate(Manual operations that physically interact with the environment)Emitting(Providing multimedia bandwidth by emitting signal/video/sound)6Emergency services(Response in case of an accident,fire,disaster,etc.)High Implies major risks transporting people,or flying over people12345Figure 16:Transformation,emergency services and delivery are use cases with high risks and high benefits The results indicate that three use cases have the highest risk and benefits,and are therefore very important candidates for societal acceptance analysis:(1)commercial passenger transport by electric vertical take-off and landing(eVTOL)with a pilot onboard,(2)emergency services use cases(both medical equipment by drone and people transport by eVTOL with a pilot onboard),and(3)delivery transport by drones for commercial and industrial applications.These results also support the request from the European Union Aviation Safety Agency(EASA)to include only people transport,goods delivery,and emergency services in the scope of the UAM target market analysis.These three main use cases were analysed in detail and sub-use-cases were defined for each.The analysis centered on how often sub-use-cases were mentioned in the literature review as well as during interviews with external and internal UAM experts.For each sub-use-case,this analysis indicated whether it was a likely candidate for initial implementation in the EU,its near-term viability for 2025 to 2030,and which benefits and risks it involved.Based on this evaluation,six priority sub-use-cases were chosen for further analysis.372.1 Use case prioritsation 8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 378A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 3719.05.2021 12:55:5919.05.2021 12:55:591.Passenger transfer use cases for commercial application The sub-use-cases for commercial passenger transport were divided into three categories(see Figure 17 below):intracity transport(under 40 km),suburb/region-to-city transport(under 100 km)and regional city-to-city transport(between 100 km and 300 km).Airport shuttle(A),sightseeing(C)and fixed metropolitan network(D)were identified as the sub-use-cases with the highest benefits,lowest risks,and the highest viability for the initial UAM introduction in 2025 to 2030.They have therefore been chosen for the survey city-selection process(for more details see Appendix).As can be seen in chapter 1.2(UAM vehicle types),these operations will be piloted in the first years of introduction.Figure 17:Airport shuttle,sight-seeing(loop)and fixed metropolitan network are most important passenger use cases for the survey2.Suburb/region-to-city(100km)3.Regional city-to-city(100-300km)BFixed urban networkCar,taxi,subway,busAerial taxi for faster travelling within dense urban areaC Sight-seeing(loop)Bus,taxi,walkingPre-defined trip over iconic sights(e.g.,Eiffel Tower)EFlexible metropolitanpoint to point transferCar,ridesharing,subway,bus,walking,bikingFlexible routes,e.g.,to commute from residential rural suburb to office in a city centreDFixed metropolitan networkTrain,public transportFlights connections within a metropolitan over slow or often congested routes1.Intracity transport(300 k)2Availability of an airport)3Number of travellers between the airport and the city centre(25k passengers/day)4High GDP/capita level(35k PPP in EUR)1City size3Distance between airport and city centreUsed for informative purposes only and not for selection4657Travel time between airport and city centre with fastest alternative travel type in the rush hourCongestion rateTaxi priceSuitable weather conditions(%of weather causes in total arrival days,precipitation in mm per year)Availability of river,highway or corridor for noise avoidanceThe detailed evaluation per use case is provided in the Appendix 2.Please find further information on the viability 1)for airport shuttle use case,2)for sightseeing use case,3)for first aid use case,4)for Last-mile delivery,5)for Medical supply delivery,6)for fixed metropolitan/regional network.After applying this process,a number of cities remained which were further prioritised according to a KPI system tailored to the respective use case.Figure 21,on the example of the airport use case,shows how pre-selected cities were ranked by KPIs to arrive at the 15 highest priority cities.The KPIs included:city size;expected number of trips;distance between the airport and city centre;travel time between the airport and the city centre with the fastest alternative travel type(e.g.taxi,car,or public transport)in rush hour;congestion rate;taxi cost for the journey to the airport;and suitable weather conditions(percentage of weather causes in total arrival delays,precipitation in mm per year).A weighting factor was assigned to each KPI to adjust that KPIs impact on the overall ranking score.2.2 Target market identification438A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 438A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 4319.05.2021 12:56:0919.05.2021 12:56:0925%WeightingKPITime saving10%7Suitable weather conditions(%of weather causes in total arrival delays,precipitation in mm per year)5Congestion rate3Distance between airport and city centre4Travel time between airport and city centre with fastest alternative travel type in the rush hour25%City size125%Expected trip volumes26Taxi expenses for ride from airport to city-centre15%Milan72.1Berlin78.3Madrid74.8Rome75.4Vienna70.4Barcelona71.4Prague72.8Munich75.3Budapest73.8Dublin70.8Hamburg62.8Brussels67.8Amsterdam65.6Bucharest67.4Frankfurt am Main59.9Lyon60.8Stockholm63.0Warsaw66.8Stuttgart63.9Dusseldorf56.8Bonn59.6Ranking of cities based on further KPIsToulouse55.2Copenhagen56.2Cologne57.8Bologna59.8Helsinki58.288.2CityRanking(100=best suitability for UAM)ParisFigure 21:Target cities ranking process for the airport shuttle use caseBased on this methodology,90 potential target markets(15 cities x 6 use cases)were identified for initial OEM introduction(long list,see Figure 22 below).A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe448A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 448A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 4419.05.2021 12:56:1019.05.2021 12:56:10Figure 22:Potential target markets for the six prioritised use casesCity shortlistDPeople transportationCargo use casesCHA3QParisBerlin RomeMunichMadridBudapestPragueMilanBarcelonaDublinViennaBrusselsBucharestWarsawAmsterdamParisRomeAmsterdamVenicePragueBarcelonaFlorenceBudapestBerlinFrankfurt am MainStockholmMadridAthensNiceLisbonSightseeingBelgian central metro(Brussels)Rhein-Ruhr region(Cologne,Dsseldorf,Duisburg,etc.)Rome metropolitan regionMilan metropolitan regionBarcelona metropolitan areaRhein-Neckar region(Mannheim,Karlsruhe,Heidelberg,Pforzheim,etc)Stuttgart metropolitan regionOresund region(Copenhagen,Hillerod,Malmo,Lind)Munich metropolitan regionVienna metropolitan regionParis metropolitan regionRhein-Main region(Frankfurt,Darmstadt,Mainz,etc.)Warsaw metropolitan regionStockholm metropolitan regionNoord-Brabant region(Eindhoven,Tilburg,Breda,etc.)Fixed metropolitan network(100 K inhabitants The societal acceptance will vary for different city archetypes 5.We analysed different cities archetypes(dense/wide-spread,high/medium-income,urban/suburban city)Different ArchetypesCity selection for the surveyThis long list was reduced to six major cities,taking into account the use cases with top rankings and city-average ranking scores(across all use cases where the city was on the top 15 list).In addition,five guiding principles were established to help ensure that the selected major cities were representative of different regions,cultures and city archetypes(see Figure 23).-468A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 468A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 4619.05.2021 12:56:1519.05.2021 12:56:15Figure 24:Final city selection and rankingOur final cities selection covers all demographics,cultures and cities archetypes dimensions Top cities from KPI based evaluation XCity added to fulfil the guiding principlesX1.Most relevant use caseRanking Use caseCity archetypeCity/Country Country/Region 1Paris2Rome4Hamburg3Barcelona6Oresund region(Copenhagen,Hillerod,Helsingor,Malmo,Lund)5Budapest100Large,very dense,highincome cityAirport shuttle1Sight-seeing,First aid Central Europe87Large,medium dense,medium-income citySight-seeing1Airport shuttle,First aidSouth Europe75Large size,medium dense,medium-income cityFirst aid1Airport shuttle,Sight-seeing Central Europe79Large,very dense,medium-income citySight-seeing1Airport shuttle,First aid,Medical supplySouth Europe20Network of wide spread medium size citiesFixed metropolitan network 1North Europe68Large size,medium dense,medium-income cityMedical supply1Airport shuttle,First aid,Sight-seeingEast EuropeTarget cities selection Final cities As a result of this process,Barcelona(Spain),Budapest(Hungary),Hamburg(Germany),Milan(Italy),Paris(France)and resund(cross-border region of Denmark and Sweden)were chosen as sites for the quantitative survey(see Figure 24).For further details on use cases and the metrics used for the survey city-selection process,see Appendix 2.-Cities selected for the survey Barcelona Budapest Hamburg Milan Paris resund cross-border region between Denmark and Sweden475.Survey-based assessment of societal benefits and concerns for European citizens8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 478A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 4719.05.2021 12:56:1719.05.2021 12:56:17488A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 488A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 4819.05.2021 12:56:1719.05.2021 12:56:17The stated goal of the survey was to assess and understand the most important societal-acceptance drivers for UAM across cultures and regions in the European Union,including perceived benefits and concerns.This served both to complement available data from literature and to confirm this data for the specific EU environment.The results of this survey will further support the impact assessment and regulatory work of EASA.The survey itself contained three parts:A quantitative survey,with the participation of 3,690 citizens across six European cities,through a web-based questionnaire;A qualitative survey,consisting of one-hour interviews with more than 40 stakeholders at local,national and European level,informed by the results of the quantitative survey and aimed at better understanding the perspectives of different stakeholders;A special noise perception survey with 20 participants was initiated to gain even more insights on how the noise of UAM aircraft may be perceived by the public.The following chapter describes the overall survey methodology(3.1)and provides the ten key survey results(3.2),aggregating results from across three parts.3.Survey-based assessment of public acceptance of UAM in the EU498A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 498A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 4919.05.2021 12:56:1719.05.2021 12:56:17Chapter 3.1 is divided into three parts:First,the methodology for the quantitative survey is explained(3.1.1)in detail,including information on how participants were chosen,how the survey was structured and how the questions were defined.This section also provides a deep dive into the methodology of the conjoint(or:trade-off)analyses.Then follows an overview of the qualitative survey methodology(3.1.2)and the methodology for the noise acceptance study(3.1.3).3.1.1 Quantitative survey methodologyInformation on the panel of participantsThe participant target for the quantitative survey was at least 600 individuals from each of the six cities being surveyed.To ensure that participants were sufficiently representative of the populations of the surveyed cities,nationally representative distributions were chosen regarding gender,age,and employment status.As a sample can never be perfectly representative of a populations distribution,technical criteria were used to ensure the margin of error was kept as small as possible.Screening questions were used at the beginning of the questionnaire to ensure the fulfilment of quotas and to identify other demographic features.These questions related to,for instance,age,gender,type of household,place of residence,etc;More information on these screening questions can be found in the Appendix(Questionnaire).The final demographic distribution of participants be seen in Figure 25.Advantages of an online panel Online samples are considered very representative:A broad section of the population reacts to online surveys Office workers are easier to reach(filling survey during the workday and can participate at a time thats convenient for them)Respondents provide more authentic and detailed answers to open-ended questions(as they may take the time to reflect on their responses)Various visualisation options(videos,logos,product images,shelves,advertisements,TV spots,radio spots,etc.)arise and survey questions are better understood by participants.3.1 Survey methodology50A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 508A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 5019.05.2021 12:56:2019.05.2021 12:56:20Figure 25:Panel selection across citiesPanel composition shows that representative distribution and quotas are met in total panel16171718181435-4418-2455-6425-3445-5465-75Education,%Gross household income per year21452311High(60k EUR)Low(20k EUR)Medium(20k-60k EUR)Prefer not to sayFemaleMale5149Employment status,%Full time(30 h)incl.self-employed53Part time or student 19Not working,retired and other29Low(up to higher schooling)37Medium(up to finished college or university)44High(post-graduates or higher)19Singles21Couples46Families33Panel size=3690 participantsGender,%Age,mily type,%To summarise the figures shown in Figure 25:Total numbers of participants across the six cities was 3,690;Balanced gender distribution,as number of male and female participants were nearly the same(0.2 percent diverse,other,or preferred not to answer).The shares of male and female participants had to be at least 48 percent each.As women usually tend to be more responsive to online panels than men,it was important to maintain a balance between the genders,but a margin of error of 1 to 2 percent is considered a statistically acceptable range;3.Survey-based assessment of public acceptance of UAM in the EU518A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 518A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 5119.05.2021 12:56:2219.05.2021 12:56:22 Participant age was relatively evenly distributed between 16 and 75 years.At least 15 percent of participants were required to be in each of the age groups 18 to 24,25 to 34,35 to 44,45 to 54 and 55 to 64,and 10 percent in the 65 to 75 age group.The age group 65 to 75 years was not required to be as large as other groups as this group is generally less responsive to online panels and will be less affected by innovations in UAM,which are currently still in their infancy and will take years to develop;Most of the participants(46 percent)were employed full time(30 hours or more per week),9 percent employed part time(up to 30 hours per week),7 percent were self-employed(business owners,freelancers),9 percent were college or university students or apprentices,4 percent were homemakers,16 percent were retired,8 percent were jobseekers or other,and 1 percent preferred not to say;99 percent of participants had EU citizenship;participants had to reside in the city or region where the survey was conducted,as the aim was to reflect the perceived benefits and concerns of residents potentially affected by the rise of UAM;The type of household was diverse as well:singles(24 percent),participants with two persons in household(51 percent),with three(16 percent),four(7 percent),five or more persons in the household(2 percent)participated;On the level of education,2 percent had no school-leaving certificate,9 percent finished basic schooling,27 percent finished higher schooling(10 or more years),13 percent had college or university education(no degree),29 percent have a college or university degree(e.g.diploma or bachelors degree),19 percent have a postgraduate degree or higher(e.g.masters degree,PhD),1 percent preferred not to say;The total gross household income per year shows that 21 percent of the participants receive less than EUR 20,000,26 percent EUR 20,000 to 39,999,19 percent receive EUR 40,000 to 59,999,9 percent receive EUR 60,000 to 79,999,5 percent receive EUR 80,000 to 99,999,4 percent receive EUR 100,000 to 119,999,2 percent receive EUR 120,000 to 139,999,1 percent receive EUR 140,000 to 160,000,2 percent receive over EUR 160,000,while 11 percent preferred not to say;The replies on employment industry show that participants work in:grocery or other food retail or manufacturing(3 percent),automotive and transport(4 percent),public sector and administration(6 percent),banking and finance(7 percent),clothing manufacturing or retail(2 percent),education(7 percent),healthcare(7 percent),computer science or IT(9 percent),in another field(25 percent)or are unemployed(30 percent).The maximum allowed share of the non-working population was 35 percent,to avoid a skewed distribution towards this very responsive group;To make sure we compiled a solid database on potential users of UAM,special attention was paid on ensuring to get a minimum number of respondents with generally positive attitudes towards UAM and who were identified classified as potential users.A minimum of 120 participants per city were identified as potential users of drone delivery same for air taxis.A minimum of 200 participants per city were identified as potential users of either drone delivery or air taxis.And a minimum of 240 participants per city were not identified as potential users of UAM;People working in advertising,media,PR and marketing may typically encounter surveys and statistical models in their day-to-day work.They understand the underlying methodology and levers and this could have an influence on their responses and thus the outcome of the survey.Therefore,these professional groups were categorically excluded.The survey was translated into the local languages of the participants(Spanish,Hungarian,German,Italian and French)to ensure understanding across the different cities and regions.The exception was for participants in the resund region where the survey was conducted in English,as non-native English skills are very good in Scandinavian countries according to the Education First English Proficiency Index4.4 https:/ study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 528A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 5219.05.2021 12:56:2319.05.2021 12:56:23Information on the questionnaire structure and question typesThe questionnaire was designed to assess,understand,and measure the most important societal-acceptance drivers for UAM,including perceived benefits and concerns and what it would take to increase societal acceptance.The questionnaire included 36 questions;the response time was estimated at twenty-five minutes.Two use cases that are considered easy to imagine and self-explanatory for non-experts were used in the quantitative survey to determine levels of acceptance:the delivery of goods in the low single digit kilogram range by drone and the transport of passengers by air taxi.An in-depth analysis was conducted to measure the relative acceptance levels across cultures of three key concerns identified through the literature review:the perceptions of safety,noise,and visual annoyance in an urban environment.Finally,the questionnaire addressed the general attitude and expectations of respondents towards regulatory authorities.For an English version of the questionnaire that was distributed online to the participants,please refer to the Appendix.The first part of the survey ensured that participants met the predefined criteria(see the predefined quotas above).An informational video of 1 minute and 36 seconds was presented to give participants prior information as well as general and common understanding of UAM.The use cases shown in the video were passenger transport by air taxi,express delivery of food by drone,transport of emergency medical services to the scene of an accident,and delivery of medical supplies to a hospital.The selection aimed for a balanced representation of commercial and public service use cases,drone and passenger use cases,as well as use cases both with a pilot on board and remotely piloted.The vehicles depicted in the video were invented and did not correspond to any industrial product existing or in development.The objective was to give a general feeling and idea,rather than to reflect actual technical accuracy.The video concluded with the message that Urban Air Mobility is coming soon to Europe.The video did not include any sound other than music,as noise perception was evaluated in a separate survey.Subsequently,this section checked whether participants could be considered a potential user for either or both of delivery of goods by drone and/or transport of passengers by air taxi.The subsequent parts of the survey focused on collecting insights about the following topics(in order):General attitude towards UAM Delivery by drone Passenger transport(air taxi)Regulators and their role Further understanding of security and environmental aspects Additional demographic questionsFor more information on the structure of the questionnaire,see Appendix 2.The online questionnaire was divided into 6 areas:1.Making participants familiar with what UAM means and assessing participants general attitude towards new techno-logy and UAM use cases2.Testing acceptance of delivery drones,3.Testing acceptance of passenger trans-port(air taxis)4.Understanding their attitude towards regulators and their expectations5.Understanding security and environ-mental aspects and concerns 6.Asking for additional demographic data533.Survey-based assessment of public acceptance of UAM in the EU8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 538A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 5319.05.2021 12:56:2319.05.2021 12:56:23Deep dive into choice-based conjoint(trade-off)analysisConjoint analysis is a statistical technique that models the behaviour of survey participants in choice/trade-off situations.Among other things,it helps to explain and forecast the level of readiness for new technologies where trade-offs between objectives need to be made.In a survey situation,participants are asked to indicate their preferences when faced with different alternatives.The aim is to find out which factors are relevant to a decision and to what extent they influence that decision.A conjoint setting is characterised by its attributes and the levels of those attributes.Attributes are characteristic properties of,e.g.products,services,or scenarios.In product design,typical attributes may be price,brand,and durability.Attributes should be relevant to decision making,consist of at least two levels with varying values,and are expected to influence preferences between products,services or scenarios.In product design,typical attributes may be price,brand and durability.Levels are expressions of the attributes,i.e.unambiguous,mutually exclusive and realistic possibilities of how an attribute could materialise.Levels for,e.g.the attribute price would simply be the different price points.Participants are offered a choice between different bundles,in which each attribute is assigned one level only.To continue the above example,a bundle would be a theoretical product described by its price,brand and expected durability.As the number of attributes and levels to be assessed significantly influences the sample size and number of choices to be made,the number of distinct attributes and levels should be limited to keep the scope of the choice-based conjoint analysis manageable.In a survey setting,the process for conducting a choice-based conjoint analysis is as follows:participants are shown a small number of different bundles represented by choice cards(see Figure 26),and are asked to choose their preferred bundle.This step is repeated several times.Figure 26:Example of a choice in choice-based conjoint analysisSafetyOne drone has the same likelihoodof hitting a pedestrian as one carOne drone has 1/10ththe likelihood of hitting a pedestrian as one carOne drone has 1/100ththe likelihood of hitting a pedestrian as one carNoise One drone Is as loud as a leaf blower(90-r dB,unbearable)One drone is as loud as a leaf blower(-90 dB.unbearable)One drone is as loud as a cardriving by at city speed(65 dB,noticeable)Visuals1 or 2 drones per hour in ones field of view when walking down a street5 drones per hour in ones field of view when walking down a street20 drones per hour in ones field of view when walking down a streetSelectSelectSelect54A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 548A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 5419.05.2021 12:56:2319.05.2021 12:56:23Due to the high number of possible combinations of attribute levels into bundles,participants will not see every possible bundle,and will not be asked to compare every bundle to every other bundle.However,preferences can be extrapolated based on a few choices.A specific two-stage process is used to estimate valid/stable utilities for each respondent:a latent class(LC)segmentation is followed by a hierarchical Bayes(HB)utility estimation within each latent class analysis(LCA)segment.The model assigns a utility to each level(the expressions of the attribute).The utility describes numerically how(negative for rejection,positive for approval)and to what extent a level impacts decision making(small absolute value for little influence,large absolute value for great influence).The greatest increase in utility within an attribute is equivalent to the greatest gain in approval rating(i.e.from the left-hand side to right-hand side of a number scale).Arranging the utilities on a scale from-3 to 3 gives an overview of which levels lead to rejection and which to approval,e.g.level A.4 in Figure 27 has the greatest approval rating for attribute A.The ideal bundle would consist of levels A.4,B.4,C.4 and D.4.However,in a real-world setting this particular bundle might be unrealistic,and trade-offs may need to be made.This raises the question about which levels are still considered acceptable,i.e.what is the lower boundary.For example,a bundle composed from the levels to the right of the respective greatest increases,i.e.A.4,B.3,C.2 and D.1 in Figure 27,might provide an acceptable approval rate.However,this logic should be applied with caution to real-life applications and bundles should always be chosen with care.Level B.1Level B.2Level B.3Level B.4Attribute BLevel C.1Level C.2Level C.3Level C.4Attribute CLevel D.1Level D.2Level D.3Level D.4Attribute D-3.00.0Level A.1Level A.2Level A.3Level A.4Attribute A3.0Utilities of attributesFigure 27:Schematic illustration of utilities in choice-based conjoint analysis3.Survey-based assessment of public acceptance of UAM in the EU558A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 558A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 5519.05.2021 12:56:2319.05.2021 12:56:23Conjoint analysis was chosen for the joint assessment of concerns regarding safety,noise,and visual annoyance in two settings:the operation of drones and the operation of air taxis.The aim was to avoid participants choosing the option that indicated the least change from the status quo when asked about desirable levels.In the conjoint analysis they are forced to make trade-offs between three scenarios,thereby indicating real preferences and acceptable levels.The questions used can be found under B7 and C7 in the Appendix.The bundle of levels accepted by the majority will serve as a basis for future regulatory projects.The initial setting of levels is therefore of particular importance.On the one hand,levels need to be specific enough to form a solid basis for specifications in regulatory projects;their formulations,on the other hand,need to be graspable for non-experts and relatable in a survey situation.SafetyTwo different scales for the safety attribute were selected because the air taxi use case poses risks to both passengers and pedestrians,whereas the drone use case poses risk solely to pedestrians.The following levels were selected for the operation of drones:five-times higher likelihood of one drone hitting a pedestrian as one car;the same likelihood;one-tenth of the likelihood;and one-hundredth of the likelihood.The safety standard for the first level would translate to about 200 fatalities per year in Europe by 2025,compared to 22,800 fatalities caused by cars in the 27 EU member states in 20195(i.e.200 fatalities from drones would lie in a range of 1 percent of the fatalities from car accidents).The best level for the drone safety standard(a hundredfold improvement compared to passenger cars)lies within a factor of two of todays commercial aircraft safety standard(calculated on a passenger-kilometre basis and assigning a theoretical passenger to a drone).The following levels were selected for the operation of air taxis:safety standards comparable to motorcycles(approxi-mately 5 fatalities per billion passenger kilometres),cars(approximately 2)6,buses(approximately 0.05)7,and com-mercial aircraft(approximately 0.01)8.Motorcycles are widely regarded as an unsafe mode of transport,and commercial aircraft as one of the safest.NoiseFor the noise attribute,the following levels were selected to cover both the operation of drones and the operation of air taxis:volume of a leaf blower(over 90 dB,unbearable),volume of a truck driving by at city speed(roughly 82 dB,disturbing),volume of a car driving by at city speed(approximately 65 dB,noticeable),and volume of a bicycle riding by at city speed(around 57 dB,barely noticeable).By comparing scenarios to an example from everyday life,participants can imagine the background noise;moreover,the decibel indication can be used to inform a noise specification.For the first and loudest level,a noise was selected that is quite common in urban environments but not permanently conceivable as background noise.For the last level,a noise was selected that is not disturbing but still realistic for drones and air taxis.5 https:/ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/de/qanda_20_10046 Eurostat7 Eurostat8 Eurostat56A study on the societal acceptance of Urban Air Mobility in Europe8A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 568A0846_Report_Spreads_210518_Langversion.indd 5619.05.2021 12:56:2319.05.2021 12:56:23Figure 28:Stakeholder interviewee overview28Stakeholders interviewedLocal levelMayor and municipalities servicesLocal environmental protection associationsLocal traffic and transport authorityLocal resident association/Real-estate ownersEmergency response organizationLocal airport,local ATCLocal urban and city plannersLocal chamber of commerceLocal policeVisualsFor the visuals attribute,the following levels were selected for both the operation of drones and the operation of air taxis:more than 20 flying vehicles per hour in ones field of vision when walking down a street;around 10 vehicles;around 5 vehicles;and 1 or 2 vehicles.On a typical day and in a typical residential area,roughly 1 to 2 aircraft per hour are visible in the sky today.Helicopters,too,can be seen flying above cities in Europe and hospital pads are estimated to be busy at 1 to 2 landings per hour.The last level is chosen as a realistic lower limit.Multiplying this number by 20 for the first level amounts to a massive change from today but is in the range of the projected number of drones in urban areas in 2025.Questions B8 and C8 in the Appendix ultimately serve to find upper and lower limits for the overall acceptance rate.For this purpose,the acceptance rate(without comparison or choice)for the bundle o
2025-04-01
162页
5星级
An ER&D perspective on the future of E-MobilityVEHICLEELECTRIFICATIONReach us at infoLTTS.comLife,as the saying goes,is a journey.And,what defines this journey?It must comprise of movement the vital indicator of progress and success.The defining term,therefore,is“mobility.”History indicates that the growth of humanity has centered on being mobile.For eons,this was dependent on physical power,whether sourced from animals or humans,or natural sources like the wind.But ever since the first wheel rolled from point A to B,movement has been driving our search for growth,progress,and all that what makes us the inheritors of the earth.About a little over a 150 years ago,we awoke to the possibility of a new mode of mobility the internal combustion engine.Since then,this technological marvel has become the mainstay of transportation transforming and redefining our journey forward.The scenario,however,is evolving.Worldwide,the availability and use of fossil fuel is under stress.The diminishing supplies of this nonrenewable resource,combined with the impact of rising carbon emissions,poses a major challenge for our common future and is under increasing scrutiny.As global concerns around sustainability and environment protection mount,the focus,therefore,is on electric mobility.And hence the current book on vehicle electrification,presenting a global Engineering Research&Development(ER&D)perspective on electric mobility.Latest trends indicate that a streamlined and effective transition toward electric vehicles(EVs)features high on the agenda of governments,local authorities,automotive OEMs,and the global mobility industry.With growing public interest,higher levels of technological progress and innovation,and significant investment outlays,we will witness an exponential improvement in the quality,usability,and performance of EVs across the board.While vehicle electrification and the subsequent operationalization of EVs is yet to scale to masses.,the forward momentum does not show any signs of abatement.The global demand for EVs has already started making a mark for itself,and several nations are witnessing mid-to-high double digit growth patterns.Studies also indicate that we may have already reached a tipping point in this direction,with growing EV adoption driving wider market acceptability,especially among the initial sceptics.FOREWORD1Reach us at infoLTTS.comCombined with globally synchronized taxation incentives and other benefits,vehicle costs are now moving steadily,but surely,toward greater affordability.In turn,this is driving further growth for the segment.Innovation in EV technologies,based on the development and expansion of charging infrastructure,is another key driver for the worldwide vehicle electrification paradigm,with the recent technologies not only helping optimize costs,but also ensuring security,reliability,and reach.At L&T Technology Services,we are closely monitoring the global trends,and are focused on driving the Electric Autonomous and Connected Vehicle(EACV)transformation for helping build a sustainable future.EACV is a leading constituent of our 6 Big Bets,and has gained significant traction among our global customers and partners.The paradigm is further supported by focused investment initiatives across LTTS centers in state-of-the-art lab infrastructure,industry-leading electric-mobility reference designs and solutions,and world-class ER&D capabilities spanning the automotive,off highway,commercial,and light vehicle segments.We are engineering the change for a better tomorrow,leveraging our end-to-end capabilities,rapid turnaround capacities,and domain expertise and maturity.Team LTTS continues to redefine the emerging frontiers of the EV story,and the gearshift ahead is set to be electrifying!Shailendra Shrivasatva,Chief Delivery Officer,L&T Technology Services2TABLE OFCONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEM THE GLOBAL MARKET LANDSCAPE The multi-faceted stakeholder ecosystem Factors driving the global EV market HOW STAKEHOLDER ECOSYSTEMS IMPACT ELECTRIFICATION The rise of favorable regulations and policies The realization of sustainability and green mobility goals The role of ecosystem partnerships ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITY ADDRESSING VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION CHALLENGES How LTTS addresses electrification challenges THE ONE-STOP SHOP!LTTS portfolio of end-to-end electrification expertise5232830313189111316161920SECTION 1SECTION 2SECTION 3 LTTS IS COMMITTED TO INNOVATION AND SAFETY Investments in innovation eVOLTTS:LTTS pathbreaking EV platform An in-depth understanding of EV safety and standards ecosystem Industry leaders endorse LTTS electrification capabilities ELECTRIFICATION SUCCESS STORIES Case study 1 Modular application design kit for DC fast electric vehicle charger Case study 2 Integrated inverter DC-DC converter Case study 3 Feasibility analysis for on-board charger THE WAY FORWARD REFERENCES3533333937414243444547SECTION 4SECTION 5SECTION 6TABLE OFCONTENTSSUMMARYSECTION 1As the pace of electric mobility accelerates,the global automotive industry is undergoing a significant transformation.While old challenges persist,new opportunities beckon.Evolving customer demand patterns are driving car ownership and vehicle mileage,while the urban agglomerations are grappling with traffic congestion,emission,and pedestrian safety.The automotive industry is responding with technology-driven innovations that are redefining the frontiers of electric-powered transportation.Concepts such as mobility-as-a-service,smart traffic management,and freight-sharing are therefore no longer merely drawings but a sign of the times to come.Over the last few years,electrified urban transportation has witnessed By 2025,plug-in vehicles will constitute 23%of global passenger vehicle sales.3 out of 4 of those vehicles will be fully electric.a combination of technological advancements,policy changes,and automaker investments.In 2021,electric car sales doubled to reach a new record of 6.6 million.By the end of H1 2022,a total of 4.3 million new EVs were already delivered.This has brought the total number of electric vehicles on global roads to more than 20 million.The portfolio of electric vehicle models on offer from the most prominent manufacturers have continued to expand.Battery technology,charging infrastructure,and e-powertrain technologies witnessed innovative initiatives.All this happened amidst a global pandemic,withstanding and exceeding the impact of the lockdowns and the subsequent economic disruption.SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYReach us at infoLTTS.com6The European Union is the global frontrunner in the adoption of electric vehicles(EVs):its member countries are responsible for more than a quarter of the worlds EV production,and EVs represented roughly 20 percent of its new-car sales in 2021.However,reaching the goal of 230 million electric vehicles on the roads by 2030,the vision laid out by the IEA Sustainable Development Scenario,remains a challenge.While there have been noteworthy fiscal incentives to encourage electric light-duty vehicles(LDVs),a broader industry-wide synergy is the need of the hour for mass market adoption.Consumer subsidies and tax rebates have been around for many years.These efforts,which were intended to put electric vehicle pricing on pace with conventional vehicle price,have almost plateaued.Norway has had such policies since the 1990s,the US since 2008,and China since 2014.Their impact,however,was limited.Today,the implementation of stricter standards around fuel economy and carbon emissions are leading the conversation.With over 85%of global car sales held to these standards,it is the logical next step.However,in the long term,the industry needs full integration of connectivity in power systems,reliable recharging infrastructure,sustainable batteries,low-carbon electricity,and prioritized safety standards.When all these elements operate together,the true vision of electrified mobility can be achieved.This e-book dives deeper into these moving parts of the EV ecosystem and discusses short-and long-term solutions for accelerating EV production and adoption.SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYReach us at infoLTTS.com7SECTION 2EV ECOSYSTEMThe declared targets for net-zero emissions and electric vehicle proliferation around the world are impressive.The European Union and the United States alone are aiming for at least 50%electric vehicle share by 2030.Many other countries worldwide plan to phase out Internal Combustion Engine(ICE)sales between 2030 and 2035.Automobile manufacturers around the world are already stopping investments in new ICE models.More than 120 countries are working on net-zero emission pledges that will change the outlook of urban vehicle fleets.THE GLOBALMARKET LANDSCAPEOver the next3 decades,more than 20 countries will phase out ICE car sales.All these advancements are being fueled by increased R&D spending worldwide.The automotive industry has witnessed a 6.5%rise in R&D spending in FY 22.The primary focus of this spending has been on electric powertrains and vehicular software.With many moving parts shaping the electric vehicle landscape,R&D investments are paving the way for a brighter and cleaner future.SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEMReach us at infoLTTS.com9The future of mobility is being driven by the mass adaptation of Electric Vehicles.While much of the current focus seems to be on developing accessible charging infrastructure,the evolution,and maturity of key EV components 4-in-1 axles,battery chemistries and new materials,battery aging prediction algorithms,fast and smart chargers compliant with OCPP and ISO 15118 standards,and improved thermal management will accelerate the pace of EV adoption worldwide.Yograj Verma,Head Vehicle Electrification,L&T Technology ServicesNorwayDenmarkIcelandIrelandIsraelNetherlandsScotlandSingaporeSloveniaSwedenUK2025204520502030SwedenFranceCanadaPortugalSpainSri Lanka20402035Cabo VerdeChinaJapanUKCanadaChileEUFijiKoreaNew ZealandNorwayUKCosta RicaGermany100%electrified sales100%ZEV sales100%ZEV stockNet-zero pledgeICE*BANS ORELECTRIFICATIONTARGETSNET-ZEROPLEDGE*Internal Combustion EngineMore than 20 countries have electrification targets or ICE bans for cars,and 8 countries plus the European Union have announced net-zero pledges.Reach us at infoLTTS.comSECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEMTHE GLOBAL MARKET LANDSCAPE10The multi-faceted stakeholder ecosystemThere is an overhaul underway across the global vehicle electrification landscape.Evolving customer expectations are seeing traditional manufacturers adopt new capabilities,whereas new players are taking up emerging roles to fulfill the need for new electric vehicle platforms.A strong focus on EV capabilities is changing how OEMs and other players operate.While some OEMs are building electric vehicles on existing internal combustion engine platforms,consumer demands are driving the need for new skill sets and technologies,including the move to new-age EV platforms.New partnerships are being forged to navigate the evolving landscape.EMERGING ROLES&PRIORITIES IN THE VEHICLEELECTRIFICATION DOMAINPowertrainDevelopmentChargingManagement&ControlPowertrain&Tyre TechnologyBattery&CellDevelopmentBattery ChargingSystemsEV ChargingSolutionsE2E ChargingServicesCompatibleInfrastructureBatteryManagementAnalyticsSmart GridCharging SystemE-PowertrainIntegrationDrivetrain&Axle systemPowerElectronics&SoCPowerModule ChipGrid-scaleBatteriesCustomizedChipsetsCharging&Battery DesignDevelopPowerGridPRIORITYPARTNERSHIPS FOCUSMARKET PLAYOEMTier-1Tier-2StartupsSemiconductorsInfrastructureCompaniesReach us at infoLTTS.com11SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEMTHE GLOBAL MARKET LANDSCAPEIncreasingly,the focus of electric vehicle manufacturers is shifting tofour key areas,viz.,New-age platforms that offer more efficiency than the traditional IC engine platformsBattery systemsAdvanced battery technologies that offer safety,efficiency,and improved rangeEV platformsFast charging technologies that offer quick time-to-charge,increased capacity,and interoperabilityCharging systemsReach us at infoLTTS.com12SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEMTHE GLOBAL MARKET LANDSCAPEE-powertrainPowertrain component development that offers scalability,packaging,and testingOver the last decade,significant investments have been made on technology advancements in the industry.Automotive technology innovation is reducing the cost of electric vehicles and making electric shared mobility a reality.Factors driving the global EV marketWhile evolving consumer awareness and behavior patterns are driving the industry to adopt sustainable mobility models,there are several other factors at play.With industry experts,policymakers and technology developers running concerted efforts to improve the uptake of electric vehicles around the world,here are some of the key drivers shaping the EV market.Technology EvolutionDeployed across the entire value chain,technology has the potential to make traditional processes more efficient and to make modern equipment manufacturing mainstream.Reach us at infoLTTS.com13SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEMTHE GLOBAL MARKET LANDSCAPEThe future of the global EV landscape will depend upon smarter and more efficient battery technology.While the current focus is on battery health,safety,thermals,and management,we will soon see a marked shift toward increasing focus on next-gen technologies around self-healing algorithms for charging management.ER&D services will play a key role in enabling this transformation on a worldwide scale.Vasu MSenior Architect,L&T Technology ServicesReach us at infoLTTS.com14SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEMTHE GLOBAL MARKET LANDSCAPEcapacity over 8 years.These provisions have been developed by the UN Global Technical Regulation(GTR)to ensure the durability of batteries.Legal instruments such as this can boost the environmental performance of electric vehicles.They can also help remove consumer doubts about the long-term viability of their electric vehicle investments.The acceleration of charging infrastructure can remove significant bottlenecks that discourage consumer adoption of electric vehicles.The availability of public charging will drive the next generation of electric vehicle buyers.Moreover,these facilities will have to be affordable and convenient.While governments are providing direct investments towards this,public buildings need revision of building codes to allow charging points and wall boxes.In addition,many countries are diverting national economic recovery investments toward public charging infrastructure to meet demand-based coverage.Low-quality batteries with a small range are the main reason behind continuing consumer mistrust of the capacity and range of electric vehicles.However,notable changes are coming that aim to rectify this.In a concerted international effort by the US,EU,UK,China,Japan,Canada,Republic of Korea,and Northern Ireland,manufacturers will be required to ensure that electric vehicle batteries lose less than 20%of initial capacity over 5 years,and less than 30%of initial The EU hasallocated EUR 20 billion from its EUR 750 billion stimulus package towards boosting cleanvehicle sales and charging stations.Charging InfrastructureReach us at infoLTTS.com15SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEMTHE GLOBAL MARKET LANDSCAPEDrastic changes to the supply chain during the COVID-19 pandemic has led component manufacturers to implement innovative methods to offset falling revenues.In addition,new ways of working and partnerships will help OEMs alleviate the pressure that electrification will bring.Indeed,the entire supply chain is undergoing significant disruption to meet the rising demand for electric automotive components.Traditional component demand will witness a significant decline,and manufacturers must be prepared.Supply Chain Ecosystems By 2030,electrification components such as batteries,electric drives,and sensors will comprise 52%of the market size.Consumer pull towards electric vehicles and the global sustainability agenda are encouraging governments to adopt different strategies for mass adoption.For instance,the EU prioritizes high subsidies in a regulation driven market.China witnesses strong consumer interest despite insignificant incentives for Regulatory Pressures individuals and corporations.The US has seen prolonged electric vehicle growth due to negligible regulations or consumer interest,though that is now starting to change.Different regional strategies will lead to different global outcomes that the industry must be prepared to maneuver.HOW STAKEHOLDER ECOSYSTEMSIMPACT ELECTRIFICATION The deployment of electric vehicles can be incentivized through favorable policies at the local,regional,or federal levels.Direct financial assistance is now a policy of the past.Whats needed now is a combination of fiscal incentives,including,reduced import duties,tax rebates,and credits.These would need to be supplemented by revitalized regulations to offset the upfront cost of purchasing an electric vehicle over a conventional one.This includes the reduction of vehicle ownership costs.By reducing vehicle registration fees,electric vehicle parking fees,or innovative tariff designs,policymakers can make electric vehicles more attractive to the vehicle owners and operators.Policymakers must also think beyond the immediate span of financial policies.Owning a vehicle has many elements and caveats,underscoring the importance of non-financial regulations.This means policymakers must focus on fuel economy standards and zero-emission vehicle mandates that impact manufacturers and utility providers.In addition,stimulating demand for electric vehicles can be accomplished with preferred parking,electric lanes,and other policies that build an enabling environment.Utility industries,such as power generation,have a role to play as well.For instance,customer-friendly electricity tariffs can shape the electric vehicle market.Offering optimized tariffs for electric vehicle owners to charge their vehicles at home during low-demand times-of-day can go a long way in creating sustainable infrastructure.The importance of utility industries for building charging infrastructure cannot be underestimated.An ecosystem of trained professionals skilled in electric vehicles is another overlooked area.For electric vehicles to become mainstream,there must be an adequate supply of affordable mechanics and technicians who can troubleshoot issues.In addition,inexpensive maintenance,24/7 emergency response,and an accessible marketplace for buying or selling electric vehicles are necessary.These can be encouraged through effective policies that develop the workforce and provide relevant education.The rise of favorableregulations and policies Reach us at infoLTTS.com16SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEMKEY ACTIONS THAT POLICYMAKERS MUST TAKE FORFAVORABLE ELECTRIC VEHICLE ECOSYSTEMS:Optimized tariffs thatbalance customer and gridrequirements withcharging infrastructureUnique and contextualfinancial and non-financialpolicies that take userneeds into considerationStudy barriers and deviseuser-friendly policies thatmake ownership of electricvehicles easier Bridge workforce gaps tosupport the deployment,maintenance,and upkeepof electric vehiclesThe deployment of electric vehicles can be incentivized through favorable policies at the local,regional,or federal levels.Direct financial assistance is now a policy of the past.Whats needed now is a combination of fiscal incentives,including,reduced import duties,tax rebates,and credits.These would need to be supplemented by revitalized regulations to offset the upfront cost of purchasing an electric vehicle over a conventional one.This includes the reduction of vehicle ownership costs.By reducing vehicle registration fees,electric vehicle parking fees,or innovative tariff designs,policymakers can make electric vehicles more attractive to the vehicle owners and operators.Policymakers must also think beyond the immediate span of financial policies.Owning a vehicle has many elements and caveats,underscoring the importance of non-financial regulations.This means policymakers must focus on fuel economy standards and zero-emission vehicle mandates that impact manufacturers and utility providers.In addition,stimulating demand for electric vehicles can be accomplished with preferred parking,electric lanes,and other policies that build an enabling environment.Utility industries,such as power generation,have a role to play as well.For instance,customer-friendly electricity tariffs can shape the electric vehicle market.Offering optimized tariffs for electric vehicle owners to charge their vehicles at home during low-demand times-of-day can go a long way in creating sustainable infrastructure.The importance of utility industries for building charging infrastructure cannot be underestimated.An ecosystem of trained professionals skilled in electric vehicles is another overlooked area.For electric vehicles to become mainstream,there must be an adequate supply of affordable mechanics and technicians who can troubleshoot issues.In addition,inexpensive maintenance,24/7 emergency response,and an accessible marketplace for buying or selling electric vehicles are necessary.These can be encouraged through effective policies that develop the workforce and provide relevant education.Governments and cities around the world are introducing policies to accelerate the acceptance of electric mobility.For instance,the Fit for 55 program in Europe aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55%by 2030.The Biden administration in the US is targeting a 50%shift to electric vehicles by 2030.The city of Paris is investing EUR 292 million to revamp its bicycle lanes and add 50 kilometers of new lanes.Offering support to alternative mobility such as bicycles and electric vehicles is becoming an effective way to achieve low emissions and prevent climate catastrophes.Reach us at infoLTTS.com17SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEM.IMPACT ELECTRIFICATIONThe alignment of policies around energy,land use,transportation,climate,and taxation are the only ways to achieve CURRENT ZERO-EMISSION LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE POLICIES ANDINCENTIVES IN SELECTED COUNTRIES*Indicates that it is only implemented at state/provincial/local level.*All countries/regions in the table have developed basic standards for electric vehicle supply equipment(EVSE).China,European Union and India mandate specific minimum standards,while Canada,Japan and United States do not.*Historically,Canada and the United States have aligned emission standards for on-road light-duty vehicles.In April 2020 the United States adopted a final rule to reduce the annual stringency conditions for the 2021-2026 model years.Soon after,Canada finalised its mid-term evaluation of the Passenger Automobile and Light Truck GHG Emissions regulation,indicating a potential separation from the US ruling,pending further consultation.Indicates that the policy is set at national level.Notes:g CO2/km-grammes of carbon dioxide per kilometre;L/100 km-litres per 100 kilometres:CAFE-Corporate Average Fuel Economy test cycle used in the United States and Canada fuel economy and GHG emissions tests;NEDC-New European Driving Cycle;WLTP=Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicle Test Procedure;WLTP Japan=WLTP adjusted for slower driving conditions in Japan.Building regulations imply an obligation to install chargers in new construction and renovations.Charger incentives include direct investment and purchase incentives for public and private charging.RegulationsvehiclesIncentivesvehiclesRegulationschargers*ZEVmandateFiscalincentivesIncentiveschargersFiscalincentivesHardwarestandardsBuildingregulationsFuel economystandards(most recentfor cars)114 g CO2/kmor 5.4 L/100 km*(2021,CAFE)117 g CO2/kmor 5.0 L/100 km(2020,NEDC)95 g CO2/kmor 4.1 L/100 km(2021,petrol,NEDC)134 g CO2/kmor 5.2 L/100 km(2022,NEDC)134 g CO2/kmor 5.2 L/100 km(2022,NEDC)114g CO2/Kmor 5.4 L/100 Km*(2021,CAFE)British Columbia:10%ZEV sales by 2025,30%by EV 2030&100%by 2040Quebec:9.5%EV credits in 2020,22%in 2025California:22%EV credits by 2025Other states:Varied betwen 10 statesNew Energy Vehicle dual credit system:10-12%EV credits in 2019-2020&14-18%in 2021-2023.Canada China EU India Japan US*Reach us at infoLTTS.com18SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEM.IMPACT ELECTRIFICATIONsuch objectives.Heres what other countries are working towards:As climate change represents humankinds most significant challenge,reducing greenhouse gas emissions is an unequivocal way to avert disaster.Lowering emissions to net-zero by 2050 will prevent the irreversible damage of global warming.For the automotive industry,this implies that change must be underfoot today.Therefore,achieving 100%electric vehicle sales by 2035 is a worthy objective in the passenger vehicle sector.To ensure that the situations urgency is acknowledged,all stakeholders in the value chain must work together.For countries aiming to reduce carbon emissions and footprints,emission-free mobility is non-negotiable.With technology and mechanical innovation,electric vehicles can perform just as well as conventional vehicles concerning distance and speed.In addition,publicly available charging stations can increase the range of distance per charge that vehicles cover.Favorable policies are also vital in aligning the industry and delivering affordability.Electric vehicles can meet the diverse needs of all kinds of road drivers,irrespective of the distance they drive or the frequency at which they travel.At the same time,electric vehicles can enhance savings by reducing rising fuel expenditure,lowering monthly electricity bills,The realization of sustainability and green mobility goalsReach us at infoLTTS.com19SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEM.IMPACT ELECTRIFICATIONFossil fuel-poweredtransportationaccounted for of CO2emissions in 2021.and preventing frequent trips to the service station.Electric vehicles play a vital role in improving air quality in urban areas.With no smog-forming tailpipe emissions to breathe in,citizens can enjoy better health.They suffer fewer respiratory infections and heart diseases.Electric vehicles also offer equity not just in terms of public health but also in terms of accessibility,environmental benefits,and economic rebates.Moreover,as new electric vehicle sales rise,second-hand electric vehicles will proliferate in the market.Hence,more people across the board will get access to clean cars,fresh air,and affordable mobility.The fleet of electric vehicles is coming.The decarbonization of the transport sector is just the first of many steps that lead to industry transformation.Entire ecosystems of transport,energy,and infrastructure are now being revamped to make the vision of electric mobility a feasible reality.Existing stakeholders,and new entrants,have a tremendous opportunity to become vital contributors to a multi-billion-dollar industry and millions of new jobs.So long as technology and economic viability go hand-in-hand,sustainable electric mobility will become a reality for all.Now,more than ever before,stakeholders in the electrification industry need an ER&D partner that is capable of delivering across the value chain and understands each of the key parameters in the EV ecosystem.Approaching separate vendors for product conceptualization,design and development,testing,maintenance,manufacturing support,and after-sales support increases complexity and costs.The days of multi-vendor partnerships look consigned to the past.The need is for an ideal ER&D partner that can reduce speed to market and deliver high-quality performance and scalability of electrification components.ER&D partners that drive co-innovation with transportation enterprises can help stakeholders overcome technology constraints and apply cross-industry learnings.The role of ecosystem partnerships Reach us at infoLTTS.com20SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEM.IMPACT ELECTRIFICATIONHOW PARTNERSHIPS WILL DRIVE THENEXT FRONTIER OF ELECTRIC MOBILITYReduced profitabilityPeople,technology,and infrastructure are expensive investments Rising customer expectations Innovation cycles are shorter and production timelines are squeezed Technology integrationCapability gap due to multi-industry technologiesthat leads to delays Geo-specific regulations Inconsistent experiences due to different requirements and geo-policiesLow entry barriers Stagnating revenue due to the entry of new players into the value chainCost reductionFlexible and scalable offerings that are customizedFaster innovationPlug-and-play solutions that can be deployed easilyMulti-disciplinary expertiseSkilled tech support proficient with end-to-end technology Localized support Global delivery centers that offer compliance support New revenue streams By leveraging data to monetize new opportunities and partnersSOLUTIONCHALLENGEReach us at infoLTTS.com21SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEM.IMPACT ELECTRIFICATIONThe need for software-led electric mobility solutions is leading ecosystem stakeholders to pursue high performance computing platforms.ER&D partners can provide computing models that consume less energy,boost performance and optimize data-led algorithms.In addition,they can deliver scalable software stacks that leverage sensors and physical components to provide the safety and performance that electric vehicles need.ER&D partners can also help redefine focus areas with software for ensuring third-party integration,feature deployment,CloudOps,and fast over-the-air updates.In addition,the rising complexity in technology embedded within electric vehicles demands software-defined designs,one that can overcome multi-layered challenges ranging from software development,to deployment and maintenance.Reach us at infoLTTS.com22SECTION 2 THE EVOLVING EV ECOSYSTEM.IMPACT ELECTRIFICATIONSECTION 3NEXTGENE-MOBILITYSECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYWith industry-leading experience in redefining engineering possibilities for global customers,LTTS provides multi-domain and multi-vertical expertise as an engineering partner.The Company specializes in bringing engineering ideas to reality.The company has engineered many firsts across product categories-from AI-based radiology assist solutions to dual touchscreen Android smartphones.LTTS is a technology partner for a sustainable tomorrow.Operating in more than 25 countries and with more than 20,000 skilled employees,LTTS is a leader across the product development lifecycle across industries.Leveraging multi-vertical expertiseContinued investmentin new-age technologiesState-of-the-artresearch and testing labsKEY DIFFERENTIATORSTranslating innovationto engineering Leveraging pre-builtaccelerators and solutions Reach us at infoLTTS.com24The EV industry needs a well-balancedcombination of engineering expertise and transportation domain experience from an ER&D partner to meet the core electrification goals.Technology and innovation at LTTS are driven by CrossPoll!nnovation.By leveraging its expertise across different sectors,LTTS helps reduce time to market and drive innovation in the electrification domain.The Company operates in transportation,medical and life sciences,hi-tech and telecom,plant engineering,and industrial products;best practices from each vertical drive success in each other.SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITY.MEET THE CORE ELECTRIFICATION GOALSWE KEEP OUR PROMISES 343 GLOBAL CLIENTSWITH 90%REPEAT BUSINESSCrossPoll!nnovationPlantEngineeringHi-Tech,Telecom&MediaTransportationMedicalIndustrialProductsReach us at infoLTTS.com25For instance,autonomous welding robots from industrial products are used for product engineering.Working across verticals in this manner fuels innovation and productivity.Thanks to CrossPoll!nnovation,LTTS is helping unlock value across emerging technologies on the global landscape.LTTS Transportation PracticeReach us at infoLTTS.com26SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITY.MEET THE CORE ELECTRIFICATION GOALSThe transportation practice at LTTS is gearing up for a shift toward electric mobility.It is one of LTTS six big bets for the next decade,and reflects the companys vision for transforming the technology-defined roadmap of the future.LTTS has well-established alliances within the transport ecosystem and is a recognized leader in driving cutting-edge in-house reference designs,tools,and frameworks.With its cross-functional expertise forming the core,the Companys engineers are equipped with the credentials,capabilities,and skill-sets to drive,define,and deliver global electric mobility initiatives.OUR TRANSPORTATIONPRACTICE SNAPSHOTOurCredentials15 State ofthe Art Labs20 Years ofExperienceProductmaintenanceTesting&certification Productconceptualization Product&ValueEngineeringManufacturingSupport Design&development Whatwe doAftermarketSupport Reach us at infoLTTS.com27SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITY.MEET THE CORE ELECTRIFICATION GOALSSegmentswe serveAutomotive8of Top 10CV&Off-Highway4of Top 58of Top 10AerospaceOurclientelecar sales,production halts,and lack of shared mobility.These problems were further exacerbated in 2020,especially with the cascading impact of the global chip shortages.The automotive industry is a significant contributor to jobs and economic production globally.However,the industry is amidst a transformation,with emerging global trends redefining the boundaries of operational and market excellence.Automakers are reeling from the effects of COVID-19 and juggling the rising demand for electric mobility.With workforce regulations leading to the shutdown of manufacturing units and the slowdown of production plans,the industry is in revival and resurgence at the same time.The scenario is compounded by the evolving customer demand patterns around a need for high power density and efficiency for expanding the reach and reliability of existing electrical engines.Companies are focusing on addressing the shifting expectations on efficiency,while actively exploring areas for cost optimizations across the value chain.With safety and compliance requirements gaining center stage worldwide,there is an urgent need for a reliable engineering and technology partner for helping unlock value for all key stakeholders in the global electrical automotive ecosystem.The years before the pandemic were fraught with challenges owing to lowered ADDRESSING VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION CHALLENGES Embracing new technology transitionsThrough new concepts or electrification of existing platformsNavigating around design constraintsTo redesign architecture for electric vehicle systemsStreaming integrationsTo overcome the complexity of electronics and softwareAdopting reliable validation and testing servicesThrough advanced testing infrastructure and methodologies from leading global ER&D majorsWith electric mobility becoming a globalpriority,automotive companies are:Reach us at infoLTTS.com28SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYCHALLENGESSEGMENTConsumerCostpremiumover ICEProductprofitability&differentiationFiscal andnon-fiscalincentivesTime tomarketRapidscalabilityUniformexperienceRangeanxietyCharginginfrastructure&timeTechnicalspecifications&needsCharginginfrastructure&maintenanceUpfrontand energycostsCost&infrastructureconcernsSystem safety&reliabilityTechnologydemands Regulations&certifications Operationaldurability&lifeFragmentedglobaladoptionShort-haulaviationpreference 2&3-wheelers&PowersportsvehiclesCommercial&off-highwayvehiclesAutomotiveAviationProductReach us at infoLTTS.com29mainstream electrification uptake has a long way to go.LTTS caters to the unique needs of each segment to accelerate the penetration of electric vehicles.Operating across diverse automotive segments,LTTS is equipped to address sector-specific behavioral and regulatory challenges.Despite rising demand,SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITY.ELECTRIFICATION CHALLENGESHow LTTS addresses electrification challengesReach us at infoLTTS.com30PLUG&PLAYSOLUTIONSBATTERYEFFICIENCYFEASIBILITYASSURANCE REFERENCEDESIGNSLIFECYCLEMANAGEMENTWhat ourcustomers needOurApproachWhat wedeliverRe-usableSolutionsEffectiveComponentDesignFlexible EVCharger DesignOptimize Miles/Charge8 ReferenceE2E DesignsReferenceArchitecturesand PoCHardware PrototypingBattery ModelingIncrease Re-utilizationCost EffectiveAgileImplementationRe-usable AlgorithmsReduce Re-design&ErrorsEffectiveFeasibilityChecksEnd-to-EndPLMCustomized InterfaceFaster SoftwareIntegration GUI Enabled System&Module TestingStandardizationand SafetyLTTS ADROIT(TestingAutomation)ValueEngineeringCertified SafetySpecialistsLTTS SafeXTM(CI/CDBuild Automation)LTAG-AUTOSAR xmlASPICE&FUSA CoEFaster EVSoftware TestingEasy andCost-EffectiveUpgradeVersatile InterfacingProductivityImprovementFasterIntegrationHomogenousRoll-outSECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITY.ELECTRIFICATION CHALLENGESLTTS provides end-to-end e-mobility development with a strong focus on electrification.Thanks to its expertise in delivering silicon to security services,LTTS can accelerate development cycles and enable seamless technology THE ONE-STOP SHOP!LTTS portfolio of end-to-end electrification expertise integration.In addition,reusable designs reduce error costs and provide superior outcomes in the electrification domain.This means that LTTS understands electrification needs of all types and delivers on them.OUR VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION PRACTICE SNAPSHOT OUR ELECTRIFICATION EXPERTISEPowerElectronicsVehicleLightweightingE-PowertrainEV DomainControls&SoftwareCharging&EnergyManagementBatteryManagementVehicleElectricalsThermalManagementSystemsIntegrationSECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYReach us at infoLTTS.com31CORE EXPERTISE INVEHICLE ELECTRIFICATIONReach us at infoLTTS.com32E-powertrainIntegrated development of modular and compact HV components/systems for e-motor and Drive Vehicle electricalsComprehensive design and development services from schematics to prototyping Domain controlsand softwareExtensive domain expertise in the design and development of control software/algorithms Power electronicsHolistic development of efficient,compact,and robust electronics systemsThermal managementProven expertise in addressing the unique thermal management challengesCharging andenergy managementEnd-to-end development of systems and solutions supporting charging technologiesBattery management Complete end-to-end design,development,and validation of HV battery packsVehicle light-weighting Driving value innovation through comprehensive and end-to-end vehicle light-weighting expertiseSystems integrationUnique multi-disciplinary integration expertise leveraging cross-domain capabilities SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYTHE ONE STOP SHOPInvesting in innovation is a crucial priority for LTTS.For the company to continue driving transformation that helps people,its industry-leading global state-of-the-art R&D labs bring engineering ideas to life.Concerning electrification,LTTS uses its R&D labs to build electric vehicles from the ground up.Dedicated CoEs focus on power electronics,functional safety,andLTTS IS COMMITTED TOINNOVATION AND SAFETYInvestments in innovationhardware and software accelerators.Reusable reference platforms allow LTTS customers to leverage the precise technology they need.Fast-tracking electric vehicle transitions demandR&D partners with expertise in building and testing prototypes,and LTTS has advanced frameworks for each requirement.IN-HOUSE STATE-OF-THE-ART LABSElectric Vehicle LabEV Components/Systems:performance,endurance,and functional testingHigh-power dyno capabilityEV component testing with HILPower Electronics LabSystem Evaluation&QualificationTesting of drives LTTS BENGALURULTTS MUMBAIReach us at infoLTTS.com33SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYTeardown&ProductEngineering Lab Competition BenchmarkingVAVE&Cost/Weight optimizationElectrical Harness LabHarness Evaluation and TestingQuality Electronic Testing ofProduction harnessesAutomotive LabSystem Integration,Validation andTesting for Automotive Sub-Systems Automotive CenterVehicle design,validation,and testingVirtual Simulation for ProcessEfficiency ImprovementLTTS VADODARALTTS,PEORIA,ILLTTS,MUNICH LTTS,DUBLIN,OHReach us at infoLTTS.com34SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITY.INNOVATION AND SAFETYeVOLTTS is an in-house developed electric vehicle platform that leverages the end-to-end engineering capabilities of LTTS.The learnings gained during development enables the company deliver faster time to market,modular systems and architecture,and customized re-usable components for electric vehicle manufacturers.eVOLTTS is scalable across all vehicle segments,making it the ideal blueprint for EVOLTTS:LTTS PATHBREAKING EV PLATFORMSECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYElectric Autonomous and Connected Vehicles(EACV)is one of LTTS key6 Big Bets which will drive innovation and growth in the future.As part of our EACV growth story,the LTTS proprietary e-VOLTTS platform designed for next-generation electric vehicles along with an EV Lab and in-house autonomous drive platform is helping script the next chapter of LTTS growth story in transportation.Platforms such as e-VOLTTS,combined with our domain expertise in this exciting segment,will help us to further consolidate our position as a one-stop leading engineering services player for e-mobility solutions with expertise ranging from build to specification definition to vehicle level integration.Reach us at infoLTTS.com35e-mobility solutions.It utilizes a range of innovative solutions,including integrated inverter,DC-DC Converter,eAXLE transmission,onboard charger,traction motor,modular battery pack and management system,and the Vehicle Control Unit.Most of these solutions have been developed in-house by LTTS engineers leveraging cutting-edge infrastructure and access to industry-leading partnerships.KEY FEATURESAUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION3 drive modes SOS mode23.5 KWH Battery160 KM Range50 KWMax power140 NMMax torque1040 KGGross vehicleweightPRDNCOMPONENTS DEVELOPEDAccelerating EV DevelopmentEfficient batterysystemsHigh voltagepower electronicsIntegrated eAXLEand e-PowertrainEV centerconsoleChargingsystemsEV systemsintegrationThe vehicle electrification journey,however,will be incomplete without the availability of smart charging options.As an evolving paradigm,smart EV charging leverages artificial intelligence to manage when and how a vehicle plugged into a smart charger will receive power for charging,based on the cost of electricity,availability,and the projected needs of the driver.This is made possible by an underlying data network that connects the EV,its driver,and the charging operator to accurately assess and address power requirements.LTTS has developed its own smart charging solution with OCPP2.01 implementation,the capability for handling multiple charging profiles,and Vehicle-to-Grid(V2G)interface.The solution enables smart energy management and is equipped for load balancing and demand forecasting.Its charging station management system(CSMS)also provides advanced analytics and diagnostics for powering the future of the EV revolution.Smart Charging:Enabling the FutureReach us at infoLTTS.com36SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYLTTS PATHBREAKING EV PLATFORMThe growth of the electric vehicle market is influenced by the safety and environmental standards upheld by the ecosystem.Traditional incumbents and new entrants must all adhere to the same standards.Electric vehicle design and operation are more straightforward when universal standards are followed.As the industry is in its nascent phase,the opportunity for defining and implementing these standards remains.Electric vehicle production hubs in the US,Europe,China,and others follow regional laws and regulations for manufacturers.The laws stipulate safety and environmental guidelines,but they come into play once the vehicles have already been manufactured.The long-term vision must be to implement standards that govern pre-manufacturing tasks.At present,accredited bodies provide certifications for vehicles and their components.While there is some uniformity in these certifications,as the industry matures,certifications will make it more convenient to build electric vehicles.An in-depth understanding of EV safety and standards ecosystemReach us at infoLTTS.comSECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYLTTS PATHBREAKING EV PLATFORM37WE UNDERSTAND SAFETY&STANDARDSLTTS follows all the prevalent safety regulations and standards in the industry.In addition,the companys operational size gives it the flexibility to respond to changing regulations.With a commitment to user experience,here are the safety standards followed by LTTS:ISO 6469-3ISO 17409IEC 60664-1IEC 61851-1IEC 60068-2-2IEC 60068-2-14IEC 60068-2-30ISO 16750-4ISO 16750-1STANDARDS ADOPTEDBY EU COUNTRIESCERTIFICATIONCMMI L5 ASPICE ISO 27001STANDARDS ADOPTED BY CHINAGB/T 18384-3 GB/T 31498 GB/T 18487-1SAFETYISO 26262,SOTIF,ISO 21434,GTR 20,UN ECE R100 DEVELOPMENTMISRA,MAAB,AUTOSAREMC STANDARDSCISPR 25 STANDARDSSAE J2344SAE J1766STANDARDS ADOPTED BY USAFMVSS 305UL 840SAE J1772 CHAdeMOCCS type 1 CCS type 2 AC type 1 AC type 2AC GB/T DCGB/T CHARGING PROTOCOL&STANDARDSReach us at infoLTTS.com38SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYLTTS PATHBREAKING EV PLATFORMIndustry leaders endorse LTTS electrification capabilitiesAWARDS&RECOGNITIONS-EACVLTTS was recognized as Leader in Everest Group Autonomous,Connected,Electric,and Shared(ACES)Mobility Automotive Engineering Services Peak Matrix Assessment 2021LTTS was recognized as a Leader in Zinnov Automotive Engineering Services Ratings 2022LTTS was recognized as a Leader in Zinnov ER&D Services Vehicle Electrification Services Ratings 2022ANALYST RECOGNITIONSReach us at infoLTTS.com39SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYLTTS PATHBREAKING EV PLATFORMLTTS Trademarked SafeXTM CI/CD&DevOps Framework won Stevie International Business Award for Achievement in the Product Innovation categoryLTTS eVOLTTS Platform won Connected Car Platform of the Year award in Business Leadership Awards 2021 L&T Technology Services was recognized at the prestigious 13th Aegis Graham Bell Award for its industry-leading EV Charging InfrastructureAWARDSReach us at infoLTTS.com40SECTION 3 ENGINEERING NEXTGEN E-MOBILITYLTTS PATHBREAKING EV PLATFORMSECTION 4CAPABILITIESAT WORKSECTION 4 LTTS ELECTRIFICATION CAPABILITIES AT WORKCASE STUDY 1:MODULAR APPLICATION DESIGN KIT FOR DC FAST ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGERCUSTOMERGlobal tier-1 automotive manufacturer Product development forthe global marketScalable as per customer demands Speed to market and reusability ofelectric vehicle charger design RESULTScalableApproachableGlobal reachWas unable to create a vehicle system architecture Needed assistance with vehicle driving power and control systems Needed fast electric vehicle charger to be prototyped and tested The bidirectional rectifier enhanced vehicle power factorThe three-phase process to achieve higher efficiency standards State-of-the-art siliconchip packages SOLUTIONCHALLENGEReach us at infoLTTS.com42EuropeSECTION 4 LTTS ELECTRIFICATION CAPABILITIES AT WORKCASE STUDY 2:INTEGRATED INVERTERDC-DC CONVERTERCUSTOMERGlobal tier-1 automotive manufacturer Software for vehicle motor control and energy converter Needed a reliable thermal management control system Required vehicle controllerboard development Dual Active Bridge TopologyDC/DC Converter Sic MOSFETDiagnostics to determine safety concerns and faults Automotive AECqualified components SOLUTIONCHALLENGESpeed to market and reusabilityof converter design Wire harness and space reduction Improved and efficientthermal management RESULTBetter resultsAcceleratedReusableReach us at infoLTTS.com43NASECTION 4 LTTS ELECTRIFICATION CAPABILITIES AT WORKCASE STUDY 3:FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS FORON-BOARD CHARGERHigh-level fitment resultsin 6 weeks Design calculations to determinecomponent size and cost RESULTCost-effective$Better resultsAcceleratedSuggestions to meet efficiency targets Needed feasibility checks for vehicle fitments Needed hardware design needs assessment and vehicle circuit simulations Vehicle thermal management and control board design Power factor corrector used as a converter for 98 efficiency Dual-stage power filtersfor electro-mech needs Energy converters for awide power range SOLUTIONCHALLENGEReach us at infoLTTS.com44CUSTOMERGlobal Automotive OEMAPACSECTION 5FORWARDSECTION 5 THE WAY FORWARDBy 2025,the world will see a sharp rise in the number of electric vehicles in operation.While country and geo-variances will continue to exist,favorable policies and customer interest will drive the uptake.It is safe to say that the shift from push to pull is already underway.Customer demand is encouraging automakers to produce electric vehicles in large numbers and at affordable prices.This evolving paradigm can be witnessed in the growing interest around smart charging stations and grid,ultra-fast charging infrastructure,and vehicle to grid systems.The trend is strengthened by the growing adoption of digital twins in the EV ecosystem and renewed focus on optimizing battery performance including battery swapping and introduction of new battery material.With innovations like eAxle contributing to an acceleration of the forward momentum,we are possibly looking at a global tipping point.And indicators suggest that the tipping point may already be here.Manufacturers across the value chain now have an obligation to respond.If this means revamping existing business and sales models,so be it.If it means reshaping their workforce to adjust to the new reality of the auto industry,then so be it.There are several expansion opportunities for auto manufacturers and subsidiaries to capitalize on.In fact,the sale of electric vehicles directly to customers even has the potential to disrupt the traditional three-tier sales model in the industry.Auto manufacturers must not shy away from partnerships and competition at this time.A hesitant approach will leave them vulnerable to technology-driven new entrants,similar to how traditional financial institutions were left in the wake of innovative FinTech startups.Those who embrace vehicle electrification,connected services,and predictive maintenance will inevitably last longer.OEMs and affiliated manufacturers now have the opportunity to reimagine the automotive industry.Preparing for the complexity and size of the transition is half the battle won.LTTS is committed to helping you play a pivotal role in these transformative times.By betting big on innovation to shape the future of electric vehicles,we are equipped to be your ER&D partner of choice.Together,lets drive forward.Reach us at infoLTTS.com46SECTION 6REFERENCESInternational Energy Agency:Trends and developments in electric vehicle marketsMcKinsey&Company:Why the automotive future is electric International Energy Agency:Prospects for electric vehicle deployment International Energy Agency:Policies to promote electric vehicle deployment Economist Intelligence Unit:Automotive in 2022 Virta:Heres how EU legislation accelerates theEV revolution United Nations Economic Commission for Europe:Major auto markets join forces for draft UN legislation on electric vehicle battery durability European Commission:2030 climate target plan Reuters:Biden seeks to make half of new U.S.auto fleet electric by 2030 World Economic Forum:Paris plans to be completely cyclable by 2026 World Resources Institute:Everything you need to know about the fastest-growing source of global emissions:Transport BloombergNEF:Electric vehicle outlook 2022 International Energy Agency:Global EV outlook 2022 Reach us at infoLTTS.com47Copyright L&T Technology ServicesinfoLTTS.comwww.LTTS.comENGINEERING THE CHANGE
2025-04-01
49页
5星级
How digital innovation will impact the future of mobilityPhoto by Can Erdal Dsseldorf,KearneyIntrodu.
2025-04-01
13页
5星级
A business of Marsh McLennanNorth American Freight Rail PerformanceQ4 2024 Financial and Operations .
2025-04-01
31页
5星级
Space for growthWhy every company has a stake in the new space economy 2Space Economy Thought Leader.
2025-03-31
23页
5星级
Drake Star Securities LLC is regulated by FINRA and is a member of SIPC.All securities in the UK,are.
2025-03-27
25页
5星级
RAFIQ DOSSANI,MUSTAFA SAYED,UMAR FAROOQ,ZOHAN HASAN TARIQThe Religious Tourism Supply Chain Along th.
2025-03-13
57页
5星级
Revving Up Exports The Next Phase of Export Growth for the Auto Component IndustryMarch 2025Boston C.
2025-03-13
39页
5星级
W INT E R 20 252024 Year in Review/2025 OutlookLearn MoreUS defense budget prioritized critical next-gen capabilities to deter and defeat near-peer adversaries,with a likely final round of funding for UkraineContinued growth in commercial air travel,albeit at a slower pace than in prior cyclesIncreased air travel and delays in new aircraft deliveries drove strong demand for aftermarket parts and servicesGrowth in DoD and global defense budgets in the wake of heightened security threats and continued global unrestAircraft deliveries declined due to ongoing Boeing challenges,but backlog remains at or near record highsM&A activity increased due to moderating interest rates and strong buyer appetite,but remained below the historical averageTransaction multiples trended up while aerospace stocks generally outperformed and defense/govcon stocks underperformed2024 saw a steady increase in aerospace,defense and government services(ADG)deal activity,driven by positive long-term fundamentals across the sector and a stabilization of global economic headwindsContinued investment in the modernization and transformation of government IT systems2Commercial air travel expected to increase with business travel offsetting softness in consumer travelAftermarket part and service providers will continue to benefit from an aging fleetShift in strategic priorities for the US under the Trump Administration,as part of an“America First”policyCommercial aircraft deliveries expected to increase 15%as Airbus and Boeing work off record or near record high backlogSpace sector M&A activity expected to continue its strong pace,as commercial space providers lower costs and increase launch accessibilityADG deal activity is expected to accelerate across most of the sector,driven by the Trump administrations pro-business policies,improving economic conditions,and continued abundance of debt and equity capitalGlobal defense spending expected to rise in the face of near-peer global threats and a focus on modernization and next-gen technologiesRising uncertainty for government services contractors under DOGE,though exact ramifications are yet to play outADG M&A activity expected to strengthen due to increased economic confidence and availability of capital,as well as pent-up pressures on private equity to deploy capital3$29 bn$30 bn$30 bn$52 bn$85 bn$63 bn$112 bn$75 bn$29 bn$131 bn$46 bn$63 bn$98 bn$18 bn$4 bn$6 bn$9 bn$37 bn$9 bn$30 bn$19 bn$121 bn$8 bn$7 bn$61 bn$11 bn4094144214324765105254973996164463584030100200300400500600700$0bn$50bn$100bn$150bn$200bn$250bn$300bn2012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024Mega DealsAll Other DealsTransactionsDeal volume across the ADG industry increased 13%in 2024 but remained below historical averagesADG M&A Deal Volume and ValueSource:DACIS Mergers&Acquisitions;transaction value and deal count as of 12/31/2024;all values in USD$Median transactions per year(2015-2024):461Acquirer:Target:10-year Median Transaction VolumeAggregate Deal Volumes(All Deals)Aggregate Deal Value(Minus Largest Deal)Largest Deal Value4M&A Transaction Multiples Increased in 2024 to the Highest Level Since 2021 ADG M&A Valuation and Buyer Trends(1)For deals with disclosed valueSource:DACIS Mergers&Acquisitions;Capital IQ13.6x13.8x11.8x14.8x19.1x12.4x15.8x18.5x9.1x15.6x12.2x13.4x9.1x11.2x9.8x10.9x16.5x13.8x10.9x13.0 x0.0 x5.0 x10.0 x15.0 x20.0 x25.0 xQ1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q420202021202220232024Average EV/EBITDA Multiple by Quarter(1)13.5x12.6x16.4x10.3x13.1xValuation multiples for completed transactions increased from 10.3x in 2023 to 13.1x in 2024 due to a decline in interest rates,an increase in the availability of debt financing and favorable supply and demand dynamicsPrivate equity and private-equity-backed strategic buyers represented the majority(53%)of completed transactions as strategic buyers remained somewhat cautious and private equity firms held record capital reserves that needed to be deployedM&A Activity by Buyer Type27()52# !PRRIG%0 0Pp0 202021202220232024Private-Equity-Backed StrategicFinancialStrategic52024 M&A Activity by SubsectorAerospace,Defense and Government Services Each Witnessed an Uptick in M&A in 2024The Government Services sector experienced a 26%increase in M&A deal activity in 2024 driven by an influx of private equity money into the segment,owner desires to exit prior to a new administration,and potential positioning ahead of new Small Business Administration(SBA)rules that take effect in 2026Aerospace saw a more modest 8%increase in activity in 2024,while Defense was relatively flatADG Deal Volume by Subsector602031384341597052645024324424233931303323312742453765462623252823153830273022293321245044525856413936382832373239473937116728213013213018217211912611190839199851051089199020406080100120140160180200Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q420202021202220232024AerospaceDefenseGovernmentSource:DACIS Mergers&AcquisitionsGovernment Services(40%)Aerospace(33%)Defense(27%)Aerospace Components/Systems68Aerostructures/Machining/Metals29Aerospace MRO&Distribution23Aviation Leasing&Services13Defense Systems48Defense Electronics/Communications37Satellite/Space Systems16Navy/Maritime7Engineering&Construction5Government Services&IT1572024 ADG Deals by Subsector6ADG Public Company Trading PerformanceMedian%Change By Index=Last 12 MonthsSource:Capital IQ,Equity Research AnalystsDefense Primes/Large Cap Defense:BA,GD,HII,LHX,LMT,NOC,RTX;Mid Cap Defense:AVAV,CMTL,KTOS,DRS,MRCY;European Defense:BA,CHG,LDO,QQ,SAF,HO;Government Services:AMTM,BAH,CACI,CGI,ICF,LDOS,MMS,SAIC,VVX;E&Cs:ACM,BWXT,FLR,J,KBR,PSN,TTEK;Satellite/Space:IRDM,VSAT,BKSY,LUNR,M0NY,RDW,RKLB,SPIR,SPCE;Diversified Aerospace/Industrial:AME,CR,CW,ESE,GE,HEI,HON,LOAR,MOG.A,PH,TDY,TXT,TKR,TDG,WWD;Aerospace Metals:AA,ATI,CRS,USAP;Aerostructures:CVU,DCO,FACC,HRX,HXL,MAL,SNR,SPR,TGI;Aviation Leasing and Services:AER,AL,WLFC:Commercial OE Airframes:AIR,BA,BBD.B,AM,ERJ;Aerospace Engine and Engine Systems:GE,MTX,RR,SAF;Aerospace MRO and Distribution l Logistics:AIR,B,S59,S63,SARO,VSEC;Test&Measurement:APH,AME,EMR,6861,MEI,ST,7701,SXS,TEL,TTGDefense Primes/Large Cap DefenseMid Cap DefenseEuropeanDefenseGovernmentServicesEngineering&ConstructionSatellite/SpaceDiversified Aerospace/IndustrialAerospace MetalsAerostructuresAviation Leasingand ServicesCommercialOE AirframesAerospace Engineand Engine SystemsAerospace MRO andDistribution/LogisticsTest&MeasurementS&P 500Dow JonesIndustrial Average$in millions,as of January 31,2025Defense Primes&European DefenseGovt Services&E&Cs Commercial AerospaceS&P 500Satellite/SpaceDowTest&MeasurementMedian Statistics2024E OPERATING PERFORMANCEENTERPRISE VALUE AS A MULTIPLE OFMarket%of 52-EquityEnterprise Revenue EBITDAEBITDANet Debt/2024E2025P2024E2025PSectorWeek HighValueValueGrowthGrowthMarginEBITDAEBITDAEBITDARevenueRevenueDefense Primes/Large Cap Defense81.1%$70,535$84,231$47,164$5,7145.5.9.1%2.0 x13.2x12.5x2.0 x1.9xMid Cap Defense79.8%5,0415,02681010559.8.2.9%2.5x40.0 x30.5x3.7x3.5xEuropean Defense84.5%,70930,52618,5452,53310.1$.5.7%0.5x11.5x10.3x1.7x1.6xGovt Services 69.3%5,2939,6737,7428436.4.7.9%1.7x10.9x10.6x1.4x1.3xE&Cs 80.2%9,86410,7007,6326187.7(.4%8.1%1.3x14.3x13.4x1.4x1.3xSatellite/Space80.0%1,2351,807229727.2%(32.4%)3.0%2.4x13.6x9.4x3.5x3.0 xDiversified Aerospace/Industrial 90.3,19316,4594,5661,0264.4.4.5%1.3x20.2x18.6x4.5x4.3xAerospace Metals82.8%8,6349,9624,2597067.6d.8.6%1.1x13.8x12.0 x2.3x2.1xAerostructures85.251,194970973.73.2.0%2.0 x10.1x9.2x1.4x1.1xAviation Leasing and Services88.3%5,14624,8472,7242,5158.1h.6.3%6.5x9.9x8.9xNANACommercial OE Airframes88.9,66715,77938,9301,3649.4.8%3.5%2.5x12.0 x10.4x1.8x1.7xAerospace Engine and Engine Systems93.4,79184,24922,2024,3279.7.1.5%0.4x17.3x15.5x3.0 x2.8xAerospace MRO and Distribution/Logistics88.8%2,3903,3932,52527814.0&.3.0%2.4x18.6x14.2x1.9x1.8xTest&Measurement87.0%,57626,18810,9822,9930.6%7.0.3%0.6x12.4x11.6x2.2x2.1xRevenueEBITDA1.7I.3%1.7%(1.0%)16.3G.5#.09.7.9$.9.9Q.0.4%(0.4%)24.7.8|ommercial air travel has continued its steady climb upward,with seasonally adjusted revenue passenger miles(RPM)reaching 94.7 billion in November 2024,which marks a 2.3%increase over November 2023 and an 11.1%increase over November 2022During the 2024 holiday season,the number of travelers passing through TSA checkpoints increased roughly 7%relative to the same period last year While air travel has continued to rise,it has done so at a slower pace as post-COVID revenge spending has come to an end,and higher interest rates and inflation weigh on consumers propensity to spendIn 2025,commercial air travel is expected to continue to rise,albeit at a slower pace than recent years,as a resurgence in business travel is expected to offset flat or declining consumer demandOn a global basis,the International Air Transport Association(IATA)is projecting the number of air travelers to increase 6.7%in 2025Air Travel Continues to Grow,Albeit at a Slower PaceCommercial Aerospace Highlights(1)Federal Reserve Economic Data(FRED)Economic Data Seasonally Adjusted Air Revenue Passenger Miles;December 2024 data not available as of the date of this report(2)tsa.gov TSA Checkpoint Travel Numbers020406080100120Jan-20Apr-20Jul-20Oct-20Jan-21Apr-21Jul-21Oct-21Jan-22Apr-22Jul-22Oct-22Jan-23Apr-23Jul-23Oct-23Jan-24Apr-24Jul-24Oct-24Seasonally adjusted miles in billionsAir Revenue Passenger Miles(1)Rolling 12-month checkpoint travelers in millionsTSA Checkpoint Travelers(2)02004006008001,000Jan-20Apr-20Jul-20Oct-20Jan-21Apr-21Jul-21Oct-21Jan-22Apr-22Jul-22Oct-22Jan-23Apr-23Jul-23Oct-23Jan-24Apr-24Jul-24Oct-2496356887188008635666116617327668897627487638063801573404805283483972015A2016A2017A2018A2019A2020A2021A2022A2023A2024A2025PAirbusBoeing6,787 6,874 7,265 7,577 7,482 7,164 7,082 7,239 8,598 8,658 5,901 5,821 5,970 6,057 5,590 4,407 4,546 4,840 5,626 5,595 Dec-15Dec-16Dec-17Dec-18Dec-19Dec-20Dec-21Dec-22Dec-23Dec-24AirbusBoeingCommercial Aerospace HighlightsAircraft Deliveries Declined in 2024 Due to Boeings Challenges but Are Expected to Rebound in 2025Source:Boeing and Airbus,DSM Forecast InternationalCommercial Aircraft DeliveriesCommercial Aircraft in BacklogTotal commercial aircraft deliveries declined 11%in 2024 due to Boeings continued strugglesAirbus deliveries increased and are approaching pre-COVID levels while Boeing significantly lags behind due to continued production issues with the 737 MAX and 787,and recent labor unrest In 2025,deliveries are projected to increase at a faster pace,with Airbus forecasting a 16%increase and Boeing forecasting a 14%increase,which will be a boost for tier suppliersFor Airbus,net aircraft orders slightly outpaced deliveries in 2024,resulting in an industry record backlog of 8,658 commercial aircraft at the end of 2024Boeings orders plummeted due to its continued struggles,from 1,314 net orders after cancellations and conversions in 2023 to 377 in 2024,resulting in a slight decline in backlog 10Aerospace Aftermarket Indexed Revenue(2)Commercial Aerospace HighlightsHeightened Air Travel and Aging Fleets Driving Strong Demand for MRO Services and Aftermarket Parts(1)Source:Aviation Week (2)Source:Public filings;includes aerospace and aftermarket sales for AAR,Barnes,Deutsche Lufthansa and VSE,as compared to Q419 results;normalized for acquisitions10096545661646875818689889499108111112118118126A resurgence in commercial air travel has led to an increase in aircraft in service and flight hours,which is driving record demand for maintenance,repair,and overhaul(MRO)services and partsA delay in new aircraft deliveries by Airbus and Boeing has further heightened demand,as fleets are aging and older aircraft require more shop visitsMRO shops have struggled to meet demand due to labor and part shortages,which has lengthened turnaround times Turnaround times are up over 35%for legacy engines and over 150%for new-generation engines compared to pre-pandemic levels(1)MRO demand is expected to remain strong in 2025 and at elevated levels through the end of the decade,while part suppliers are expected to experience continued growth,although at a slower pace as an increase in parts availability will limit growth11Aerospace deal activity was up 8%in 2024 to 133 transactions,driven primarily by a rise in deals involving companies serving the aerospace aftermarket(i.e.,MRO providers and distributors)M&A activity involving aerospace component and system manufacturers declined for the third straight year as those businesses have faced headwinds due to Boeings production issuesCommercial Aerospace:M&A HighlightsAerospace M&A Deal Volume Increased in 2024 but Remained Well Below 2021 and 2022 LevelsSource:DACIS Mergers&Acquisitions;Capital IQCommercial Aerospace M&A Activity by Buyer Type418F4)!&0DEE%0 0Pp0 202021202220232024Private-Equity-Backed StrategicFinancialStrategicCommercial Aerospace M&A Deal Volume by Subsector781039274684061492729244737152314921319012313305010015020025030035040045020202021202220232024Aerospace Components/SystemsAerostructures/Machining/MetalsAviation Leasing&ServicesAerospace MRO&Distribution122024 Key Commercial Aerospace TransactionsSource:Capital IQ,DACIS Mergers&Acquisitions;MergermarketDate:April 2024EV:$1,884MEV/EBITDA:17.1xHigh Precision and Engineered Components and Structureshas acquiredDate:March 2024EV:$725MEV/EBITDA:14.5xComponent MRO Serviceshas acquiredPRODUCT SUPPORT GROUPDate:December 2024EV:$200MEV/EBITDA:10.0 xAftermarket Aerospace Engine Components Distributionhas acquiredDate:December 2024EV:NDEV/EBITDA:NDPrecision Machined Components and Assemblieshas acquiredDate:September 2024EV:NDEV/EBITDA:NDAuxiliary Power Unit and Avionics MRO Serviceshas acquiredDate:August 2024EV:$170MEV/EBITDA:NDTurbine Engine and Accessory MRO Serviceshas acquiredDate:PendingEV:$3,104MEV/EBITDA:6.2xAircraft Leasing and Air Cargo Transportation Serviceshas agreed to acquireDate:February 2025EV:$1,000MEV/EBITDA:13.6xAircraft Landing Gear and Actuation Systems Manufacturing and Repairhas acquiredDate:October 2024EV:$3,547MEV/EBITDA:9.7xAerospace and Industrial Parts Manufacturing and Repairhas acquiredDate:PendingEV:$8,382MEV/EBITDA:NDAerostructures Manufacturing for Commercial,Defense and Regional Aircrafthas agreed to acquireDate represents close date13Aerospace metals(notably Alcoa and ATI)and aero-engine manufacturers outperformed the market,while commercial OEMs(notably Boeing)and aerostructures manufacturers(notably Hexcel and Senior)underperformedCommercial Aerospace:Public Trading PerformanceAerospace Stocks Experienced Mixed Results in 2024Election Day488$3%3%2%(12%)Source:Capital IQ;as of December 31,20246080100120140160180Jan-24Feb-24Mar-24Apr-24May-24Jun-24Jul-24Aug-24Sep-24Oct-24Nov-24Dec-24Diversified Aerospace/IndustrialAerospace MetalsAerostructuresAviation Leasing and ServicesCommercial OE AirframesAerospace Engine and Engine SystemsAerospace MRO and Distribution/LogisticsS&P 50014DoD and NATO/Allied Defense Budgets Increasing in the Face of Heightened Security ThreatsDefense and Space Highlights(1)Source:Office of the Under Secretary of Defense;Defense News;U.S.DoD;historical DoD budget inclusive of OCO and emergency appropriation(2)Source NATO;chart includes the 10 largest NATO countries based on GDPDoD-Enacted Budget Funding(1)2024 NATO Defense Spending as Percentage of GDP(2)4.12%3.37%2.33%2.12%2.09%2.06%1.85%1.49%1.37%1.28%0.00%0.50%1.00%1.50%2.00%2.50%3.00%3.50%4.00%4.50%PolandUSAUKGermanyTurkeyFranceNetherlandsItalyCanadaSpainThe FY25 National Defense Authorization Act(NDAA),signed into law by President Biden in December 2024,represented a roughly 1.0%increase over FY24,with funding to deter China and Russia,support NATO allies and Ukraine,and accelerate technical development of key next-gen systems such as artificial intelligence(AI),cyber,autonomy,and space systems(1)While the Trump administration is sending mixed messages regarding future spending increases,the administration is expected to continue to prioritize the modernization of military systems,while eliminating virtually all funding associated with the Ukraine conflict as part of a broader“America First”policyConcurrently,it is expected the Trump administration will press NATO members to increase defense spending to 5%of GDPCurrently,just over two-thirds of NATO members(23 of 32)have fulfilled their 2%commitment,up from just 10 countries in 2023(2)$in billions$521$523$600$616$633$635$742$816$842$850$59$83$71$72$90$70$35$36$58$580$606$671$688$723$705$777$852$900$0$100$200$300$400$500$600$700$800$900$1,000FY16FY17FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25Base BudgetOCO/Other Supplementals16Defense deal activity increased slightly in 2024,driven by a continued heightened threat environment and expectations of increased defense spending globallyStrategics continued to represent the vast majority of buyers,leveraging strong balance sheets in a high interest rate environmentDefense and Space:M&A HighlightsDefense M&A Deal Volume Experienced Modest Growth for the Second Consecutive YearSource:DACIS Mergers&Acquisitions;Capital IQDefense M&A Activity by Buyer Type223 gaiTi%0 0Pp0 202021202220232024Private-Equity-Backed StrategicFinancialStrategic46893345374461463348263220231612319310210610805010015020025020202021202220232024Defense Electronics/CommunicationsDefense SystemsNavy/MaritimeSatellite/Space SystemsDefense M&A Deal Volume by Subsector17Date:February 2024EV:$5,600MEV/EBITDA:19.6xFull Satellite Systems and Space-Qualified SubsystemsDate:September 2024EV:$1,900MEV/EBITDA:14.0 xRadio Frequency,Microwave,and High Reliability Microelectronicshas acquiredDate:August 2024EV:$739MEV/EBITDA:11.0 xUS Government Communications,Command and Control,and Information Systemshas acquiredDate:PendingEV:$4,100MEV/EBITDA:NDNext Gen Capabilities to Support Space,Autonomous Systems and Electronic Warfarehas agreed to acquireDate:July 2024EV:$655MEV/EBITDA:NDTest and Measurement Solutionshas acquiredDate:June 2024EV:$1,385MEV/EBITDA:NDElectronic Components and Subsystem Products for Microwave Signalshas acquiredELECTRON DEVICE BUSINESSDate:November 2024EV:$950MEV/EBITDA:NDMachined Components for Military Tracked Vehicleshas acquiredDate:June 2024EV:$200MEV/EBITDA:NDAirborne and Ground-Based Antennas,and Electromagnetic Systems and Simulatorshas acquiredANTENNA&TEST EQUIPMENT BUSINESSKANDERS&COMPANYDate:October 2024EV:$500MEV/EBITDA:NDCounter-Drone Technologies and Airspace Security Solutionshas acquiredDate:September 2024EV:$475MEV/EBITDA:NDMission Critical Connectivity Solutions for the Aerospace and Defense Marketshas acquiredhas acquired2024 Key Defense and Space TransactionsSource:Capital IQ,DACIS Mergers&Acquisitions;MergermarketDate represents close date18Defense and Space:Public Trading PerformanceSpace and Mid-Cap Defense Stocks Outperformed,While Defense Primes Generally Underperformed539%1%Election Day24%Space stocks,led by Redwire and Intuitive Machines,saw a large uptick following the election,as investors expect an increase in funding for commercial space technology under the new Trump administration(the“Musk Effect”)Defense primes underperformed the S&P 500,as RTXs strong performance(up nearly 40%)was offset by struggles at Boeing and HIISource:Capital IQ,as of December 31,2024406080100120140160180Jan-24Feb-24Mar-24Apr-24May-24Jun-24Jul-24Aug-24Sep-24Oct-24Nov-24Dec-24Defense Primes/Large Cap DefenseMid-Cap DefenseEuropean DefenseSatellite/SpaceS&P 50019Government Services HighlightsA Shift in Priorities and New DOGE Commission to Create Challenges for ContractorsSource:Office of the Under Secretary of Defense;White House;govinfo.gov$in billions$56$60$65$66$74$75 FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25R$8$9$10$11$13$13FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25R$in billions10.8GR6.1GRFederal Civilian Cybersecurity SpendingFederal Civilian IT SpendingGovernment contractors are likely to be impacted in 2025 by a shift in spending priorities with the change in administrations and the new DOGE commissionWith a focus on reducing excess spending,DOGE could reshape the government contracting landscape and create financial headwinds for many contractorsWhile spending cuts are likely,areas that could see growth under the new administration are infrastructure and technologyPresident Trump has expressed an interest in infrastructure improvements such as roadways,bridges and airports,which should benefit engineering&construction(E&C)contractorsAdditionally,it is recognized that federal agencies and DoD contractors need to invest to modernize their IT systems and strengthen cybersecurity measures as Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification(CMMC)requirements take effect in 20252111720115012115711948512821015412916220202021202220232024Government Services&ITEngineering&ConstructionGovernment Services M&A Deal Volume by SubsectorThe increase in deal activity involving government contracting companies in 2024 was driven by the uncertainty of the post-election environment,the continued influx of private equity capital into the segment and a new SBA rule change due to take effect that will limit small businesses from performing on contracts following a change of control transactionPrivate equity firms continue to be drawn to the sector due to the stability and predictability of government contracts and cash flows,and thus are accounting for an increasingly large mix of the buyer universeGovernment Services:M&A HighlightsGovernment Services M&A Volume Increased 26%in 2024,Marking the Most Active Year Since 2021Source:DACIS Mergers&Acquisitions;Capital IQGovernment Services M&A Activity by Buyer Type20&50)#cQGCD%0 0Pp0 202021202220232024Private-Equity-Backed StrategicFinancialStrategic222024 Key Government Services TransactionsSource:CapitalIQ,DACIS Mergers&Acquisitions;MergermarketDate represents close dateDate:March 2024EV:$4,400MEV/EBITDA:NDAnalytics Automation Solutionshas acquiredDate:December 2024EV:$3,000MEV/EBITDA:NDData Protection Simplifying Migration and Disaster Recoveryhas acquiredDATA PROTECTION BUSINESSDate:August 2024EV:$1,300MEV/EBITDA:NDEngineering Consultancy Services and Technical Staffing Solutionshas acquiredDate:September 2024EV:NDEV/EBITDA:NDCybersecurity,Data Analytics,Software Application Development Solutionshas acquiredCRITICAL MISSIONS SOLUTIONSDate:September 2024EV:NDEV/EBITDA:NDTransformation Strategies and Advanced Process Developmenthas acquiredDate:September 2024EV:NDEV/EBITDA:NDProfessional Services and Information Technology(IT)Solutionshas acquiredDate:June 2024EV:NDEV/EBITDA:NDMission and Enterprise Software Solutionshas acquiredDate:February 2024EV:$79MEV/EBITDA:NDFacial Recognition Technology,Cloud-Based Applications,and Data-Driven Digital Identity Solutionshas acquiredDate:November 2024EV:NDEV/EBITDA:NDDigital R&D,Acquisition and Sustainment Solutionshas acquiredDate:September 2024EV:$2,100MEV/EBITDA:NDSoftware Risk Solutionshas acquiredSOFTWARE INTEGRITY BUSINESS23An index consisting of publicly traded government contractors outperformed the S&P 500 for most of the year until the November election,when uncertainty surrounding the new DOGE commission resulted in a steep drop in performance Government Services:Public Trading PerformancePublicly Traded Government Contractors Negatively Impacted by the Election and DOGE UncertaintyElection Day9095100105110115120125130135140Jan-24Feb-24Mar-24Apr-24May-24Jun-24Jul-24Aug-24Sep-24Oct-24Nov-24Dec-24Government ServicesEngineering&ConstructionS&P 50020%7$%Source:Capital IQ;as of December 31,202424Select Kroll ADG ExperienceSell Side Advisorhas been acquired by a portfolio company of Sell Side Advisorhas divested itstoSpecialty Products North America DivisionSPNAMhas been acquired bySell Side Advisora portfolio company ofSell Side Advisorhas been acquired byhas been acquired bySell Side Co-Advisora portfolio company ofa portfolio company ofhas divested its Gardena Operationsa portfolio company oftoSell Side AdvisorSell Side Advisora portfolio company ofhas been acquired bya portfolio company ofSell Side Advisorhas been acquired byhas been acquired bya portfolio company ofBuy Side AdvisorSell Side Advisorhas been acquired bySell Side AdvisorSell Side Advisorhas been acquired byhas been acquired bySell Side AdvisorSell Side Advisora portfolio company ofhas been acquired bySell Side Advisorhas been acquired bySpace NVSell Side Advisorhas been acquired bya portfolio company ofSell Side Advisorhas been acquired bySell Side Advisorhas been acquired bySell Side Advisorhas been acquired byhas been acquired bya portfolio company ofSell Side Advisorhas been acquired bySell Side Advisorhas acquireda portfolio company ofFor more information,please contact:About KrollAs the leading independent provider of risk and financial advisory solutions,Kroll leverages our unique insights,data and technology to help clients stay ahead of complex demands.Krolls team of more than 6,500 professionals worldwide continues the firms nearly 100-year history of trusted expertise spanning risk,governance,transactions and valuation.Our advanced solutions and intelligence provide clients the foresight they need to create an enduring competitive advantage.At Kroll,our values define who we are and how we partner with clients and communities.Learn more at K.M&A advisory,capital raising and secondary market advisory services in the U.S.are provided by Kroll Securities,LLC(member FINRA/SIPC).M&A advisory,capital raising and secondary market advisory services in the United Kingdom are provided by Kroll Securities Ltd.,which is authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority(FCA).Valuation Advisory Services in India are provided by Kroll Advisory Private Limited(formerly Duff&Phelps India Private Limited)under a category 1 merchant banker license issued by the Securities and Exchange Board of India.The material in this report is for information purposes only and is not intended to be relied upon as financial,accounting,tax,legal or other professional advice.This report does not constitute,and should not be construed as,soliciting or offering any investment or other transaction,identifying securities for you to purchase or offer to purchase,or recommending the acquisition or disposition of any investment.Kroll does not guarantee the accuracy or reliability of any data provided from third-party resources.Although we endeavor to provide accurate information from third-party sources,there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future.2025 Kroll,LLC.All rights reserved.Peter BildenCo-Head of ADG M&ANew York and Washington D.C. 1(212)450-Victor CarusoCo-Head of ADG M&ANew York and Washington D.C. 1(212)871-Steve MoonCo-Head of ADG M&ALos Angeles 1(424)249-Eric WilliamsManaging DirectorADG M&ANew York 1(212)450-Dafydd Evans Managing DirectorADG M&ALondon 44(0)7089-Paul TeutenManaging DirectorADG M&ALondon 44(0)2077-
2025-03-12
27页
5星级
Effect of Hyperloop Technologies on the Electric Grid and Transportation Energy January 2021 United.
2025-03-12
60页
5星级
Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Analysis:High Level Overview Catherine L.Taylor,David J.Hyde,Lawrence C.Barr July 2016 DOT-VNTSC-NASA-16-01 Prepared for:NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland,OH Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange.The United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof.The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.Trade or manufacturers names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report.REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No.0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response,including the time for reviewing instructions,searching existing data sources,gathering and maintaining the data needed,and completing and reviewing the collection of information.Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden,to Washington Headquarters Services,Directorate for Information Operations and Reports,1215 Jefferson Davis Highway,Suite 1204,Arlington,VA 22202-4302,and to the Office of Management and Budget,Paperwork Reduction Project(0704-0188),Washington,DC 20503.1.AGENCY USE ONLY(Leave blank)2.REPORT DATE June 2016 3.REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Final Report 4.TITLE AND SUBTITLE Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Analysis:High Level Overview 5a.FUNDING NUMBERS 6.AUTHOR(S)Catherine L.Taylor,David J.Hyde,Lawrence C.Barr 5b.CONTRACT NUMBER NNC13IA05I 7.PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S)AND ADDRESS(ES)U.S.Department of Transportation John A Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 55 Broadway Cambridge,MA 02142-1093 8.PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 9.SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S)AND ADDRESS(ES)National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA Glenn Research Center,Mail Stop 5-11 Propulsion Systems Analysis Branch 21000 Brookpark Road Cleveland,Ohio 44135 10.SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12a.DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b.DISTRIBUTION CODE 13.ABSTRACT(Maximum 200 words)Hyperloop is a concept for very high-speed,fixed-guideway,intercity surface transportation,using capsule-like vehicles that operate in sealed partial-vacuum tubes.This report provide a high-level evaluation of hyperloop in terms of its commercial potential,environmental impact,costs,safety issues,and regulatory issues and to identify hurdles to its commercial and/or operational feasibility.14.SUBJECT TERMS 15.NUMBER OF PAGES 16.PRICE CODE 17.SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF REPORT Unclassified 18.SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE Unclassified 19.SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF ABSTRACT Unclassified 20.LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Unlimited NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298(Rev.2-89)Prescribed by ANSI Std.239-18 298-102 Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report i Contents List of Abbreviations.iii Executive Summary.1 1.Introduction.5 2.Passenger Service.7 2.1 Hyperloop Comparisons to Other Modes.7 2.1.1 Travel Time.7 2.1.2 Frequency.10 2.1.3 User Cost.11 2.1.4 Comfort.12 2.1.5 Reliability.13 2.1.6 Energy consumption.13 2.1.7 Capacity.15 2.1.8 System Resilience.15 2.1.9 System Interoperability.16 2.1.10 Automation.17 2.1.11 Enclosed System.17 2.2 Markets.17 2.3 Potential Revenues.19 3.Freight Service.20 3.1 Comparisons to Other Modes.20 3.1.1 Air.21 3.1.2 Truck.21 3.1.3 Rail.21 3.1.4 Water.22 4.System Costs.23 4.1 Capital Costs.23 4.1.1 Comparison with Other Transportation Modes.23 4.1.2 Low Cost Estimates.25 4.1.3 Missing Cost Components.27 Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report ii 4.2 Operating Cost.28 4.2.1 Daily Management,Dispatching,&System Control.28 4.2.2 Management and Planning.28 4.2.3 Stations.28 4.2.4 Infrastructure Inspection.29 4.2.5 Infrastructure Maintenance.29 5.Regulatory and Policy Issues.30 5.1 Access to Public Rights of Way(ROW).30 5.2 Safety Regulation.30 5.3 Federal involvement with development of other modes.30 5.4 Public Funding.31 6.Safety Issues.33 6.1 Key Safety Questions.33 6.2 Onboard Passenger Emergency and Passenger Evacuation.34 6.3 Capsule Deceleration in Response to System Malfunction.35 6.4 Power Outage.36 6.5 Capsule Depressurization.36 6.6 Capsule Stranded in Tube.37 6.7 Environmental Hazards.37 6.8 Prototype.38 7.Key Research Issues.40 Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report iii List of Abbreviations Abbreviation Term CAHSR California High Speed Rail HSR High Speed Rail HT Hyperloop Technologies,now rebranded as“Hyperloop One”HTT Hyperloop Transportation Technologies ROW Right of Way Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 1 Executive Summary Hyperloop is a concept for very high-speed,fixed-guideway,intercity surface transportation,using capsule-like vehicles that operate in sealed partial-vacuum tubes.At this stage,the technology is unproven,but it has elicited a great deal of interest from journalists,investors,engineering firms,and governments.This research is being conducted to provide a high-level evaluation of hyperloop in terms of its commercial potential,environmental impact,costs,safety issues,and regulatory and policy issues and to identify further research topics related to the technology.This research is intended to provide NASA decision-makers with appropriate context to make decisions on the future direction of NASAs involvement in Hyperloop research.Commercial Potential-Passenger The hyperloop technology is touted as having very fast speeds,faster than existing forms of passenger travel,and as being able to provide that service at lower cost than high speed rail(HSR).Hyperloops proposed speeds(maximum 720 760 mph and average of 600 mph)would indeed be faster than air,maglev,and HSR.For a trip between San Francisco and Los Angeles of roughly 400 miles,the resulting time savings over air or maglev would be about 45 minutes.However,all three modes would likely have stations that terminate at the outskirts of the major city and thus require additional time on local transit for travelers to reach their final destination.The time savings over HSR is more substantial at 2 hours,but HSR stations are generally found downtown which provides savings in access and egress time.It is not clear whether hyperloops very high speeds would be comfortable for passengers.Because it is a fixed guideway the route needs to be planned with exacting precision so that passengers are not subject to uncomfortable g-forces on curves or dips.In contrast,passengers find maglev and HSR trains very comfortable and appreciate being able to use their time productively.Proponents claim that because the system is enclosed in a tube,it will be impervious to weather delays.However,maglev is also resilient to weather because the train is elevated above the guideway it can operate in bad weather.HSR,while not impervious to bad weather,is considerably more resilient than air.As originally described,hyperloop capacity would be far lower than HSR.However,that capacity could potentially be increased by using larger pods or by having more tubes stacked on a single pylon structure.Hyperloop appears to be able to offer faster speeds than other modes of passenger transport,but other modes offer advantages in other dimensions such as proximity to downtown areas and/or passenger comfort.Much of the public is not aware of the higher speeds offered by maglev technology,likely because it has only been deployed in one instance,in Shanghai,China.However,that one deployment has shown that it is feasible and thus it would be a less risky investment than the entirely unproven hyperloop technology.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 2 Commercial Potential-Freight The early discussions related to hyperloop technology focused on its potential for passenger transport,but more recent discussions of hyperloop have focused on freight.This shift in focus to cargo is perhaps because of the(likely accurate)perception that it will be less risky to prove the technology on cargo than on passengers.The portion of the freight market that might be interested in the high speeds offered by hyperloop would likely be the current market for air freight which accounts for just 2 percent of ton miles,but represents 40 percent of freight value.However,aircraft serve this market through vast hub-and-spoke networks that accumulates freight from many origins and distributes them to many destinations.It would take a massive investment in a hyperloop network to create the same coverage and the value of incremental time savings over air would likely be small.Because only air(expensive but fast)and ship(cheap but slow)are available for cargo shipment across water of distance that prohibits building a bridge,there is a compelling need for an additional mode.For cargo,the super-fast speeds are not of themselves the compelling feature of hyperloop,rather super-fast speeds enable higher throughput for a given tube size.Recent presentations by Hyperloop Technologies(HT)1 have focused on putting the hyperloop tubes underwater as a way to avoid land acquisition costs for right of way.The HT presentations also mention the idea of using hyperloop to facilitate off-shore port facilities.Many ports are capacity constrained and unloading containers from ships to a hyperloop tube to be brought inland for sorting and distribution using equipment on offshore platforms could provide much needed expansion for port facilities.Environmental Impact The various hyperloop proponents make much of the idea that hyperloop would be completely powered by solar technology.While that is certainly not true of air travel,both maglev and HSR are electrically powered and could be powered by solar if desired.It is not clear how much energy would be needed to operate hyperloop but an HT presentation stated that most routes would be two to three times more energy efficient than air travel per passenger mile.Maglev and HSR are also two to three times more energy efficient as air,so that criteria does not seem to favor hyperloop over existing high speed transportation options.Discussions of environmental impact tend to focus on emissions during operations and ignore the full lifecycle emissions during manufacture of the equipment during construction of the guideway.Those impacts would be present for any new transportation project but at this point the information is not available to compare across alternative transportation modes.1 Hyperloop Technologies has recently rebranded themselves as Hyperloop One.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 3 Costs There is not much detailed information available about the costs of hyperloop.The most detailed information came from the“Hyperloop Alpha”white paper written by Elon Musk which provided an estimate of$17 million per mile.Subsequent to the Alpha white paper,HT gave a presentation citing$25-$27 million per mile for just the technology,excluding land acquisition.For an almost entirely underwater track specifically from Helsinki to Stockholm HT estimates a cost of$64 million per mile including vehicles.2 For an approximate frame of reference,California HSR faces costs of$63-$65 million per mile and in Europe the cost is$43 million per mile,although those figures include costs of land acquisition but exclude train sets.Thus,cost estimates for a land-based hyperloop system may appear lower than other modes,but as the technology is still conceptual and in very initial testing,there is uncertainty in both the underlying infrastructure needed to operate a system and the cost to construct it.One issue driving the idea that hyperloop would be lower cost to build than HSR is that by constructing an elevated system on pylons,the builder would just need to purchase“air rights”which would be lower cost than outright land acquisition.Further,there is an assumption that the system could operate on the existing highway right-of-way further reducing costs.In addition,there appears to be an understanding that the tube guideway would be lighter weight than a steel wheel rail system and thus be cheaper to build.HSR and maglev could also be built on elevated tracks and on existing highway right-of-way.However,the relative cost savings from building a supposedly lighter-weight elevated system is an interesting future research question.Air appears to have a cost advantage because outside of airport facilities,no right of way is needed.Regulatory and Policy Issues At low fares(for example,$20 for Los Angeles to San Francisco)and relatively low capacity(pods carry 28 passengers and one tube in each direction),the hyperloop would not be able to cover its construction costs.Thus,a public entity of some sort would need to subsidize the endeavor.A Hyperloop Transportation Technologies(HTT)executive has said as much.At present,there appears to be a general presumption against government interfering in the private marketplace or placing large“bets”on particular new technologies or products,at least in the US.For that reason,the various hyperloop companies appear to be focusing on foreign markets.Government officials(foreign or domestic)would need to consider whether the public interest is best served by using public right of way for hyperloop.It is an open question as to whether communities would be willing to host a facility that services long distance travel mode at the expense of using resources to provide local transit.Safety Issues 2 https:/hyperloop- Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 4 A completely new transportation mode needs to not only address safety issues that are known from existing modes but also anticipate any safety issues specific to it.The following issues have been identified and the companies that are developing the hyperloop technology are certainly aware of them.The proposed solutions would need to be carefully tested and vetted.How will tube construction allow for emergencies,such as rapid depressurization or large-scale leaks,capsule malfunction,or natural disasters such as earthquakes?What will happen in the event of the depressurization of a Hyperloop capsule?What happens if a capsule is stranded in the tube?Where will the emergency exits be?How fast can the capsule decelerate for emergency stop without damaging the system?What is the capsule behavior if it hits higher or even normal density air while traveling at 700 MPH?Can it be designed to survive that and protect the passengers?How fast will the capsule decelerate if it encounters high-density air?Can the problem of excessive drag on the capsules be overcome even in such a thin atmospheric environment?What is the potential of supersonic air surrounding the capsules?If there is a large tube breach,will the air be filling the tube at a high velocity?Will the additional speed and turbulence increase the danger to the capsule?Will oxygen masks work in a major capsule breach?How long will the system continue to run if power is lost in the area?Is it possible to provide a fire suppression system inside the capsule?What material and method of tube construction presents the ideal combination of safety,cost,and overall function(e.g.,steel,carbon fiber,Kevlar)?Key Research Questions 1.Is the hyperloop transportation system sufficiently lightweight that there would significant construction cost savings compared to building an elevated HSR or maglev system?2.What are the technology hurdles to building hyperloop underwater and can they be overcome?3.Can the capacity of a hyperloop pod be expanded to seat more than the originally proposed 28 passengers?4.What would be the weight limit for a freight capsule?5.How big would the tube need to be in order to carry a standard size shipping container?6.Can the system be designed so that in addition to carrying long distance passengers,it can also provide local transit service?7.Would hyperloop be loud for passengers?Would hyperloop be loud in communities?Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 5 1.Introduction Hyperloop,as described conceptually by Elon Musk of SpaceX and Tesla in an August 2013 white paper,is a new,very high speed,intercity transportation mode.It consists of two(or more)very long tubes,elevated on pylons,which have been partially evacuated of their air,creating a partial vacuum.Linear induction motors propel small passenger or freight capsules riding on low-friction air bearings at very high speed within the tubes.The partial vacuum dramatically lowers aerodynamic drag resistance,which is ordinarily a key limitation on vehicle speed.Arrays of solar panels along the guideway would provide much or all of the required electrical power,with claims of very low overall power consumption per passenger-mile.Proposals include 28 passenger pods,passenger pods that also carry up to three vehicles,and freight pods that can hold a standard 40 foot long shipping container.This report provide a high-level evaluation of hyperloop in terms of its commercial potential,environmental impact,costs,safety issues,and regulatory issues and to identify hurdles to its commercial and/or operational feasibility.This research is intended to provide NASA decision-makers with appropriate context to make decisions on the future direction of NASAs involvement in Hyperloop research.Mr.Musk has described the concept as an“open-source platform,”making his conceptual white paper available to others to refine the design.SpaceX has announced plans to build a one-mile test track at its headquarters in Hawthorne,California.It also was one of the sponsors of Hyperloop pod design competition held at Texas A&M in January 2016.At the design competition,US Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx called Hyperloop a very solid idea that merited further beta testing,and that the federal government had a responsibility to support the idea.Hyperloop Technologies,Inc.(HT)is a venture capital-funded company currently hiring engineers and developers.The firm has recently rebranded itself as“Hyperloop-One”but this report will continue to refer to the entity as“HT.”Their initial focus appears to be on freight and they are based in Los Angeles,California.The firm appears to have informal ties to Space X and Tesla.The firm conducted a propulsion test in May 2016.Hyperloop Transportation Technologies(HTT)is using a crowdsourcing model,in which 100 core technical researchers work part-time for equity in the company.They have announced plans to construct a five-mile,demonstration test track along Interstate I-5 in Quay Valley,California,a privately-owned planned community.Transpod is a Canadian start-up with plans to implement Mr.Musks hyperloop idea.The sources used for this report include the white paper by Mr.Musk titled“Hyperloop Alpha,3”HTTs 3 http:/ Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 6“Official Crowdstorm Documentation,”HTs website(now www.hyperloop-),two presentations made by Vice President of Technology and Development at HT,4 and press articles.“Hyperloop Alpha”focuses on Hyperloop connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles using the I-5 right-of-way.HT states that they are focusing on freight initially but if they were to build a passenger system connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles,they would chose an underwater route for the tube.HTT identified several potential markets for HL service.4 November 2015 at KTH in Sweden accessed at https:/ 2016 at Purdue accessed at https:/ Commercial Feasibility Report 7 2.Passenger Service 2.1 Hyperloop Comparisons to Other Modes A passenger transportation option can be analyzed in terms of its service characteristics and operational features.Service characteristics experienced by travelers include:travel time,frequency,user cost,comfort,and reliability.Operational features include:energy consumption,capacity,system resilience,and system interoperability.Capital costs and operating costs are discussed in Chapter 4.These features of hyperloop are described below.In subsequent sections,hyperloop is compared to other high speed modes along these service characteristics.The important results of the comparison to other modes is that hyperloop is not categorically better than other existing modes.In fact,it is very similar to other fixed guideway systems.Although it provides marginally higher speeds,the costs of attaining those speeds are uncertain while proven technologies are available that achieve almost those same attributes.2.1.1 Travel Time Travel time is comprised of three components:line haul time,station time,and access/egress time.Line haul time depends on the speed of the technology and any ramp-up/ramp-down,taxiing time including tarmac delay(for air travel),station dwell time and intermediate stops(for rail or maglev travel).Station time refers to the time needed at the embarking/disembarking station for things like ticketing,security screening,baggage loading,etc.In the case of very frequent non-scheduled service such as subways,travel time includes the expected wait time between trains usually estimated as one-half the headway between trains.Access and egress time depend on the spatial relationship between the station and the ultimate origins and destinations of the individual travelers.Hyperloop is estimated to have maximum operating speeds in the range of 720-760 mph over distances of 300-500 miles.Those top speeds are mitigated somewhat by the need for gradual acceleration or deceleration and at the beginning and end of the trip.“Hyperloop Alpha”describes hyperloop capsules making the trip from the San Francisco Bay area to the Los Angeles area in roughly 35 minutes,with no intermediate stops.This is a distance of about 350 miles for an average speed of roughly 600 mph.However,there would be no taxiing time as with air travel or time spent at intermediate stops as there is for rail or maglev.Of course,line haul time is just one component of total travel time.There is also the time needed to access and egress the station to the ultimate origin and destination.The amount of access and egress time needed will depend on where the hyperloop terminals are located.Downtown locations provide time savings for passengers but higher costs associated with land acquisition along with other institutional barriers related to building in areas of high population density.As regards station time,at this point it is not clear whether hyperloop would require TSA-style security Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 8 screens as is currently done for air travel.On the one hand,TSA-style screening is not currently required for rail travel in the US,Europe,or China and the scope for damage is confined to the system itself unlike air travel where the planes can be diverted to other destinations in the case of hijackings and become weaponized such as what occurred on 9/11.On the other hand,hyperloop would be high profile asset and as such might attract attention of potential terrorists and thus warrant special protective measures.In fact,“Hyperloop Alpha”states that the system would indeed be subject to TSA style screenings.It might be possible that the government would not require security screenings as a public safety measure but instead the owner(a corporation or a public agency)of the asset might require screenings as a means of protecting its asset.Baggage handling for hyperloop is anticipated to be similar to that of air,where luggage is stowed in a separate portion of the vehicle and thus requires special handling.Rail and maglev riders generally handle their own luggage which saves time at the station.The table below compares these travel time characteristics among high speed modes.The hyperloop technology claims the highest maximum and average speeds,more than twice as fast as the next fastest modes,air and maglev,over an intermediate range of less than 500 miles.For markets like LA to SF and LA to Las Vegas,those speeds translate to 45 minute savings over air.That time savings over air may be even greater if hyperloop does not require TSA-style security screening,although that issue is not clear;HTT documents say TSA-style screening would not be necessary while Alpha and HT say that TSA-style screening would be necessary.Maglev also does not require security screenings and would face similar hurdles to having stations located downtown because it also is new mode.HSR for the LA to SF market is planning travel times of 2 hours and 40 minutes which would be 2 hours longer than a hyperloop trip,but HSR does not require TSA-style screenings and has stations located in the downtown areas which would provide travel time savings for access/egress portions of the trip.Air travel experiences very high boarding time as passengers must all squeeze through one access point(a bottleneck).Maglev and HSR allow for fast boarding through multiple boarding points along trainset and wide aisles allow for passenger to pass others.Hyperloop is anticipated to offer similarly fast boarding times by using rollercoaster type seating procedures.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 9 Table 1.Travel Time Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Maximum Speed 720 mph(HTT)750 mph(HT)760 mph(Alpha)515 mph(basic cruise speed of CRJ700)375 mph(Japan Railway test track)5 150 mph(Acela,Boston to NYC)168 mph(TGV Paris to Lyon)200 mph(Thoku Shinkansen)220 mph(CAHSR)Average Speed6 600 mph(Alpha,SF to LA)253 mph(SF to LA)7 143 mph(Shanghai Maglev,19 mile line)265 mph(proposed Tokyo Nagoya line)70 mph(Acela,Boston to Washington)102 mph(Acela,Boston to Providence)130 mph(TGV Paris to Lyon)164 mph(CAHSR)Representative Travel Times LA-LV(270 highway miles)26 minutes(HTT)70 min 61 min(imputed at 265 mph)84 min(DesertXpress,186 miles from Victorville to LV plus 85 miles Victorville to LA)SF to LA(382 highway miles)35 minutes(HTT)83 min 86 min(imputed at 265 mph)160 min(CAHSR)5 http:/ Distance divided by Station-to-Station or Airport-to-Airport travel time(includes allowances for curves,station stopping patterns,etc.)7 Calculated as distance divided by ramp to ramp travel time.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 10 Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Access/Egress Time Low if stations are downtown Similar to air if stations on outskirts Generally high Low if stations are downtown.Shanghai Maglev requires another 20 minutes by subway.Low-stations are generally downtown-Station Time for Security Screening Low,no security screening(HTT)Same as air,need TSA-style screening(Alpha&HT)High-requires security screening Low-no security screening Low-no security screening Station Time for Baggage Handling High(similar to air)High Low Low Station Time for Passenger Loading Potentially low,envision roller coaster like seating procedure Highest of all modes,as all passengers enter through one point,causing bottleneck Multiple boarding points along trainset allow for fast boarding Multiple boarding points along trainset allow for fast boarding 2.1.2 Frequency“Hyperloop Alpha”envisions Hyperloop departures every 2 minutes on average,or as frequently as every 30 seconds during peak periods meaning that in theory wait time should be very small.However,that assumes that supply and demand are evenly balanced temporally.That is,that passengers arrive at a rate equal to the availability of pods.If more passengers arrive than there is pod capacity,queues will form and station time will increase.The discussion of hyperloop discusses the high frequency as being an advantage because the proponents claim there will always be a new pod,if you miss the first pod.The ability to provide“walk-up”service is business plan decision.Airlines could provide similar walk-up service but have found it more profitable to use advance ticket sales and yield management techniques to charge only very high prices for walk-up service.Current Amtrak service operates similarly in that a limited number of low priced tickets are available which rewards those who book tickets early.Walkup Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 11 service is available but at higher prices,although the price increases are not as substantial as they are in air travel.But those are business plan features,not features of the technology.Hyperloop provides much higher frequency than other modes.However,for intercity travel,frequencies higher than 4 per hour tend not to provide additional utility to riders other than providing additional capacity.That is,the amount of reduced wait time(estimated as one-half of headway,or 7.5 minutes for 4 departures per hour)is perceived as not significant for a longer distance trip.California HSR has plans for 12 departures per hour or 5 minute headways which would probably be perceived as being only slightly less preferred than hyperloops 30 second headways.A direct comparison to air in terms of frequency is not easy since air tickets are generally purchased in advance for a specific boarding time.However,for major markets multiple carriers generally offer hourly service to accommodate a variety of passenger scheduling needs.Table 2.Frequency Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Frequency 30 120 per hour 30 sec to 2 minute headways 3 per hour(LA-SF)4 per hour(Shanghai)15 minute headway 12 per hour 5 min headway(CAHSR)2.1.3 User Cost“Hyperloop Alpha”suggests fares of$20 for the San Francisco the Los Angeles route which would apparently be used to cover operating expenses.However,this research has not found any sources providing estimates of operating costs for the system.A presentation made by an HT executive cited$10 to$15 for a route linking Abu Dhabi to Dubai.However,that presentation seemed to indicate that that fare amount was a price point which the market could bear,rather than an estimate of the services operating cost.In a pricing structure where fares are only used to cover operating costs,some entity would be required to fund the upfront capital construction and vehicle costs without repayment.An assumption of public funding can only be speculative,especially in the current constrained fiscal environment for government expenditures.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 12 Table 3.Fare Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Fares(per mile)$0.33 per mile(Shanghai)$0.20 per mile(CAHSR)$0.25 per mile(Italy)$0.22 per mile(China)$0.52 per mile(Paris Lyon)$0.50 per mile(Acela)LA-LV$50(Desert Express)LA-SF$20 but does not cover projected costs(Alpha)$68-$200 depending on when purchased$0.33 per mile$86(CAHSR)Abu Dhabi-Dubai$10-$15 2.1.4 Comfort Many news articles express concern about passenger comfort while traveling at such high speeds,even calling hyperloop a“vomit comet.”This is because at high speeds,hills or curves will exert g-forces on passengers.A commonly cited metric in articles discussing hyperloop is that 0.5g is the maximum for human comfort.To achieve that metric,speeds must be lowered,pylons must create flat or only gradual rises,and/or the route must use only very wide turns.While 0.5g is cited as a general measure of tolerance,there is variability among individuals about what they can personally tolerate.Thus,one could expect that some portion of the traveling public would find the 0.5 g threshold uncomfortable and avoid the technology.A study conducted by the Volpe Center published in 1994 finds lower thresholds 0.3 g for positive vertical acceleration and 0.2g for negative vertical acceleration using acceptability criteria that 95 percent of passengers would not hesitate to ride again.In one presentation an HT executive mentions similar tolerances,so it appears that HT is aware of the issue.In turning maneuvers,Volpe study found that this criteria was achieved when roll rates were less than 7 degrees per second and bank angles were less than 37 degrees.8 It is not clear if any of the hyperloop firms are planning routes using those parameters.There are also concerns about noise for the occupants.Mention has also been made of lack of restrooms in a hyperloop pod but for trips on less than an hour,this should not be a problem for most of 8Sussman,E.Donald,J.K.Pollard,P.Mengert,and R.DiSario.Study to establish ride comfort criteria for high speed magnetically levitated transportation systems.No.DOT-VNTSC-FRA-94-1.1994.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 13 the traveling public.Passengers tend to rate HSR and(by inference maglev)as being quite comfortable with sufficient leg room,ability to walk around,and work productively.Air travel is commonly the target of complaints about those issues.Table 4.Comfort Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Passenger comfort Unknown,“Vomit Comet”Potentially noisy Less leg room,less productive time use Unknown for long distances but likely similar to HSR Comfortable and able to use time productively 2.1.5 Reliability One advantage of hyperloop touted by its supporters is resilience to weather conditions which can plague air travel and to a lesser extent rail travel.Maglev,because of it is suspended above its guideway is also considered to be resilient to weather conditions as well.HSR and even conventional rail are more resilient to weather conditions than air travel.Table 5.Reliability Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Reliability Protected from rain and snow Most affected by weather events.Can operate in all weather conditions because it is separated from guideway Affected by ice and snow events,but more resilient than air.Even conventional rail carries additional passengers when weather affects air travel.2.1.6 Energy consumption“Hyperloop Alpha”emphasizes that the hyperloop technology will be completely solar powered.However,maglev and HSR are also electric and could in theory also be solar powered.Focusing on the amount of energy required,HT found that for most routes hyperloop would be 2 to 3 times more energy efficient than air on a passenger mile basis;however,maglev and HSR also use 1/3 the energy of air on a passenger mile basis.The emphasis on solar power tends to obscure the fact that no technology is entirely clean because there is energy consumed in manufacture and construction of the technology.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 14 Table 6.Energy Consumption Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Fuel Electric Jet Fuel Electric Electric Power Source Solar powered with backup batteries Grid,so mix of all energy sources in region.There is no reason maglev couldnt be solar powered as well.100%renewables via purchase of offsets(CAHSR)Grid,so mix of all energy sources in region.There is no reason HSR couldnt be solar powered as well.Energy Consumption(BTUs per Passenger Mile)Short route:5-6x more fuel efficient than air Other routes:2-3x more fuel efficient than rail9 3,230 BTU/p-m 1,180 BTU/p-m10 975 BTU/p-m11 Emissions-Operating Phase Zero High,but improving over time12 Depends on Electric Source Depends on Electric Source Emissions-Construction Phase Not zero due to manufacturing of tube and vehicles Additional due to manufacturing of vehicles and construction of airport facilities Additional due to manufacturing of guideway and vehicles Additional due to manufacturing of guideway and vehicles 9 https:/ 10“Japan commits to worlds longest maglev train system,”Electric Vehicle World,26 Feb 2013 accessed at http:/ 11 Bay Area to Central Valley HST Final Program EIR/EIS,Table 3.5-5 accessed at http:/www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/programs/bay_area_eir/BayCValley_EIR2008_Vol1Ch3_5enrgy.pdf,.12 New ICAO standards for C02 emissions for jets are being adopted that will reduce emissions and fuel use by 20 to 25 percent for newly manufactured large jets.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 15 2.1.7 Capacity As mentioned above,“Hyperloop Alpha”envisions Hyperloop departures every 2 minutes on average,or as frequently as every 30 seconds during peak periods with pods capacity of 28 people.Taken together those two parameters suggest a maximum capacity of 3,360 passengers per hour.As will be discussed further below,this capacity is considerably lower than other high-speed modes and has important consequences for financial viability as transportation is an industry that generally exhibits significant economies of scale.However,it appears possible that the pods could be made longer to accommodate more passengers.Also,multiple tubes could be constructed on the same pylon structure to increase capacity.Table 7.Capacity Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Capacity Passengers per vehicle 28 per vehicle(this may be flexible)130 per plane(LA-SF)10,000 per hour LAX total 574 per train 436 per train(Tokyo-Nagoya)1,000 per train (CAHSR)Capacity-Passengers per hour 840 3,360 per hour 400 per hour(LA-SF,average current schedules)2,296 per hour(Shanghai,4 trains per hour)12,000 per hour Passengers per year 15 million per year(maximum capacity)Unknown 28 million per year(forecast CA HSR)140 million per year(actual,Tokyo-Osaka)2.1.8 System Resilience Repairs within a tube will necessarily halt operations in that tube and depending on system redundancy may impact other tubes.Repairs may potentially require the pressurization of the tube for workers to operate.If the repairs are external,operations may still need to be halted to prevent any external disturbance to operations and the tubes exacting tolerances.Halting operations in one direction may halt operations in the opposite to prevent the stacking of capsules in the system depending on the capacity of a capsule maintenance and inspection facility(stations are described to have a capacity of only 3 to 4 capsules).In a presentation,HT made a comment that they will use 3 tubes to address the Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 16 issue of maintenance.In contrast,rail and maglev systems allow for switching between tracks for track maintenance.Air travel does not require maintenance of way.For maintenance and repair of vehicles,all the modes share the ability to take a single vehicle out of service and replace it with others but because the service involves many small pods,taking one out of service will have less impact on operations than taking one of an a limited number of trainsets out of service for maintenance.There is question of how difficult it will be to maintain the partial vacuum in the tube over long distances.Will minor shifting of pylons result in significant impacts on operations?Will passengers feel jolts and bumps if pylons shift?Table 8.System Resilience Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR Resiliency Unless multiple tubes are stacked in each direction,maintenance or repair in one section of tube would require entire route to shut down.An HT presentation mentions building 3 tubes.Its unknown how minor shifts of pylons might impact operations.Aircraft can be replaced to keep service going during maintenance.Because the train is elevated,the guideway experiences minimal wear and tear,compared to rail Maglev can switch between rails,to allow for maintenance.Multiple tracks and sidings allow system to continue operations even while maintenance is performed 2.1.9 System Interoperability Because it operates in such a unique environment,hyperloop would not be able to provide interoperability with other modes.This problem has plagued adoption of maglev as well.However,HSR provides interoperability with conventional rail so that those modes can share right of away.This is particularly advantageous in cities where land acquisition costs are high.Further,communities are less likely to accommodate a large infrastructure project that doesnt provide benefits to the people in the host communities.But a community would probably be more welcoming of a new HSR track if that track could also provide local transit service.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 17 Table 9.System Interoperability Comparisons Hyperloop Air Maglev HSR System Interoperability Not interoperable,cannot provide local transit Not interoperable,cannot provide local transit Not Interoperable,but can provide short distance and long distance trips on same track.HSR track and stations can also be used by conventional intercity rail and local commuter rail,and can provide short distance and long distance trips 2.1.10 Automation Hyperloop would be completely automated with no pilot,driver,or engineer.Discussion of hyperloop often discuss the safety benefits that are expected to result from the removal of human error from the transport system.Automation is being added incrementally to the other modes with features of positive train control(rail),auto pilot(aviation),and speed regulators(trucking).The Shanghai Maglev does have a driver,but some driverless people-mover transit systems exist.It is only speculation as to whether complete automation will be safer than using human drivers.2.1.11 Enclosed System The fact that hyperloop would a completely enclosed system that is protected from interactions with the natural world(trees falling over rail tracks,birds sucked into jet engines,etc.)and from transportation modes(rail grade crossing with highways)would likely also provide safety and reliability advantages to hyperloop.2.2 Markets “Hyperloop Alpha”states that hyperloop is appropriate for markets of 900 miles or less.However,it may be more realistic to focus on markets 200-500 miles apart.At longer distances,the construction costs of the guideway begin to erode any cost-effectiveness advantage over aviation;for shorter trips,there is little net time savings over the automobile due to the need to access a terminal and go through check-in procedures.HTT Crowdsource suggest several markets.The top markets identified in the paper are the following:Los Angeles to San Francisco.Hyperloop would be competing with California HSR which is already under Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 18 construction and for which the California government has already made substantial investments.It is unlikely that the State would allow access to the I-5 corridor for hyperloop,given that doing so would undermine its own investment.Los Angeles to Las Vegas.There is currently no passenger rail service to downtown Las Vegas so that may make it an attractive market for hyperloop because of lack of competition.DesertXpress is project for HSR between Victorville,CA and Las Vegas.Victorville is the starting point because of prohibitive cost of going through Cajon Pass.The estimated cost is$5 to$6 billion.Of that,approximately$1 billion is from private financing.The project applied for federal loan for remainder was not willing to accept Buy America provisions related to federal funding.So no further progress has been on the proposal.The same challenges to faced DesertXpress(cost of crossing Cajon Pass and lack of federal funding)would likely affect hyperloop as well.Texas Triangle.This currently has no real rail service so it may be a good market for hyperloop due to the presence of several large cities and no competitive rail service.However,there is current plans for a privately financed HSR line between Dallas/Ft.Worth and Houston with travel times of less than 90 minutes for the 240 mile trip.().Below are the travel times HTT estimates for hyperloop:Dallas to Houston 22.9 minutes Dallas-Austin-San Antonio HL 28.6 minutes Houston to San Antonio 19.6 minutes Northeast Corridor.The NEC already has a mature rail market and HSR in the form of the Acela Service.The NEC Future project(NECFUTURE.com)is a large planning effort to improve the NEC rail service.The costs of acquiring ROW in this region will be extremely high due to high land prices.The topology would require many large bridges and tunneling for urban areas.Coordination among several states is also challenging.Below are the travel times HTT estimates for hyperloop:New York Boston 19.5 minutes New York Washington 21 minutes Vienna,Austria-Bratislava,Slovakia-Budapest,Hungary.It currently takes 1 hour to get to Bratislava from Vienna by train or bus,HTT estimates it would take 8 minutes with hyperloop.It would take 10 minutes from Bratislava to Budapest by hyperloop.HTT has signed an Agreement with the Slovakian government to pursue the project.Commuter Markets.Linking a city with an existing transit network and low housing costs but perhaps few employment opportunities to a city with high housing prices and abundant jobs would perhaps be the ideal application of a high speed,low cost service.However,any expensive transport link needs to serve a large number of travelers,which means high-density cities on each end which tend to have high land prices.However,some cases may exist,especially where natural or political barriers exist.One example is the Oresund link connects Denmark and Sweden with 7.5 miles of tunnel and bridge.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 19 Apparently Danes buy homes in Sweden to take advantage of lower housing prices in Malm and commute to work in Denmark.A Detroit to Chicago linkage might be a case of city pair with differing costs of living.However,the transportation link could probably be achieved with high quality rail service.The following are examples of potential commuter markets for hyperloop.Gulf of Finland Tunnel.The proposed tunnel would to link Helsinki,Finland and Tallinn,Estonia across the Gulf of Finland.The cities are 31 miles apart.Rent in Tallinn is 50%lower than in Helsinki.13 HT is studying this city pair as a potential application of hyperloop.Abu Dhabi to Dubai.The two cities are 93 miles apart.Currently only personal auto,taxi,or buses are available to service the market.Rent in Abu Dhabi is only marginally lower than in Dubai.14 HT has indicated that they are exploring this city pair as a potential market for hyperloop.2.3 Potential Revenues“Hyperloop Alpha”states that a hyperloop trip between San Francisco and Los Angeles would cost the rider$20 per one-way trip.With 15 million trips per year as the maximum capacity,that suggests$300 million per year in farebox revenue.That calculation assumes average 2 departures per minute over all 24 hours.However,very few people would want to travel in the middle of the night.So that is an upper bound estimate.In addition,the Alpha white paper mentioned that the fares would cover operating costs which leaves one to wonder where the financing for the construction and development would come from.“Hyperloop Alpha”mentions billboards as an additional source of revenue but that would likely face public opposition.The HT COO,Bibop Gresta,states explicitly that government subsidies will be required.15 13 http:/ 14 http:/ 15 https:/ Commercial Feasibility Report 20 3.Freight Service 3.1 Comparisons to Other Modes While early discussions of the potential for hyperloop focused on passenger transport with freight as an afterthought,the more recent information provided by hyperloop companies focuses on freight.Such a development might perhaps be a natural extension of the current role pipelines playing moving certain types of gas and liquid goods such as oil,natural gas,and water.This shift in focus to cargo is perhaps because of the(likely accurate)perception that it will be less risky to prove the technology on cargo than on passengers.When discussing hyperloop as freight mode there is a question as to the size limit and weight limit of a pod.There are some conceptual renderings that show the freight pod being large enough to accommodate a standard shipping container which is 10 feet by 10 feet by 40 feet.Given that NASA researchers found that the tube needs to be three to four times the size of the pod,16 this suggest a very large tub circumference(or a smaller specialized shipping container).Further there has been no discussion of what the tonnage limit for the pod would be.The tonnage limit would impact what type of freight could potentially be moved by hyperloop.Figure 1.Cargo Pod Illustration The existing modes of air,truck,and rail attract certain types of cargo and hyperloop does not offer clear advantages for the types of cargo carried by the existing air and surface modes.However,it may be an interesting prospect for movements over water where the existing shipping service is extremely slow.16 Chin,J.C.,Gray,J.S.,Jones,S.M.,and Berton,J.J.Open-Source Conceptual Sizing Models for the Hyperloop Passenger Pod,56th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures,Structural Dynamics,and Materials Conference,AIAA SciTech,(AIAA 2015-1587)http:/dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-1587 Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 21 3.1.1 Air The cargo currently served by air would be the most likely market for hyperloop service.However,air service has important operational features other than just speed.Air service provides the fastest delivery times for long distance freight movements.The service is expensive and used just for time sensitive,high value,or perishable cargo.Air travel accounts for just 1-2 percent of all freight ton-miles,but 40 percent of freight value.Fast but expensive air service makes economic sense for high value cargo because having a high value cargo sitting unused while in transit imposes a cost.In economic terms it is called the time value of money and it can be estimated as the value of the freight times the days in transit times the daily cost of capital.FedEx revolutionized package delivery with its overnight hub and spoke system.Although the internet has replaced the need for overnight letter delivery,overnight or two-day delivery has become very popular for e-retailers who must compete with brick-and-mortar stores who can provide products to customers instantly at point of sale.Hyperloop is point-to-point,meaning there would need to be a high density of high-value,perishable,or time-sensitive freight moving between a specific origin and destination pair to support a hyperloop investment.Air networks like FedEx and UPS use a hub-and-spoke network to collect cargo from multiple origins,sort it,and then distribute it to multiple destinations.The flexibility of air(not having a fixed guideway)enables the hub-and-spoke system.Hyperloop would require enormous investment to create a similar hub-and-spoke system with the same geographic reach as the air network.As a result,air appears to be a better option for most the cargo that currently travels by air.There may be some niche markets where hyperloop would have an advantage,but data simply does not exist to pinpoint what those markets might be.3.1.2 Truck Hyperloop would be unlikely to take market share from truck.Using hyperloop would still require truck service at the origin and final destination which requires unloading from the truck and loading into the pod and then unloading from the pod and loading onto a truck for final delivery.Distances shorter than 500 miles(the suggested range of the hyperloop tube)can be covered in a day by truck.Thus,it would likely be more cost effective and still very quick delivery time(less than a day),to make the shipment by truck if the cargo is currently going truck.3.1.3 Rail Hyperloop would likely not cut into rail market share significantly.Freight rail service has the advantage when moving heavy,bulk cargo that is not time sensitive.With multiple high speed rail passenger lines in place all over the world,it is notable that although the idea of using the high speed lines for freight is sometimes discussed,it has not actually been pursued,outside of priority postal service which is in Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 22 decline because of the dominance of the internet.This observation suggests that there may not be need for very high speed ground transportation for freight.3.1.4 Water Because only air(expensive but fast)and ship(cheap but slow)are available for cargo shipment across water of distance that prohibits building a bridge,there is a compelling need for an additional mode.For cargo,the super-fast speeds are not of themselves the compelling feature of hyperloop,rather super-fast speeds enable higher throughput for a given tube size.Recent presentations by HT have focused on putting the hyperloop tubes underwater as a way to avoid land acquisition costs for right of way.The HT presentations also mention the idea of using hyperloop to facilitate off-shore port facilities.Many ports are capacity constrained and unloading containers from ships to a hyperloop tube to be brought inland for sorting and distribution using equipment on offshore platforms could provide much needed expansion for port facilities.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 23 4.System Costs Upon publication in 2013,the low costs included in the“Hyperloop Alpha”white paper attracted a great deal of media attention.“Hyperloop Alpha”estimated a cost of$6 billion for the passenger-only version system,less than one tenth of the cost for the California High Speed Rail(CAHSR),then estimated at$68.4 billion.17 This section will investigate the capital and operating costs of the“Hyperloop Alpha”proposal,compare those costs with other modes of transportation,and discuss potential issues with the proposals cost estimates.For simplicity,the discussion will focus exclusively on the passenger-only version and exclude the passenger-plus-vehicle version.4.1 Capital Costs “Hyperloop Alpha”estimated the total construction cost of the system to be$6 billion including guideway construction,capsule fabrication,and stations for a route from the Los Angeles metropolitan area to the San Francisco Bay,or$17 million per mile.18 Subsequent to the Alpha white paper,HT gave a presentation citing$25-$27 million per mile for just the technology,excluding land acquisition.For an approximate frame of reference,California HSR faces costs of$63-$65 million per mile and in Europe the cost is$43 million per mile,although those figures include costs of land acquisition but exclude train sets.For an almost entirely underwater track specifically from Helsinki to Stockholm HT estimates a cost of$64 million per mile including vehicles.19 Beyond construction costs,the full capital cost of an infrastructure project typically includes conceptual engineering,final design,environmental planning,and land acquisition.These professional costs are likely easier to estimate for existing technologies and generally exclude basic research and design costs needed to bring hyperloop technology to market.These costs are excluded from the construction estimate and are likely to be significant.4.1.1 Comparison with Other Transportation Modes As presented in“Hyperloop Alpha”,the construction costs of hyperloops fixed capital assets per mile of infrastructure are lower than the traditional high speed rail and substantially lower than the costs of a maglev system.Table 10 below shows the capital costs of various passenger transportation technologies both observed and proposed.One issue driving the idea that hyperloop would be lower cost to build than HSR is that by constructing an elevated system on pylons,the builder would just need to purchase 17 Hyperloop Alpha.Page 8.18 Hyperloop Alpha.Page 56.19 https:/hyperloop- Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 24“air rights”which would be lower cost than outright land acquisition.Further,there is an assumption that the system could operate on the existing highway right-of-way further reducing costs.In addition,there appears to be an understanding that the tube guideway would be lighter weight than a steel wheel rail system and thus be cheaper to build.HSR and maglev could also be built on elevated tracks and on existing highway right-of-way.However,the relative cost savings from building a supposedly lighter-weight elevated system is an interesting future research question.Air appears to have a cost advantage because outside of airport facilities,no right of way is needed.Expanding capacity at airports is quite expensive,but those investments add huge increments of capacity and offer flexibility to reach a wide range of destinations.Table 10.Comparison of Capital Costs by Transportation Mode.Mode Infrastructure Cost(per mile)Note High Speed Rail CAHSR:$63-65 million Europe:$43 million20 CAHSR figure and Europe average from recently completed projects as detailed in the GAO report.Maglev Baltimore Washington$132 million Completely separated guideway,ROW acquisition,station Air$1.2 billion for 5th runway in Atlanta(2006)21$1.8-$3 Billion for additional runway Philadelphia22 While no right-of-way exists,airlines require substantial infrastructure at airports along with the air traffic control network.Hyperloop Alpha:$17 million Hyperloop Technologies:$25-27 million(minus land)$64 million(underwater)Based on the estimates presented in the Hyperloop Alpha proposal.HT estimate excludes land acquisition 20 http:/www.gao.gov/new.items/d09317.pdf Tables 2&3.Pages 23-24 21 http:/www.atlanta- 22 http:/ Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 25 4.1.2 Low Cost Estimates Hyperloops cost estimates are lower than other modes,but as the technology is still conceptual and in very initial testing,there is uncertainty in both the underlying infrastructure needed to operate a system and the cost to construct it.Current proposals indicate the potential for more or larger tubes that would increase the overall construction cost.The costs presented above in the Table 10 comparison represent the floor of cost as presented in the“Hyperloop Alpha”proposal.However,critics have questioned validity of those cost estimates and suggest that the costs might be much higher than initially published.23 This section will investigate the infrastructure components of the“Hyperloop Alpha”proposal and discuss any cost implications.While“Hyperloop Alpha”is but the initial proposal,its cost estimates are the most thorough and allow for investigation.The estimates of current private sector initiatives developing hyperloop technologies may differ from the“Hyperloop Alpha”proposal,but it offers a useful baseline for discussion.Table 11 shows the cost per component of the 354.6 mile route described in the Hyperloop Alpha papers passenger-only variant.It does not include the cost of the pods.The proposed route does not terminate at Los Angeles Union Station or San Franciscos Transbay Center,the planned endpoints of California High Speed Rail.23 Examples of press claiming high cost estimates:http:/ http:/ http:/greatergreaterwashington.org/post/19848/musks-hyperloop-math-doesnt-add-up/Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 26 Table 11.Cost Estimate for Guideway in Hyperloop Alpha Proposal Component Cost (Million USD)Note Tube Construction 650 709.2 miles of Tube Pylon Construction 2,550 25k pylons Tunnel Construction 600 15.2 miles of tunnel Propulsion 140 Linear induction motors Solar Panels&Batteries 210 Panels cover both tubes Station&Vacuum Pumps 260 2 stations$125 m each Permits&Land 1,000 Largely in I-5 ROW,minimal acquisitions Total 5,410 The cost estimates for individual line items may underestimate the total cost to construct a hyperloop system,beyond the exclusion of research and development funds to bring the technology from concept to market.The following list describes factors that may potentially increase the cost estimate for some line items but is not meant to substitute for a full civil engineering analysis to estimate costs.Additionally,cost elements are subject to variation in material prices.Tube Construction.The tube is to be prefabricated offsite and positioned on the pylons.The cost estimate is based on two tubes roughly 3 meters in diameter.Increasing the number of tubes or the tube diameter would increase the total tube cost.Indeed,a 3 meter diameter tube for the Alpha estimate would not be large enough for standard 10 foot tall shipping container which shows how outdated these costs estimates are given that the firms presently active had announced they will focus on freight initially.Pylon Construction.25,000 concrete pylons along the route.Pylon cost may increase if more tubes are added.One critique suggested that the pylons would need more robust seismic dampers than described in the proposal that would significantly raise costs.24 Tunnel Construction.The Hyperloop Alpha proposal estimated$50 million per mile of tunnel.The cost estimate is based on two tubes roughly 3 meters in diameter.Increasing the number of tubes or the tube diameter would increase the tunnel cost per mile.Hyperloop Alpha estimates roughly 15 miles of total tunnel length but routing changes could change this figure.24 https:/ Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 27 Station&Vacuum Pumps.Hyperloop Alpha estimated station construction costs at$125 million.The conceptual station locations were outside the urban cores both in San Francisco and Los Angeles and stations construction would be more expensive in an urban location.If more tubes are added,station and vacuum pump costs would increase to handle greater capacity.Adding intermediate stations or alternate branches would similarly increase station costs.Permits&Land.Land costs have potential to be substantially higher than estimated by Hyperloop Alpha.The Alpha paper suggests that by building the system on pylons,land owners will be willing to sell overhead access and pylon rights for lower prices than is needed for a ground level high-speed rail system.However,HSR could also be built on pylons and project planners did not pursue that option,suggesting that such cost savings compared to ground level were not sufficient to overcome the additional complexities and costs of elevated construction for HSR.Hyperloops lighter weight may mitigate the cost of pylons.Obtaining NEPA clearance and other permitting approvals will be a significant cost,particularly with a technology unfamiliar with federal agencies.4.1.3 Missing Cost Components A criticism of the Hyperloop Alpha proposal is that the route stops short of the California HSR endpoints and that a truly analogous system would be higher.In order to achieve ridership necessary to divert passengers from other modes and cover its capital costs,the route likely needs to continue into the urban core of both San Francisco and Los Angeles.At the northern end,the Hyperloop Alpha terminates in the East Bay but does not cross the San Francisco Bay into the city itself and the additional cost of bridging or tunneling under the Bay and into San Francisco would be substantial.As a point of comparison,New Jersey recently cancelled a similar two-track tunnel project under the Hudson River connecting New Jersey with New York City.The Access to the Regions Core tunnel project was budgeted at$8.7 billion,with some projections as high as$15 billion.25 A hyperloop tunnel under the San Francisco Bay into the Transbay Center alone could exceed the proposed cost of the system.At the southern end,expanding the route into Los Angeles Union Station would substantially increase the costs.Los Angeles is currently constructing a 2 mile rail tunnel connecting several rail lines near downtown at a cost of$1.4 billion.26 Los Angeles Union Station is located 25 miles further south than Hyperloops proposed endpoint.A project combining even some tunneling or raised guideway for 25 additional miles in an expensive urban environment would be substantial.Also missing from the proposal is any capsule maintenance facility where they would be cleaned,maintained,and repaired.The description of the station describes a small platform capable of handling only three to four capsules at a time eliminating their capability to store capsules for service and 25 New Jersey ARC tunnel costs.http:/ 26 http:/ Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 28 inspection purposes.The cost of a maintenance facility would vary depending on the location and footprint of such a facility,however,using the estimated station cost as a proxy,each maintenance facility could cost$125 million.4.2 Operating Cost The Hyperloop Alpha proposal offers no discussion or projection of operating&maintenance(O&M)costs apart from a single mention that its projected ridership and fare recovery covers daily operational costs with a$20 fare.Assuming that Hyperloops largest operating cost,energy,is fully covered by the self-sufficient solar panel system,there are still daily O&M costs that must be considered.This section presents several key O&M cost areas that would need to be added to any comprehensive analysis of high speed transportation options.These costs are largely labor and dependent on the size of the Hyperloop operators staff,but might be estimated by looking at overhead rates for similarly sized companies.4.2.1 Daily Management,Dispatching,&System Control While the operation of the system itself is likely highly automated,some element of human control or supervision is needed from a central command center to address issues as they arise.Day to day system operation at a minimum includes dispatching,security,and maintenance.If this work does not take place at one of the stations,the capital cost of a dispatch facility would need to be added to the cost estimate.4.2.2 Management and Planning In addition to day to day system operation,general management is needed for strategic planning of the system,long term maintenance,personal management,IT services,and business development.If this work does not take place at one of the stations,the capital cost of a facility would need to be added to the cost estimate.4.2.3 Stations The operating cost of stations was not mentioned in the proposal.While the Hyperloop Alpha proposal describes an electronic-only ticketing system that would eliminate ticket sales agents,station operations likely require other staffing.Examples of station labor costs likely to be Hyperloop stations are station safety and security personnel,customer service,pod maintenance or cleaning,and customer baggage assistance.Additional,station costs will include utilities and water for restrooms,connections to other ground transportation,and other customer amenities(coffee,Wi-Fi,or bookstore).These station operation costs need to be added to the ongoing cost of operations.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 29 4.2.4 Infrastructure Inspection Given the speeds involved and the narrow tolerances permitted,any Hyperloop technology must have a rigorous inspection regime to maintain safe operations.Amtrak inspects its high speed tracks visually twice a week and using an automated track geometry inspection vehicle roughly every 30 days.Amtraks track geometry car inspects the rails as part of normal service as the car is coupled to a train ensuring revenue operations generally arent affected.Presumably an inspection pod will be created to inspect the interior of the tube at normal operating speed,but capital costs for an inspection pod need to be added to the cost estimate if it is not already integrated into each passenger pod.Federal regulators will likely require an exterior inspection of the tubes&pylons be conducted at a much lower speed for periodic intervals on par with Amtraks bi-weekly requirement.The cost for this inspection labor as well as any vehicles or equipment needed to inspect the tube(trucks,cherry picker lifts,and electronic equipment for solar testing)need to be added to any cost estimate.4.2.5 Infrastructure Maintenance No mention of maintenance costs were mentioned in the Hyperloop Alpha proposal,but components will inevitably fail and need repair.These costs will need to be added to any cost estimate but are not estimated here.As mentioned above in Section 2.1.8,repairs within a tube will necessarily halt operations in that tube and depending on system redundancy may impact other tubes.Another large cost for any inspection and maintenance activity is the foregone revenue from any downtime if operations have to be halted.The redundancy of the system may impact its ability to continue revenue operations during a maintenance period.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 30 5.Regulatory and Policy Issues 5.1 Access to Public Rights of Way(ROW)Early discussions of hyperloop concept suggested that a hyperloop system could be built at lower cost than HSR by minimizing land acquisition costs through extensive use of highway medians and other public ROW.While it is not uncommon to use highway medians for other transport modes,such as light rail transit,this would raise numerous safety,engineering,and aesthetic issues.More broadly,state highway officials would need to consider whether the public interest is best served by this use.It is an open question as to whether communities would be willing to host a facility that services long distance travel mode at the expense of using resources to provide local transit.As mentioned in Section 2.1.9 discussing interoperability,as currently described,hyperloop guideway could only be used for hyperloop pods.It would be an interesting research question to evaluate whether the system could be adapted to offer lower speed transit-type service(with more stations accessed)within metropolitan areas.Such interoperability might make communities more willing to host the facilities and grant hyperloop access to city centers,instead of requiring the building of terminal stations at the outskirts of town.5.2 Safety Regulation Because Hyperloop is an entirely new system that runs on neither roads nor rails,it may present novel issues related to the Federal role in ensuring safe operation.For one,it is unclear which of the USDOT modal administrations,if any,would have the legal authority to issue and enforce safety regulations for hyperloop,and the extent to which safety responsibility would be shared with state regulators and private owners/operators.Emergency response across a 500-mile alignment would also need to be coordinated with state and local agencies.In particular,the proposed Hyperloop alignment passes through rural areas where local fire departments may not have the specialized equipment and expertise necessary to address a fire or evacuation of the elevated system.The Shanghai maglev system is also elevated so a similar concern may be present for that technology but HSR is generally not elevated,5.3 Federal involvement with development of other modes The United States Department of Transportation(USDOT)and its modal administrations have made significant investments in the US aviation system and in researching the feasibility of high-speed surface travel technologies,notably high-speed rail(HSR)and maglev.The Federal government has supported commercial aviation since at least 1925,with the passage of the Air Mail Act,which provided an important source of revenue to the nascent aviation industry in the form of Post Office contracts.During the 1930s the Federal government also took on responsibility for air Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 31 traffic control functions.The World War II military buildup saw massive investment in airfields and other infrastructure,followed by significant technology transfer from the defense industry to civilian aviation in areas such as aircraft design.Today,Federal investment in aviation continues through the Airport and Airway Trust Fund,supported in part by ticket and fuel taxes,which funds FAA operations,upgrades to air traffic control,and grants to local airports.Federal support for HSR dates back to the High Speed Ground Transportation Act of 1965,($90 million for R&D,or about$671 million in todays money).Specific HSR corridors were first designated in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act(ISTEA)legislation in 1992,with additional corridors designated in 1998-2004.Major funding support resumed in 2008-2009 with the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act(PRIIA)and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act(ARRA),which together led to a renewed emphasis on HSR corridor development and a total of$10 billion in funding for state-and region-led projects.Since then,there has been planning support,and about$3.2 billion in funding for incremental improvements and Positive Train Control on designated HSR corridors.However,it is unclear whether significant Federal investment in HSR will continue,due largely to political concerns about cost,cost-effectiveness,and subsidy levels;a more constrained fiscal climate vis-vis the stimulus package era;and arguably,the lack of a high-profile HSR success story outside of the highly urbanized Northeast Corridor.Magnetic levitation(maglev)trains have also received substantial federal research support,starting with a National Maglev Initiative(NMI)authorized in 1991 with$12 million in funding.NMI studies on maglev technologies,performance,safety and environmental issues,and cost concluded that US maglev applications were premature.However,the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century(TEA-21)established the Federal Railroad Administration(FRA)s Maglev Deployment Program to explore the feasibility of maglev technology on specific routes,awarding grants to 7 projects for pre-construction planning and environmental studies.Two finalists were selected for continued evaluation and initial project development,including engineering design and analysis.However,funding has been limited since then and FRA has generally not pursued the maglev concept.In the United States,maglev implementation appears to suffer from high capital costs(including right of way acquisition,guideway,and power infrastructure construction),lack of interoperability with existing rail infrastructure,and modest travel time and cost savings versus commercial air service.To date,technical and commercial viability has been proven in overseas deployments;the most ambitious is the Japan Central Railroad Tokyo-Osaka route,set to open in 2027.5.4 Public Funding It seems clear that even if hyperloop has capital costs lower than HSR,it will still need public subsidy.At present,there appears to be a general presumption against government interfering in the private marketplace or placing large“bets”on particular new technologies or products,at least in the US.For that reason,the various hyperloop companies appear to be focusing on foreign markets.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 32 For the hyperloop concept,the relevant public funding policy question would be whether the prospect of very high-speed,potentially low-emissions travel in a limited number of corridors would be so compelling as to warrant public funding;and if so,at what stage of development?If significant public investment were to occur,that would also introduce myriad questions about governance,business model,and fare policy,since the system would not be fully private.In the US,Federal funding comes with many stipulations about how it can be used including Davis-Bacon Act prevailing wages and Buy America provisions.The Buy America requirements apparently halted progress on the DesertXpress proposal for HSR between Victorville,CA and Las Vegas.There may also be equity considerations,particularly if the hyperloop emerges as a high-end,niche product for passengers willing to pay a substantial premium for travel time savings.As regards freight,after deregulation in the 1970s and 1980s of the air,rail and trucking sectors,the US freight policy has been to generally leave those markets to the private sector.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 33 6.Safety Issues The purpose of this safety analysis is not to conduct a formal safety risk assessment in which hazards are identified,the risk of possible outcomes of the hazards in terms of severity and likelihood of occurrence is determined,and measures to mitigate the risk are proposed.The intent is merely to outline some of the safety issues that need to be addressed during the design,development,and requirements definition phases of the Hyperloop transportation concept.These safety issues and considerations have been documented in white papers describing the Hyperloop concept published by Elon Musk of SpaceX27 and Hyperloop Transportation Technologies28,as well as in numerous publicly-available articles and critiques.What is lacking in the currently available literature,however,are detailed descriptions of safety mishaps and the failure chains leading to them for capsules,passengers,and system operation,along with credible prevention options and mitigation strategies.Musk advances several strategies and design solutions for mitigating the risks of potential safety hazards in his Hyperloop Alpha White Paper,and many of these are included in this section.6.1 Key Safety Questions Hyperloop Transportation Technologies has listed several questions that have important safety-related implications for the Hyperloop concept.Many of these questions will be discussed briefly in the sections that follow.How will tube construction allow for emergencies,such as rapid depressurization or large-scale leaks,capsule malfunction,or natural disasters such as earthquakes?What will happen in the event of the depressurization of a Hyperloop capsule?What happens if a capsule is stranded in the tube?Where will the emergency exits be?How fast can the capsule decelerate for emergency stop without damaging the system?What is the capsule behavior if it hits higher or even normal density air while traveling at 700 MPH?Can it be designed to survive that and protect the passengers?How fast will the capsule decelerate if it encounters high-density air?Can the problem of excessive drag on the capsules be overcome even in such a thin atmospheric environment?What is the potential of supersonic air surrounding the capsules?27 Hyperloop Alpha 28 Hyperloop Transportation Technologies Crowdstorm Documentation Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 34 If there is a large tube breach,will the air be filling the tube at a high velocity?Will the additional speed and turbulence increase the danger to the capsule?Will oxygen masks work in a major capsule breach?How long will the system continue to run if power is lost in the area?Is it possible to provide a fire suppression system inside the capsule?What material and method of tube construction presents the ideal combination of safety,cost,and overall function(e.g.,steel,carbon fiber,Kevlar)?6.2 Onboard Passenger Emergency and Passenger Evacuation In the event of a serious incident,passengers may lose oxygen.In such a circumstance,as in airplanes,oxygen masks would be deployed.Once the capsule reached the destination safely it would be removed from service.Safety of the onboard air supply in hyperloop would be very similar to aircraft.All capsules would have direct radio contact with station operators in case of emergencies,allowing passengers to report any incident,to request help and to receive assistance.In addition,all capsules would be equipped with first aid equipment.Despite these safety measures,the issue of an en route passenger illness or emergency is not addressed rigorously in the available literature.SpaceX claims that because of the short hyperloop travel times(San Francisco to Los Angeles in 30 minutes),the best course of action in case of emergency would be for the capsule to communicate the situation to the station operator and for the capsule to finish the journey in a few minutes where emergency services would be waiting to assist.All capsules would have direct radio contact with station operators in case of emergencies,allowing passengers to report any incident,to request help and to receive assistance.In addition,all capsules would be fitted with first aid equipment.Musk concludes that an emergency in a hyperloop capsule simply requires the system to complete the planned journey and meet emergency personnel at the destination.29 Emergency evacuations also present a safety challenge.Musk discusses the use of escape hatches,but these would likely create undue leakage.One critique of hyperloop30 states that the larger version of hyperloop(intended to carry cars as well as passengers)may accommodate these needs,but the proposed passenger-only version did not.29 Hyperloop Alpha,p.54 30 Natalie Burkhard,“Why Invent the Hyperloop?”,http:/large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph240/burkhard2/Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 35 6.3 Capsule Deceleration in Response to System Malfunction The passenger capsules,which coast through the tubes,pushed in front of a column of pressurized air,are coasting for much of their journey.They would be equipped with emergency brakes and engine-driven wheels in case they are stranded or need to avoid hitting a stranded hyperloop pod.In the event of a large scale capsule depressurization,other capsules in the tube would automatically begin emergency braking while the hyperloop tube would undergo rapid re-pressurization along its entire length.In one proposed operational concept,once all capsules behind the stranded capsule are safely brought to rest,capsules would drive themselves to safety using small onboard electric motors to power deployed wheels.All capsules would be equipped with a reserve air supply great enough to ensure the safety of all passengers for a worst case scenario event.The safety concern in the case of a required rapid deceleration is that the margin for error appears to be relatively slim.The system would have up to 28-passenger cars departing every two minutes on average or every 30 seconds during peak-use periods,putting as many as 70 capsules in a tube connecting Los Angeles to San Francisco and more than twice that number on a 1,000-mile route.Given their speeds and departure intervals,the capsules would be separated by appreciable distances,approximately 37 km(23 miles)on average during operation.Nevertheless,a serious safety hazard is introduced if a problem occurs that forces the capsules to slow or come to a stop and the brakes fail in even one of the capsules.31 NASA calculated required stopping distances in the event of an emergency of system failure or malfunction.To simplify the calculations,a maximum capsule speed of 295 m/s(660 mph),maximum acceleration of 0.5 gs,and a capsule launched every 30 seconds were assumed.In addition,it was assumed that each capsule would know instantly if a capsule ahead has emergency stopped.A capsule can accelerate to its maximum speed of 295 m/s in 60 seconds.Using these assumptions,the calculations indicated that,even if the first capsule goes from maximum speed to stopped instantaneously,the second capsule only needs to decelerate at 0.5 g to avoid collision(with 0ctor of safety),or it can decelerate at 0.6 g with a 20ctor of safety.From these results,it was determined that the separation distance between two capsules once they both reach maximum speed will be approximately 8.85 km,and approximately 4.5km would be needed to come to a complete stop from maximum speed at 1 g deceleration.Thus,the analysis concluded that the proposed 30-second headway is very feasible from a stopping time perspective.31 Matt Peckham,“4 Reasons Elon Musks Hyperloop Could Tank,”http:/ Commercial Feasibility Report 36 6.4 Power Outage While hyperloop would include safety systems,from oxygen masks(in the event of depressurization)to emergency brakes and retractable wheels in each pod,systems like these are not impervious to glitches,power outages,and battery backup failures.In the event of a power outage in the area,and to avoid a lengthy shutdown of the Hyperloop system,it seems that it would be necessary to at least complete the trip for all in-progress capsules.Hyperloop Transportation Technologies states that it would be desirable,if possible,to continue for 8 hours to allow people to get home.SpaceX maintains that the vast majority of the hyperloop travel distance is spent coasting and so the capsule does not require continuous power to travel.The risk of a power outage is mitigated in their design by using two or more redundant lithium ion battery packs to power the capsule life support systems.In the event of a power outage occurring after a capsule had been launched,all linear accelerators would be equipped with enough energy storage to bring all capsules currently in the hyperloop tube safely to a stop at their destination.In addition,linear accelerators using the same storage would complete the acceleration of all capsules currently in the tube.For additional redundancy,all hyperloop capsules would be fitted with a mechanical braking system to bring capsules safely to a stop.32 6.5 Capsule Depressurization One potential risk for passengers of trains operating in evacuated tubes is that they could be exposed to the risk of cabin depressurization unless safety monitoring systems can re-pressurize the tube in the event of a train malfunction or accident.However,since the hyperloop capsules operate very close to the Earths surface,emergency restoration of ambient pressure should be straightforward.In the event of a minor leak,it is proposed that the onboard environmental control system would maintain capsule pressure using the reserve air carried onboard for the short period of time it will take to reach the destination.In the case of a more significant depressurization,oxygen masks would be deployed as in airplanes.Pressure is so low(100 Pascal)that under the point of view of human physiology the conditions are closer to space than to the ones at commercial airplanes.At 100 Pascal,none of the emergency measures commonly used even by military pilots(except the partial pressure suit),are enough to avoid severe hypoxia and traumas related to the decompression.33 Maintaining even a partial vacuum is nontrivial and expensive.If a leak were to occur,the entire tube 32 Hyperloop Alpha,p.54 33 Hyperloop Transportation Technologies Crowdstorm Documentation Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 37 would shut down.In addition,the extremely thin air cushion is worrisome.The tolerances provide little factor of safety so that in the best case scenario,the passengers experience uncomfortable bumps and turbulence;the worst case outcome could be potentially devastating.34 6.6 Capsule Stranded in Tube A capsule stranded in a tube due to a system or component malfunction or perhaps a passenger emergency presents a safety hazard.In their Hyperloop Alpha White Paper35,SpaceX addresses this issue by stating that this scenario is highly unlikely since the capsule coasts the majority of the distance at high speed,and no propulsion is required for more than 90%of the journey.If a capsule were somehow to become stranded,capsules ahead would continue their journeys to the destination unaffected.Capsules behind the stranded one would be automatically instructed to deploy their emergency mechanical braking systems.Once all capsules behind the stranded capsule had been safely brought to rest,capsules would drive themselves to safety using small onboard electric motors to power deployed wheels.In addition,all capsules would be equipped with a reserve air supply great enough to ensure the safety of all passengers for a worst case scenario event.6.7 Environmental Hazards An important safety concern,particularly on the proposed route from Los Angeles to San Francisco through central California,is resistance of the pylon and tube infrastructure to earthquakes.In California,transport systems are all built with earthquakes in mind.Musk comments that hyperloop would be no different with the entire tube length built with the necessary flexibility to withstand the earthquake motions while maintaining the hyperloop tube alignment.It is also likely that in the event of a severe earthquake,hyperloop capsules would be remotely commanded to actuate their mechanical emergency braking systems.36 Another concern expressed in one critique of the hyperloop concept has to do with temperature.It is argued that the passenger capsule will be compressing air and expelling it downwards and backwards,thus creating an enormous amount of heat that could potentially damage the capsule and its machinery.37 Musks solution is to add to each capsule a water tank that will capture that heat and turn 34 Natalie Burkhard,“Why Invent the Hyperloop?”,http:/large.stanford.edu/courses/2014/ph240/burkhard2/35 Hyperloop Alpha,p.55 36 Hyperloop Alpha,p.55 37 Matt Peckham,“4 Reasons Elon Musks Hyperloop Could Tank,”http:/ Commercial Feasibility Report 38 it into steam to be offloaded at the next station.However,a thermodynamic analysis conducted by NASA38 concluded that the dominant heating factors and thermal interactions are a result of the massive tube structure and are unrelated to the heat generated by the capsule compression system.Therefore,the temperature effect from air compression would be minimal and the steady-state temperature inside the tube would be only 10-20F higher than ambient temperatures.As a result,the need for the originally proposed water-based heat exchangers is eliminated.Wind stress is another challenge.Any structure elevated 100 feet off the ground is going to be under a lot of wind pressure,which will act on it in unpredictable and sometimes multiple directions.If that structure is a heavy tube stretching hundreds of miles in either direction,you effectively have a big sail.Will the concrete pylons be powerful enough to resist that pressure?This problem is similar to air flow over a cylinder and could therefore be easily and accurately modeled.6.8 Prototype The biggest issues with hyperloop technology are speed and scale.It is still unclear how to create a prototype that verifies the safety of the technology and allows testing of all necessary components.It is easy to imagine safety concerns limiting hyperloop speeds to just a fraction of its theoretical top speed or right-of-way issues keeping stations far from urban centers.These deployment details are critical issues for the hyperloop,but as long as the tests are focused on the planned 5-mile test tracks that are under development,it is not clear these issues will ever be fully understood.If one wonders how fast the hyperloop can go or how safe it will be at high speeds,a 5-mile test track will only provide the slightest glimpse of the important challenges ahead.A test track of only 5 miles falls far short of the distance needed to reach 700 miles per hour.For the same reason,these test tracks cannot address the unique safety issues that come with near-supersonic travel.The result is just a tube-powered version of conventional transportation technology such as maglev and high-speed rail.39 A possible solution proposed by Hyperloop Transportation Technologies would be to create a full-scale version on a commercial route used for freight transport only.Using this approach,all components of the system could be tested under optimized speed and acceleration conditions,and valuable data would be collected for the final design of system used to transport human passengers.In order to get up to speed and be able to slow down,a minimum length of a little over 38 km(23.61 miles)would be needed,but it would not be able to be used by people;a smooth ride would require approximately 120km(74.56 miles).As the cost for such a prototype is close to the cost of a fully operational system,it 38 Chin,J.C.,Gray,J.S.,Jones,S.M.,and Berton,J.J.“Open-Source Conceptual Sizing Models for the Hyperloop Passenger Pod.”AIAA 2015-1587,56th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference,January 2015.39 Russell Brandom,“The Hyperloops biggest questions are still unanswered,”http:/ Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 39 would make sense to place it in an area that has an actual need for hyperloop transportation.Hyperloop Commercial Feasibility Report 40 7.Key Research Issues In attempting to evaluate the commercial feasibility of the hyperloop transportation concept,several interesting research questions have emerged:1.Is the hyperloop transportation system sufficiently lightweight that there would significant construction cost savings compared to building an elevated HSR or maglev system?2.What are the technology hurdles to building hyperloop underwater and can they be overcome?3.Can the capacity of a hyperloop pod be expanded to seat more than the originally proposed 28 passengers?4.What would be the weight limit for a freight capsule?5.How big would the tube need to be in order to carry a standard size shipping container?6.Can the system be designed so that in addition to carrying long distance passengers,it can also provide local transit service?7.Would hyperloop be loud for passengers?Would hyperloop be loud in communities?U.S.Department of Transportation John A.Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 55 Broadway Cambridge,MA 02142-1093 617-494-2000 www.volpe.dot.gov DOT-VNTSC-NASA-16-01
2025-03-12
47页
5星级
Hyperloop:the fifth mode of transportation Faculty of Civil and Industrial Engineering Department of Civil,Construction and Environmental Engineering Masters Degree in Transport Systems Engineering Mirhabib Alizada Matricola 1848643 Supervisor Paola Di Mascio A.Y.2020-2021 2 Contents ABSTRACT.3 INTRODUCTION.5 Introduction of Hyperloop and the review of current state of the project.5 Exploration of Hyperloop Companies:.18 Analysis of technological systems.20 a.Levitation.20 b.Propulsion.25 c.Braking.29 Technology generations.33 Technology Readiness Level.34 Hyperloop infrastructure.35 Designing the tube.40 Hyperloop Linear Infrastructure and Tunneling from Hyperloop TT.41 Tube to Station Vacuum Interface from Delft Hyperloop.45 Hyperloop Stations from Hyperloop TT.47 Infrastructural Challenges.50 Safety and Politics.53 Safety.53 Politics.59 Hyperloop Freight Market.61 Possible Freight Target Markets.61 SUMMARY.68 CONCLUSION.69 REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY.71 3 ABSTRACT In 2013,Elon Musk proposed an idea.He would propel passengers in a pod through an evacuated tube at nearly the speed of sound,hurtling them from Los Angeles to San Francisco in 30 minutes.Its a lot quicker than the 2 hours and 40 minutes of the rival technology,a proposed high-speed train.He called this scheme the Hyperloop and said it would cost US$6 billion to build versus$60 billion for the train.And because the Hyperloops friction-free movement would save energy,operating costs would be lower,too.Brussels,February 11,2020,A new milestone in hyperloop transportation was reached when European countries banded together and agreed to create a joint technical committee(JTC)called JTC 20.As part of the European Committee for Standardization(CEN)and the European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization(CENELEC),the goal of this technical committee is to define,establish,and standardize the methodology and framework to regulate hyperloop travel systems and ensure interoperability and high safety standards throughout Europe.The proposal for the creation of the technical committee was a joint effort by the national standardization organizations of Spain(UNE)and the Netherlands(NEN).JTC 20 will comprise working groups focusing on various components of hyperloop systems including vehicle systems,tube infrastructure and components,overall infrastructure,and communications protocols.The consortium of hyperloop companies responsible for initiating the creation of JTC 20,along with members from various national standardization organizations and experts from a variety of industries,will participate in the working groups to lend technical and geo-specific expertise.In this thesis,a research was implemented on the possible technologies for the new mode of transport.First of all,the history of the new mode of the transport were studied for deeper diving into the system idea and previous experiments failures and learning pints.Also,the current situation with the international organization working on research and development of the systems were analyzed.Further,my research was carried out on the available technologies for the system and pros and cons of 4 each of them.It was also proposed a concept for safety and security measurements and the public-private partnership for the sustainability of the project.The Hyperloop will integrate engineering,operations and safety concepts from aviation and highway as well as from rail.Therefore,the Hyperloop has been called a“fifth mode”of transportation,since it doesnt fit neatly into any of the existing established models,but rather it integrates design and operational concepts from a number of different existing transportation modes.Many of Hyperloops concepts are not really new,but rather integrate already proven technologies in a new way.5 INTRODUCTION Introduction of Hyperloop and the review of current state of the project There is a continuous interest to reduce travel times between distant human settlements while improving the overall efficiency of the transportation system.Transportation for short distances can be particularly inefficient due to additional travel time at airports or train stations.In 2013,Elon Musk triggered the attention of the engineering society by proposing the Hyperloop concept as an alternative mode of transportation,with benefits in terms of performance and comfort for traveling distances below 1500 km.The concept consists of a levitating vehicle/pod traveling at high speeds(300 ms),inside a low-pressure tube(100 Pa)that minimizes aerodynamic drag.The levitation can be achieved through an air-bearings system that generates a smooth air cushion,although different methods such as magnetic levitation or rails can be explored,depending on the application and feasibility.In case of an air-bearing system,the required high-pressure air can be delivered by a compressor placed in front of the pod.Additionally,with this system,part of the flow can be compressed and bypass the throat area,which helps to delay the flow choking.Present-day transportation can be grouped into 4 large categories:cars boats trains airplanes Lets first have a look at cars.We see that many people use the car because it is the most flexible mode of transportation.You get in right after you leave your house and you then travel by car all the way to your destination.The car expels a quite large amount of polluting gases,especially when not occupied to full capacity.6 We can also consider boats.These largely have two use cases.First,we have luxury transportation,such as yachts and cruise ships.These have quite high emissions and are of course mostly not made for speed,as people spend their time relaxing instead of only traveling to reach their destination.Secondly,cargo ships can be considered,which are of course polluting and very slow,but also carry a large number of products,thus somewhat compensating their high emissions for nowadays.Third,think of trains.These travel quite fast and relatively efficiently,also allowing for more sustainable energy sources,since they often use electricity nowadays.There are however also still quite some trains running on diesel,which are more polluting.Also,the infrastructure maintenance of this category cost quite much.Finally,well have a look at airplanes.These are the fastest mode of transportation available to us,but also one of the most polluting.This type of transportation especially,has very high emissions.When looking at our options for transportation,it is interesting to rank them according to a graph with speed on one axis and efficiency on the other.Efficiency here means how much energy per passenger per km is required(kJ/passenger/km).Figure 1:Speed-Efficiency graph(own elaboration)7 As you can see,there is one quadrant where a transportation method is missing,and that is when something is both fast and efficient.Of course,companies are trying to make their planes more efficient or their trains faster,but still after years of development we have not found the solution for existing transportation.This is where the Hyperloop fits in according to project.The Hyperloop vehicle is a conceptual mode of transportation in which a pod travels at high speed through a low-pressure tunnel to minimize the aerodynamic drag.Its believed that the concept first was introduced in August 2013,by SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk as a published a white paper.It was detailing a Hyperloop,a super-fast passenger train that would overcome the usual friction by levitating above its track on air-bearings in an enclosed low-pressure tube.However,he is not the first person to think of this concept.George Medhurst was an inventor who had already proposed a method of goods-transportation through iron pipes using air pressure.He came up with the idea of transporting passengers through the tubes in 1812,more than 200 years ago!Figure 2:The Brunel Jolly-sailor railwor station and pumping station,1845(Wikipedia Commons)8 The development of the so called“atmospheric railways”began in the mid-1850s.Several pneumatic railways were built in Europe,one example is The London Pneumatic Despatch system,which was opened by a festive ceremony in which the Duke of Buckingham traveled through the pneumatic system in 1865.Figure 3:Alfred Ely Beachs experimental pneumatic elevated subway on display in 1867(Wikipedia Commons)So how were these atmospheric railways designed?It is quite simple.They made tubes(in which air was present)through which carriages could move on a track.To generate movement,the tubes were equipped with a large fan that propelled the carriage by blowing air into the tube.On the return trip the fan was reversed,resulting in movement in the other direction.An example is the idea of using low-pressure or vacuum tubes as part of a transport system has a long heritage too.For example,Crystal Palace Atmospheric Railway in South London,built in the mid-1860s.The Crystal Palace pneumatic railway used air pressure to push a wagon uphill(and a vacuum to drag it back down)way back in Victorian south London in 1864.Similar systems using pneumatic tubes to send mail and packages between buildings have been in use since the late nineteenth century and can still be seen in supermarkets and banks to move money around today.9 Figure 4:Crystal Palace pneumatic railway(Wikipedia Commons)In the United States,similar developments were going on;Alfred Ely Beach designed the Beach Pneumatic Transit,which operated in New York from 1870 to 1873.This system was inspired upon the already existing pneumatic mail delivery system.Beach was not supported by local politics for the project of building a Pneumatic Transit system for passengers.To get the support,he claimed that he was working on a pneumatic mail delivery system(while instead building a bigger system to transport human passengers).It became a public attraction,for 25 cents people could ride the one-stop one-car shuttle.Unfortunately,his investors could no longer keep up the operation after the stock market crash in 1873.10 Figure 5:Wikipedia Beach Pneumatic Transit(Museum of the City of New York)In the early 1900s,the design shifted from a propulsion based on atmospheric pressure differences,as in the atmospheric railways,to vacuum-sealed tunnels.Robert Goddard,an American rocket engineer,designed a magnetically floating train inside a vacuum tube in 1910.The design looks a lot like the hyperloop concept that was shared by Elon Musk.Besides Goddards concept,an extensive study was performed by the US government into vactrain,the combination of magnetic levitation and near-vacuum tubes.The concept of magnetic levitation was very promising,however,this project was too expensive to continue.11 Figure 6:Robert Goddards vactrain concept(Wikipedia Commons)Magnetic Levitation,or Maglev,became a hot topic in the late 1900s.The Government Maglev System Assessment Team assessed the viability of several maglev system concepts with innovative outcomes in the fields of guideways,superconductivity and motors.Several maglev concepts have proved to be functioning,for instance the Transrapid(Germany),M-Bahn(Germany),HSST(Japan)and SCMaglev(Japan).Moreover,China has unveiled a prototype maglev that is supposed to reach 600 km/h.12 Figure 7:The first maglev prototype rolled off the production lines(Getty Images)The Maglev business is not skyrocketing,there are only a few operational Maglevs.One of the reasons might be that the investment costs are simply too high.Besides that,as is often the case with new modes of transportation,safety concerns were high,and some systems werent reliable enough.The crash of the Transrapid in Emsland,Germany in 2006 that resulted in 23 deceased probably also played its role in the popularity of Maglev.Also MIT researchers designed a vacuum-tube train system with a magnetic track for a 45-minute trip from New York City to Boston in the early 1990s that looked very similar to the hyperloop concept of today.13 Figure 8:Researchers at MIT designed a vacuum-tube train system(MIT)Some startups began designing magnetically levitating carriages in pneumatic tubes,such as ET3(USA).In the early 2000s,transportation startup ET3 designed a pneumatic-and-maglev train.The design features car-sized pods that would travel in elevated tubes.The ET3 Global Alliance(ET3)was founded by Daryl Oster in 1997 with the goal of establishing a global transportation system using passenger capsules in frictionless maglev full-vacuum tubes.14 Figure 9:Pneumatic-and-maglev train designed by ET3(ET3)Elon Musk first publicly mentioned the Hyperloop in 2012.His initial concept incorporated reduced-pressure tubes in which pressurized capsules ride on air bearings driven by linear induction motors and axial compressors.From late 2012 until August 2013,a group of engineers from both Tesla and SpaceX worked on the conceptual modeling of Hyperloop.Finally,in 2013,Elon Musk published his proposal for the Hyperloop Alpha concept.The envisioned preliminary design was published in a 57-page white paper.From that moment onwards,lots of companies have embraced the challenge of developing a hyperloop.For example,ET3 founder,Daryl Oster,and his team met with Elon Musk on 18 September 2013,to discuss the technology,resulting in Musk promising an investment in a 3-mile(5 km)prototype of ET3s proposed design(source).15 Figure 10:Hyperloop Alpha(Hyperloop Alpha White Paper)Back in August of 2013,Musk declined to start a Hyperloop company himself.Instead,he made his work open to any startups that might want to tackle the challenge and started a contest series for engineering students to run their own test pods.Two startups have since dominated the scene:Virgin Hyperloop One(USA),which enjoyed a significant investment from Richard Bransons Virgin Group,and Hyperloop Transportation Technologies(HyperloopTT)(USA),which began as a collaboration among 800 engineers,designers,and other interested parties.Hyperloop is still in its beginning phase,but there is progress:technology is being developed,feasibility studies are being carried out and the whole world is ready to make the next step towards a future with sustainable high-speed transportation.In 2017,HyperloopTT opened the 3,000 square meter European Hyperloop Research and Development Center in Toulouse,France.In 2019,with tubes assembled and vacuum pumps installed,HyperloopTT completed the worlds first full-scale system.HyperloopTT is currently running full-scale tests to establish safety and insurance certifications,as well as optimizing and fully integrating all of the technical 16 components of the system.The Toulouse R&D center also serves as HyperloopTTs staging ground for global commercial projects.HyperloopTT also has several agreements on the books for potential Hyperloops in the future.For example in February 2018,HyperloopTT signed an agreement with the Infrastructure Ministry of Ukraine to begin the process for a planned commercial Hyperloop system as an initiative aligned with the nations National Transport Strategy of Ukraine 2030.In July 2018,the company signed an agreement to develop a Hyperloop in Chinas Guizhou Province.In April 2018,the agreement was with the UAE for the worlds first commercial Hyperloop system of 10km in critical development area between Abu Dhabi and Dubai,which will allow HyperloopTT to start construction of a Hyperloop system as well as HyperloopTTs XO Square Innovation Center,and a Hyperloop Visitor Center.In February 2018,HyperloopTT began a feasibility study for a Hyperloop between Cleveland and Chicago.Even though there are a lot of investments into the project and researches on the one are happening along with test failure and pessimistic forecasts,in this paper I am going to analyze mostly the engineering side of project alongside with infrastructure aspects and social-economical acceptance.Below there are two graphs that rank our current modes of transportation.The first one shows you the efficiency in terms of energy consumption per kilometer per passenger(Source:TU Delft).It can be seen that airplanes and cars are the most polluting.Maglev trains and conventional trains score quite good,and the Hyperloop will be in the same range.However,if we compare it to the speeds,as seen in the second graph(Source:TU Delft),the Hyperloop is by far the fastest mode.Especially the combination of low energy consumption and high speeds make the Hyperloop a good alternative to the existing modes!17 Figure 11:Energy Consumption of Modes(TU Delft)Figure 12:Speed(TU Delft)In both graphs Hyperloop data was assumed,but this assumption turned to the goal for the further development of the project.18 Exploration of Hyperloop Companies:Since the 2013 release of Elon Musks Alpha paper and the subsequent SpaceX-led pod design competition,a number of private and public entities have been formed with the aim of establishing a commercially viable Hyperloop design by developing the tube,power supply,vacuum system and surrounding infrastructure required for the operation and testing of a pod/capsule within the tube environment Virgin Hyperloop One-This company was established in 2014 and is now one of the biggest companies working on Hyperloop.They are located in the United States.As the name already indicates,it is one of Richard Bransons Virgin companies.They have already created a Hyperloop pod and tested this prototype at Devloop,their testing site in Neveda.The XP-1 already reached a top speed of about 310 km/h.As of today(begin 2020),Virgin Hyperloop One has performed many feasibility studies in which they investigated places that are suitable for a first connection.Some design parameters are the investment cost,distance between the cities,travel time and environmental factors and challenges in between the cities(e.g.a large water in between cities results in a huge additional cost to build around,over or underneath the water).Hyperloop Transportation Technologies(HyperloopTT)-This hyperloop company originates from a crowdfunding project and is a crowd collaboration mix(team collaboration crowdfunding).They are developing a full-scale test track in Toulouse,France where they will perform Research and Development.The initial length of the test track is 320 meter.The current states of this test facility is kept confidential yet.Hyperloop Transportation Technologies has performed several feasibility studies in the United States and China.The plan is to construct a 10 km track in Tongren,Guizhou,China.Hardt-This is a Dutch hyperloop company,located in Delft.Hardt is the first company that has developed electromagnetic switches and proved their concept on low speeds.In December 2019,they announced the development of the European Hyperloop Center,a test centre in Groningen,The Netherlands.The finish of the construction of the 3-kilometer test track is scheduled to be in 2022.19 Transpod-Transpod has their HQ located in Toronto,Canada.They have shared visions for routes in Canada.Besides that,they unveiled designs of the Transpod hyperloop station.A remarkable feature about the design featured in their videos is a compressor on the front of the pod.Besides those companies,there are some smaller companies and student teams whore also working on the development of hyperloop.In overview,table below summarizes the leading Hyperloop developers.Hyperloop Developer HQ No.of employees Testing Facilities Equity Funding VHO USA 300 Completed:500m,USA Developing:12KM,India$500M HTT USA 100 Developing:320m,France$100M TransPod Canada 50 Developing:3km*,France$100M Hardt Netherlands 50 Completed:30m,Netherlands Developing:3km,Netherlands$100M Zeleros Spain 50 Developing:2km*,Spain$10M Hyper Poland Poland 50 Completed:30m*,Poland Developing:500m*,Poland$10M KRRI South Korea 50 Developing:7km*,South Korea N/A SwissPod Technologies Switzerland 10 Developing:40m*,Switzerland$1M*Scaled-down vehicle and tube/track Table 1:Summary of Leading Hyperloop Companies(Hyperloop feasibility prelim study)There is also Boring Company,which is not Hyperloop company,but directly affecting the technology maturing.The Boring Company is founded by Elon Musk himself.The main goal is to increase the speed of Tunnel Boring Machines.Since a significant part of the hyperloop infrastructure will be built underground,increasing the speed of these Tunnel Boring Machines is paramount.They also help to organise the yearly SpaceX Hyperloop Pod Competition.20 Analysis of technological systems Hyperloop is a tube-based inter and intra-city transportation system that travels at airplane speeds safely,efficiently,and sustainably.Passengers and cargo capsules will levitate inside a tube.By creating a low-pressure environment inside the tube using vacuum technology,aerodynamic drag is considerably reduced allowing for not only faster speeds,but a safer,cleaner and quieter form of energy-efficient transport.In this chapter the levitation,propulsion and braking technics considered by TU Delft for Hyerloop will be described as well as Technology Readiness Level(TRL)framework will be introduced.a.Levitation Lets have a quick look at wheels,for getting some background.As you know,wheels require bearings.These bearings need to be able to handle high rotational speeds,and the load forces of carrying the pods.These bearings are also not frictionless,adding onto the rolling friction that the wheels already have.To reduce this rolling friction,wheels should generally be made of a very hard material.For example,steel train wheels are one of the best wheels in terms of low rolling friction.Unlike levitation,wheels are limited in speed because of excessive heating and centrifugal force.The current record is 574.8km/h by the French TGV.However,such speeds required extremely accurate track alignment and modified wheels that cause huge wear and tear.Therefore,these speeds were never used in regular train services.In many other vehicles,like the Bugatti Chiron,wheels turn out to be the limiting factor in terms of top speed.The Chirons top speed is electronically limited to 420 km/h(261 mph),or 375380 km/h(233236 mph)without the specific key,for safety reasons,mainly arising from the tyres as the manufacturer concluded that no tyre currently manufactured would be able to handle the stress at the top speed the Chiron is capable of achieving.21 Levitation is an excellent alternate method of moving at high speeds.There are three big advantages compared to conventional wheel/rail-infrastructure important for us to consider:Firstly,due to the vehicle not making physical contact with the infrastructure they run on,there is virtually no friction which causes wear and tear on the tracks.This reduces the maintenance costs by improving the longevity of the track.Secondly,maintaining ride comfort is much easier to do with levitation.This is because an air gap between vehicle and track is an excellent absorbing interface for small track imperfections,greatly reducing vibrations during travel,and decreasing infrastructure construction costs.Lastly,by using levitation,friction caused by wheels is eliminated.This rolling friction is especially large at high speeds.Because of the reduced friction,levitation will allow for a reduction in energy needed to operate,making it an environmentally friendly option.The cost of the infrastructure for a levitation transport system has also been coming down over the past years due to technological improvements.One can now expect to pay a comparable price for high speed wheel/rail or levitation infrastructure.However,the fact that a levitation transport system cannot operate on already existing wheel/rail-infrastructure is a major setback.The construction of a whole new infrastructure for only a levitation transport system is expensive and is not very promising yet,especially for countries that already have high speed wheel/rail-infrastructure.Lets have a look at different methods of levitation.Levitation always requires some force at a distance acting between vehicle and rail.Magnetic levitation is a well-established option and is already being commercially used at high speeds in China and Japan.Another option that has also been proposed by Elon Musk for the hyperloop is the use of air bearings.Lets first have a look at Magnetic levitation.Magnetic levitation comes in two forms.The first being electrodynamic suspension,or EDS.EDS is a passively stable method that does not need active tweaking of the magnetic fields.This method relies on small electrical currents that are induced in a conducting material when a magnetic 22 field is moving relatively to the conductor.These small electrical currents,known as eddy currents,produce a magnetic field that opposes the change in magnetic field caused by the moving magnets.Resulting from this is a magnetic levitation force.This levitation force is dependent on the relative velocity between magnet and conductor.Increasing when the relative velocity increases and vice versa.This means that the force would be too weak for pods at low speeds and completely disappear for stationary pods.Thus,the pods require additional landing wheels comparable to those of an airplane.When designing an EDS system,the magnets can be either attached to the track or to the pod,this does not matter for the effect to work.But when being mounted on the track,many more magnets are needed,since they need to be present along the full length of the track.Figure 13:ADS Magnetic Levitation drawing scheme(own elaboration)Additionally,the magnets can either be permanent magnets or electromagnets,the latter of course require an electrical power supply.The advantage of using electromagnets is that they can be cooled to very low temperatures to become superconducting.Superconductivity allows these electromagnets to create an exceptionally strong levitation force which could be a requirement with heavy pods that would be required for transporting a large amount of people.In addition to a repulsive force,a drag force opposing the direction of movement is also present.This means an EDS system will always have some magnetic drag.However,this drag becomes relatively smaller for higher speeds,which is disadvantage of the system.23 The other form of magnetic levitation is the electromagnetic suspension,or EMS system,which works in a very different way.This method is active,meaning that the strength of the magnetic field of the electromagnet is being controlled via a feedback loop.Unlike EDS,here the electromagnet is placed close to a ferromagnetic material and will exert a strong attractive force.This force is dependent on the distance to the object,becoming much stronger when the magnet is closer and weaker when further away.Via a feedback loop,the magnetic field strength of the magnet will be lowered whenever the magnet comes close and vice versa.EMS does not need the same“landing wheels”that EDS needs because the levitation force is not dependent of movement speed,but at the same time needs an active control system that could be a point of failure.Figure 14:EMS Magnetic Levitation drawing scheme(own elaboration)EMS is currently operational in the Transrapid,Shanghai.It functions as a line connecting Shanghai Airport and Longyang Road Stationwith a top speed of 431 km/h.Another example of an operating EMS system is the Linimo,Japan.This is a low speed train that has an operating speed of 100 km/h.The operations have not always gone smoothly.Two accidents with the Transrapid Maglev occurred in 2006,one of which resulted in 23 fatalities.The Technology readiness level(TRL)depends on the guideway,for the top-EMS the TRL is 5 or 6.For the bottom-EMS the TRL is 9,because it is already implemented into the Shanghai Transrapid.24 Figure 15:Shanghai airport Transrapid()Technology readiness levels(TRLs)are a method for estimating the maturity of technologies during the acquisition phase of a program,developed at NASA during the 1970s.The use of TRLs enables consistent,uniform discussions of technical maturity across different types of technology.A technologys TRL is determined during a Technology Readiness Assessment(TRA)that examines program concepts,technology requirements,and demonstrated technology capabilities.(Source:From NASA to EU:the evolution of the TRL scale in Public Sector Innovation).TRLs are based on a scale from 1 to 9 with 9 being the most mature technology.The US Department of Defense has used the scale for procurement since the early 2000s.By 2008 the scale was also in use at the European Space Agency(ESA).Apart from magnetic systems,it is also possible the levitate via air bearings.Air bearings thrust air to create a thin air film between the pod and the track.The extremely low friction they have can be clearly demonstrated by an air-hockey table.The air bearings can be mounted on the vehicle or on the track,but this choice has some design implications.Mounted on the vehicle,they thrust air downwards while being mounted on the track,they thrust air upwards similar to the air hockey table.Just like with the magnets,having them installed on the track would mean there needs to be a lot of them since they are required along the whole track.Conversely,in Elon Musks Hyperloop alpha paper he featured a hyperloop design with air bearings mounted on the vehicle.This pod uses a compressor to suck in the high pressure front that the Pod encounters during high speed travel.This air is then redirected downwards through the air bearings for levitation.Air bearings always 25 require some sort air flow control through an air compression system,be it an air compressor,or having valves release compressed air stored on board.Figure 16:Schematic of air bearing skis that support the capsule(Engineering New Record)b.Propulsion Firstly,to come up with a logical method of propulsion it is important for us to consider the environment that the pod is in.Due to the soft vacuum in the tunnel,using conventional combustion engines becomes problematic.Since oxygen is not readily available to allow for combustion to happen.If we were to place a traditional car in a hyperloop tunnel,it wouldnt move a centimeter.Luckily for us,there are many alternatives.The first is the rotational electric motor.These motors are very efficient running up to 85ficiency,converting electrical energy to useful work.It consists of two parts:the rotor on the inside and the stator on the outside.To run the motor,an electric current is applied to the coils of the stator.This current is changing over time,shaped like a sine wave.26 Figure 17:DC Motors(Electronics Tutorials)The coils are designed to create a magnetic field after each other.And since they are placed in a circle,together they create a rotating magnetic field.The rotational speed of this field can easily be changed by controlling the frequency of the electricity.Meanwhile,the rotor is situated inside of the stator and is exposed to this rotating magnetic field.The rotating magnetic field induces a current in the rotor.The action of the current in the rotor and the moving magnetic field causes a net force on the rotor along the direction of rotation.The magnetic field is now applying a torque on the rotor,causing it to spin.For electric vehicles,the rotor is connected to the axle,which is connected to the wheels.Then the wheels start turning,causing the vehicle to accelerate.The second type of electric motor is the linear induction motor or LIM for short.The LIM is essentially a rolled-out version of the Rotational motor.Instead of the magnetic fields creating a torque,the magnetic fields now apply a linear force that can accelerate and decelerate the vehicle.This means that the LIM is a contactless motor,unlike the rotational electromotor,which still relies wheels for force transmission to the track.27 Figure 18:DC Motors(Force Engineering)When designing LIM,the“rotor”can be on the vehicle while the“stator”is part of the track,but it can also be the other way around.The stator needs electric energy to create the magnetic fields.So,if the stator is part of the tracks,weight can be saved on the pods as the electric energy does not need to be stored on board.This reduces energy used to accelerate the Pods and weight of the Pods.Another type of LIM called the double-sided LIM is also an option.A nice advantage of the double-sided LIM is that the rotor is automatically centered by the magnetic fields coming from both sides.This means that the rotor is stable and wont accidentally hit the stator and destroy the double-sided LIM.Since the LIM and double-sided LIM are of finite length,it suffers of magnetic end effects at both ends.Since the field lines of the magnetic field must be closed,they curl back around at the ends.This means the fields at the ends of the LIM are oriented unfavorably,reducing the useful magnetic force there.This makes them less energy efficient than the rotary electric motor,which does not have ends being shaped like a circle.An alternative to these electric motors is a cold gas thruster.28 Figure 19:Cold gas thruster(Wikipedia Commons)The cold gas thruster does not get its thrust force from electric energy like the rotational motor and the LIM.Instead,it uses the potential energy of inert gas being stored at a very high pressure.This gas naturally wants to escape,and by directing it backwards the pod is propelled forwards(Like an air balloon).This can be explained by Newtons 3rd law:for every action,there is an equal and opposite reaction.The thrust is controlled using a valve and propelling nozzle.The thruster is simple in design,yet effective.A downside of the cold gas thruster is that all this gas must be stored on the pod and it has to be refilled by either replacing or refilling the tanks.Work also has to be done by vacuum pumps in the tunnel,to make up for the gas released when pods are travelling through it.In this system,the gas is not heated,like in a rocket engine.This is what the cold gas thruster owes its name to.Rocket engines could in principle also work in a vacuum tunnel,just like they do in outer space.However,they output a lot of heat which could damage the tunnel.As well as being complex and very expensive.I should also consider the Linear Synchronous Motor.The Linear Synchronous Motor is a propulsion mechanism in which the mechanical motion is synchronous with the magnetic field.The thrust force is not created by an induced magnetic field,but the magnetic field is created by windings.For this,it is necessary to know exactly at what position the vehicle is and at what speed it is travelling.29 This method of propulsion is used by most of todays operating Maglev Trains such as the German Transrapid(TR07)and the Japanese SCMaglev.The latter holds the current speed record of 603 km/h.Figure 20:Linear Synchronous Motor(Physics Stack Exchange)c.Braking Besides getting our Pod up to speed we also need to have a braking system to stop at our destination or during transit in case of an emergency.It is of utmost importance that these brakes will be reliable and safe.If the propulsion malfunctions,the Pod will stay in place.If the brakes malfunction,we have a more serious problem.Here I will discuss the most important factors that influence a design and the different ways of braking,including among others friction braking,magnetic braking,but also more unconventional ones.If we look at the core function of the brakes,they need to slow our pod down to a standstill.30 Figure 21:Velocity-Distance graph(TU Delft)Our first constraint results from the fact that we are transporting people,which limits our braking force,expressed in g force,which means ratio between the force we experience and the force of gravity,which is always acting on us.Generally,we can withstand forces of around 2 or 3 g without trouble,but it would still be rather uncomfortable.Thus,we limit ourselves to a much smaller number,which should be based on other design factors,especially for the passenger experience and interior design.Our second consideration is the wear of the material,both for the track and the brakes themselves.If either material is too soft and direct contact,it will wear out fast.Especially for the track this is a concern,since you simply cannot change the track every year or few years even.The brakes also should not wear out fast,as this imposes large costs on the operation of the vehicles.Lastly,we need to consider general safety of the system.Since we would be travelling at speeds similar to aircraft,failing brakes would result in huge damage with fatal consequences even.For this reason,a failsafe and redundant mechanisms is required for our brakes.This means that also emergency braking must be well thought out,as this must occur instantaneously,instead of slowly like we can when nearing a station.31 Now we know what factors mainly influence our design,it is time to start looking into our options.First,we can simply go for friction braking.This means we clamp brake pads around something to create a huge amount of friction,which dissipates our kinetic energy.We can do this either on the track or on a brake disc,which both have their own advantages.Figure 22:Friction Brake(Machine Design)The big difference is the heat buildup,in a disc brake,you build up all the heat in the disc,while you could also distribute this over the entire brake distance on the track.This means that we can apply a larger friction force to the track before we overheat an element.On the other hand,its easier to replace a brake disc than a track segment.32 The second method is passive magnetic braking.Here we also use the same principle as Electrodynamic Suspension,namely using Eddy Currents to generate a force from the magnetic field.By moving the magnets along the track,a current start moving and this generates a force.However,instead of the normal force we use for levitation,we now use the drag that these magnets impose,so the force opposite to velocity vector.By bringing magnets closer to the track the drag will increase.The big advantage here is that we do not directly touch the track,and thus we will not wear it out.The disadvantage is that we will have a decreased brake performance and that the system is more expensive,as we require very strong magnets.Figure 23:Eddy current brake(Wikipedia Commons)Another magnetic braking option could be to use the Linear Induction Motor that was used for acceleration.But this time we set it to“reverse”and use it to slow down the Pod whilst also regaining part of our kinetic energy.Due to placement of the LIM its impossible to do an emergency stop in between LIMs and therefore this concept is deemed less safe.As unconventional braking systems,we can look at progue parachute.These are proven to work for very high speeds,as rockets and spacecraft use these at supersonic speeds already.The big problem we would have,though,is that this principle is entirely based on air friction which would be greatly reduced in the vacuum tube.and needs to have enough space for deployment,both of which are very limited in a vacuum tube.33 Figure 24:Drogue parachute(Wikipedia Commons)Staying in the space sector,we can use cold gas thrusters,which are less harmful than usual retro-rockets and do not heat up the system,however it only allows for relatively small forces,meaning that we require a lot of time to brake and we need to refuel after every brake,even if we are emergency braking.Technology generations This concept of tube-based travel has been considered for over two centuries,but the technology has now matured so that each required Hyperloop system and subsystem is available in some form in the marketplace.Engineering work is ongoing to appropriately Hyperloop Companies conducts system engineering to integrate and optimize the existing technologies around the human passengers;focusing first on safety,comfort,and the passenger experience as the primary design criteria while using efficiency,sustainability,cost reduction,and process optimization as objectives within the integration process.Hyperloop System can be broken down into several core components as shown in.The capsule is the vehicle that carries people and goods.The capsule begins and ends each trip on wheels and levitates using passive magnetic levitation technology above a target speed.Acceleration and deceleration is provided by a linear electric motor,with redundant emergency braking systems.The capsule and propulsion and levitation system are housed in a tube,which provides a boundary for maintaining a low-pressure operating environment.Vacuum pumps and valves maintain a safe and efficient environment inside the tube.Passengers and goods are able to enter and 34 exit the system at stations and can exit the system along the route in emergency situations.An autonomous control system monitored by trained staff oversees all operations of the Hyperloop system.Figure 25:Full-scale HyperloopTT system(HyperlooTT)Technology Readiness Level Technology Readiness Levels(TRL)are a type of measurement system used to assess the maturity level of a particular technology.Each technology project is evaluated against the parameters for each technology level and is then assigned a TRL rating based on the projects progress.There are nine technology readiness levels.TRL 1 is the lowest and TRL 9 is the highest.Hyperloop companies are developing routes in various countries following reports from reputable consultancies showing the transformational benefits of the technology.These assume that Hyperloop will be operational within the next few years.35 Yet bringing a new transport system into service is a formidable task that requires all parts to be at technology readiness level(TRL)8,which means undergoing active commissioning.In tests in a 500m tube,the maximum Hyperloop pod speed achieved to date is 387km/h.Such research facility testing is at TRL 4.Moreover,many aspects of the system are only at the stage of establishing basic principles(TRL 1).These include vehicle suspension,air locks,vacuum-tight tube expansion joints and switches.Switches are required for proposed Hyperloop networks that need to route pods between tubes.Yet neither Musks paper nor any of the Hyperloop companies describe how their switches would work at 600km/h,the turnout speed needed to maintain the capacity of the system.Figure 26:Overview of Technology Readiness Levels(Hyperloop feasibility prelim study)Hyperloop infrastructure The Hyperloop infrastructure is a broad term:many different aspects are part of the infrastructure.Think of the tubes and its pillars,tunnels and stations.But besides,there are vacuum pumps,possible overseas connections and maybe solar panels on above-ground:all part of the Hyperloops infrastructure.In general,the study for a new mode of transportation is started with an analysis of the existing transportation system.In such a study,the different modes of transportation are identified,and more importantly it is studied for which type of 36 travels the different modes are used.Within this framework,it can be seen that people bike or walk in the lowest layer of our network.This is only used for small-distance travelling.Cars and public transport are used for medium-long distance travel.This is usually between a few kms to a few hundred kms.The highest layer in our network consists of travel by aviation and high-speed rail.These modes are used for international and intercontinental travel mostly.Shortcomings in modern-day transport are:congestion pollution low reliability high maintenance costs When examining above mentioned shortcomings on the different modes of transportation,it is shown that the highest leap in quality can be achieved in mostly continental aviation.This type of travel is very polluting and emits lots of noise.Moreover,the user experience is not optimal,as the waiting times at airports are relatively long.In this sense,Hyperloop is ought to make the largest contribution to society by partially taking over demand for continental aviation.According to estimated calculation by Elon Musk,350-mile trip between Los Angeles and San Francisco,one of the most traveled corridors in the state,will cost$20 each way for a passenger.To build the extravagant tube system,Musk in his White Paper estimates its costs will be between$6 billion and$7.5 billion.His$6 billion estimate is for two one-way tubes and 40 capsules with no cargo space,while the higher end of the estimate would carry cargo.With tubes departing every 30 seconds and carrying 28 passengers each,a single tube would be able to transport 7.4 million people per year.By simple multiplication,the proposed two-tube structure could carry roughly 15 million people per year.At$20 per ride and an estimated 15 million trips per year,the Hyperloop would have the potential to gross$300 million in annual revenue.37 For current researches and experiment,cargo transportation by Hyperloop is not taking into account due to the value of time of goods.It is too low to transport cargo against the higher costs of Hyperloop.Hyperloop will however also carry the potential to be suitable to transport high-value goods,such as medicines and perishables.Focusing on the Europe continental travel,Hyperloop works best when the larger population hubs are connected.This means that cities like:London,Brussels,Paris,Amsterdam,Berlin,Milano should be included in the Hyperloop potential network.Such cities of continent might be European network connection hubs.Also,in case of underground tunneling we need to consider landscape and areas with higher seismic activity.It is likely that some parts of the Hyperloop will be constructed underground.The reasons to construct underground are primarily:environmental conditions,urban planning,and landscape pollution,but moreover also structural benefits.First,the environmental conditions.When constructed above ground,the Hyperloop tube will be exposed to sunlight.The tube will therefore increase in temperature after which the tube wants to expand,thermal expansion.At some points,these thermal strains are prohibited and as a result,compressive strains will arise in the tube.When these compressive strains are becoming too large,there is a chance of buckling of the entire structure.A solution to this might be the use of dilation segments which allows for the tube to expand freely.The downside however of these dilation segments is their risk for bad air tightness.More vacuum pumps will therefore be needed to overcome leakage of air into the tube.Another environmental issue is that most hubs are located near the coast.The air will contain saline water,which has the potential to corrode parts of the structure.This asks for intensified and costly maintenance.The most important consideration in the construction of underground Hyperloop infrastructure is however that in densely populated areas,it is extremely difficult to construct Hyperloop tubes above ground.In order to accommodate comfortable 38 travel for passengers,the radii of the bends in the Hyperloop infrastructure should be immense.This makes it nearly impossible to fit the infrastructure within the current urban planning and housing.Moreover,the construction of tubes above ground will inevitably lead to landscape pollution.Potentially,the tubes will also form a social barrier as line infrastructure may lead to social segregation,literally creating physical borders between people.All of these phenomena are unwanted in modern-day society.Lastly,underground infrastructure is desirable in earthquake prone areas.Underground infrastructure consists of segments which form a relatively flexible structure.During earthquakes,the tunnel will move with the soil surrounding it,therefore preventing damage to the structure.This is not the case for above ground infrastructure where the entire structure will start to move and perhaps collapse.The largest downside of underground infrastructure is however that the construction costs are higher.This,as the rate of construction is lower,and accessibility is more difficult.In addition to that,an additional investment needs to be made into the purchase of a specialized tunneling machine.As a result,additional methods are needed to make the underground construction of Hyperloop more profitable.Key to this is including other utilities into the infrastructure of Hyperloop.This way,additional earnings can be created resulting in profitable underground Hyperloop infrastructure.An example of such a utility that can be included are electricity and internet cables that are located at the top of the tunnel.Using cable trays,the cables itself can be installed and maintained easily.The vacuum tubes of Hyperloop are spaced in such a way,that personnel can perform maintenance on these cables and the tubes,while inside the vacuum tubes,the pods still continue to travel.Another solution for building Hyperloop tube is build it alongside with other infrastructural facilities such as:railway,high-way,pipelines etc.Including internet cables provides a good way of connecting the larger hubs between which there is a lot of data traffic.Concerning the electricity cables,sustainable energy which is usually generated in less densely populated areas can be transported between the larger hubs of Europe.This while considerably reducing the costs of the construction 39 of these high-power cables,as use can be made of the Hyperloop tunnel.By this way the cost of digging and construction will be sharable.Figure 27:Submerged Floating Tunnel(Civil Engineering Portal)Another challenge that must be overcome is the longer construction time of underground infrastructure.At this moment,underground tunnels are built at a rate of around 15 meters per day when using a Tunnel Boring Machine.When partially building the Hyperloop network underground,the construction rate must go up.Otherwise,it will simply take too long to build a Hyperloop network.Several initiatives have however been started worldwide to increase the advance rates of tunneling machines.One of them is the Boring Company,initiated by Elon Musk too.They are developing equipment to dig faster and make the process more cost effective.The company was announced in 2016 with the aim to develop a digging machine to dig high-speed underground tunnel in the fastest way.The technology might be revolutionary for digging and construction of underground infrastructure.The objective of this Boring Company is to increase tunneling speed to over 100 meters per day.40 Figure 28:The Boring Company tunnel boring machine()Designing the tube A Hyperloop tube needs to be strong to withstand the forces exerted on it and stiff enough to resist major deformations.Moreover,thousands of kilometers need to be produced for the European network requiring the tubes to be easily produced and relatively inexpensive.These criteria need to be taken into account when comparing potential tube materials.The materials examined are concrete,steel,aluminum and acrylic.Due to the high strength,high stiffness and the ability for mass production,steel is chosen as the best option.The other materials were not chosen for several reasons.Concrete has a low tensile strength and is not always airtight.Aluminum has a lower stiffness and higher costs than steel.Acrylic is significantly more expensive than steel.Now that a material has been chosen,the different forces exerted on the tube need to be explored.Since it is quite early in the design stage,not all forces in and around the tube are known.Designing the tube for allowed deformation(maximum deflection)is therefore not possible.However,designing for another important aspect is possible:the air pressure due to the near-vacuum environment.The 41 difference in air pressure exerts a radial force which can cause buckling.This phenomenon is called vacuum buckling and is especially dangerous for thin-walled containers,such as the Hyperloop tube.The equation below describes the relationship between the wall thickness,tube radius and pressure difference(Hauviller,2007).Where p is the critical pressure difference,E the Youngs modulus,the Poissons ratio and t divided by R the ratio between the wall thickness and the radius.The air pressure inside the tube is assumed to be 3 Pa and outside atmospheric pressure.The Youngs modulus and Poissons ratio are both characteristics of the material used,in this case,steel.Finally,there is the radius of the tube,which is currently set at 1.75 m.Using all the known parameters,a minimum wall thickness of 21.4 mm is needed to prevent vacuum buckling.With a safety factor of 1.5 applied to the pressure difference(p multiplied by 1.5),the Hyperloop tubes get a design wall thickness of 25 mm.Hyperloop Linear Infrastructure and Tunneling from Hyperloop TT The Linear Infrastructure develops the transportation corridor that passenger capsules travel through between station areas.The primary requirements are for a grade-separated tube shell that encloses a reduced-pressure environment and the levitation and propulsion guideway.The tube provides attachment points for communications,power,and safety systems.The tube may be elevated,with pylons supporting tube sections,or underground using cut-and-cover or deep tunnel configurations.Typical civil engineering principles are employed in the design of the structural capacity of the tube even considering the reduced pressure inside the tube.42 Figure 29:HyperloopTT Elevated Infrastructure(HyperloopTT)The elevated guideway section will be used when the elevation difference between the planned profile and ground is less than 65 feet(19.8 m).A typical span is 100 feet(30.5 m).The tube structure is continuous over multiple spans,but it can be curved and the guideway internally super elevated to meet geometric and lateral acceleration requirements.In areas of variable terrain,or to pass underneath built-up urban areas,tunnels are appropriate to reduce unreasonable grades,maintain a smooth profile with long vertical and horizontal curves,and avoid surface disruption and visual impacts.Bored tunnels can be used for this purpose.These tunnels need to have at least 30 feet(9 m)of overburden before a Tunnel Boring Machine(TBM)can be used.Depths shallower than this would be constructed by using open trenching and other transitional configuration methods.While highway and railway tunnels tend to be of very large diameter,HyperloopTT uses much smaller tunnels.At intervals of about 6 to 7 miles(9.7 to 11.3 km),an underground chamber and cross link between tubes will be constructed to enable emergency evacuation of capsules and access to the tubes for emergency and maintenance personnel.43 For shallow tunnels,cut and cover techniques can be used.In urban areas,construction typically requires installation of underground retaining walls to reinforce both sides of a vertical excavation and prevent cave-ins.After this,the area between the walls is excavated and cross-braces are installed to reinforce the retaining walls.After the tunnel is complete the excavation can be backfilled,and the retaining walls removed.Utility relocation,if required,would be coordinated with the appropriate local utility.If extensive utility relocation is needed,a deep bored tunnel may be more economical.In a rural area it may be possible to excavate a trench and slope the ditch walls consistent with local building code requirements.When constructing alongside an active rail line or highway within 25 feet(7.6 m)of the centerline of rail tracks or highway lanes,an underground retaining wall may be required to protect the rail or highway side of the excavation,determined in consultation with the rail or highway authorities.Air pressure inside the tube would be reduced to provide large reductions in aerodynamic drag.HyperloopTTs vacuum partner,Leybold,will provide a very reliable and nearly turn-key vacuum solution for the HyperloopTT System.This system will be optimized to achieve the target operating pressure in the tubes while minimizing energy consumption and maximizing operational uptime.Leybold has developed a“standard HyperloopTT vacuum unit”that fits within a standard shipping container.This container will contain all vacuum pumps and ancillary equipment(including electronics and cooling)and can be swapped in and out for off-site maintenance via relatively simple electrical and bellows connections.44 Figure 30:Vacuum pumps and modular housing(Hyperloop TT)The HyperloopTT system is designed to be net energy positive over the course of a year.This is achieved through efficient capsule movements where drag,even at high-speeds,is drastically reduced through the use of passive magnetic levitation and through the use of the reduced pressure environment inside the tube.Additionally,the system is able to generate energy through solar panels and other renewable sources.Finally,the system is able to recover energy through regenerative braking as the capsules are slowed.Solar farms would be developed at various locations along the corridor as needed,in partnership with local communities.This would extend the economic benefits of HyperloopTT into communities that may not currently possess the travel demand necessary for a station.For above-ground HyperloopTT tubes,solar panels are integrated within the tube cladding.For below-grade segments,easements may permit installation of above-ground solar panels.Utilities buildings,(e.g.,locations that house vacuum pump containers,power electronics,and emergency escape refuges)are also suitable locations for roof-mounted solar and adjacently sited solar farms.45 Tube to Station Vacuum Interface from Delft Hyperloop To transfer hyperloop pods from the low-pressure tube environment to a station to allow passengers to exit,some sort of airlock is needed.There are several ideas about taking the pod out of the tube,as well as leaving the pod inside the tube.The main objective is to have a smooth passenger transition from pod to station.In this section,the two most promising airlock concepts will be explained and a comparison between the two is made.The low-pressure tube environment is crucial for the hyperloop and is what makes the hyperloop unique and stand out.A pod arriving at a station cannot simply open the doors and let passengers out,because of the harmful low-pressure environment.In order to let passengers safely exit the pod,the inside of the pod should be in direct contact with atmospheric pressure.Multiple options and innovative ideas have been developed by people around the world.All these ideas can be divided into two main categories.The first option is a chamber in between the two states of pressure,called an airlock chamber.In this chamber,the pressure will vary,depending on which direction the pod goes.If the pod goes from atmospheric pressure(station)to the near-vacuum tube environment,the chamber will start with atmospheric pressure and will depressurize once it is sealed.When the pressure in the chamber is the same pressure as in the tube,the chamber will open on the side of the tube,allowing the pod to continue.The other way around works as well with this method.This is the same principle that was used in the Space Shuttle.The second option involves bridge doors at the platform that will lock onto the pod doors,similar to a jet bridge.In this case,the vacuum tubes will continue into the station and the pod never leaves the low-pressure environment.The bridge doors will connect the inside of the pod to the station atmosphere.The air in the bridge or in the airlock when the pod departs will dissipate into the tube.This is achieved by opening a vent in the door.From within the tube,the air will be pumped out by the vacuum pumps.Both options have advantages and disadvantages,these are listed in the table below.46 Table 2:Advantages and disadvantages of airlock chamber and bridge doors(own elaboration)Pod freedom at the station is understood as the ability to easily move the pod around and to allow for possible maintenance.The perceived safety is lower for the latter option due to passengers directly stepping into a sealed off low-pressure tube.Next to these(dis)advantages,the mechanisms can be compared in operation time,safety and structure.Looking at the operation time,both concepts are expected to be in the same range.For the airlock option,two big doors need to be moved,one to close the chamber and one to open the chamber.It is estimated that one door movement will take around 30 seconds.The removal/addition of the air is expected to take around one minute.The option with bridge doors also has two door/bridge movements which are also expected to take around 30 seconds per movement.The bridge doors are smaller;however,they require a better sealing for the safety of the passengers.The removal/addition of the air will take less time than the airlock since the volume is smaller(only around the door versus around the whole pod).In terms of safety,the airlock chamber is preferred.Humans are not able to survive a(near)vacuum environment.In an airlock chamber,the passengers are protected from the low-pressure environment by the pod at all times.However,when walking through the bridge used in the other option,passengers will pass close by the connection from the bridge to the pod.On the other side of this connection is the low pressure.A perfect seal should be guaranteed to avoid fatal accidents.47 Structure-wise,the airlock is preferred as well.A hyperloop station requires up to 12 platforms to accommodate all incoming pods and to provide enough time to embark and disembark.Thus,pods should be able to move from the tube to(at least)half of the platforms,and desirably more.A large transfer area between the tubes and the platforms is needed.With the bridge doors option,this means that a transfer area from one tube to at least six platforms will have to be placed inside the low-pressure environment.This results in large spans of the low-pressure tube resulting in extreme forces.The airlock also has its structural problems,due to the repetitive cycle from atmospheric pressure to near vacuum and back,fatigue issues will occur.However,the airlock can be designed to keep the stresses in the tube below the endurance limit,nullifying fatigue effects.To conclude,the airlock chamber concept and the bridge doors concept both have their advantages and disadvantages looking at the operation time,safety and structures.The bridge doors concept wins it in terms of the time it takes to transfer people from the tube to the station using the bridge doors.However,the bridge doors concept performs worse than the chamber concept in terms of safety.The bridge doors concept has more possible fatal failures,whereas,with the airlock,the passengers are protected by the pod.In terms of the structures,the large low pressure transfer area for the bridge doors option seems to be unrealistic.All in all,for now it is opted for the airlock chamber concept by Delft since it seems the most realistic and reliable solution.Hyperloop Stations from Hyperloop TT HyperloopTT stations will serve as the focal point of the HyperloopTT System where all transport functions and technologies converge.Station planning considers the complete passenger experience,embracing access,Accessibility Act compliance(European Accessibility Act,ADA,etc.),safety,security,movement,amenities and services,all in support of the passenger experience delivered in a sustainable,energy-efficient design.48 Lessons learned from decades of experience in station planning for various transport modes recognizes that passenger handling facilities must accommodate not only todays needs but also,to the extent practicable,tomorrows passenger expectations.HyperloopTT combines the best attributes of passenger facility planning from airports,mass transit systems,high-speed rail and other transport technologies providing a high level of transport safety,efficiency,economy,and speed.The overall design concepts of the station guide passengers through the arrival and departure experiences.Physical wayfinding signage further guides and reassures passengers that they are on the correct path.Augmented reality is employed as state-of-the-art wayfinding for individualized passenger approach and navigation.Moving walkways and inclined ramps are important components and themes of the HyperloopTT passenger experience.The experience of effortless,smooth movement with no waiting is realized and emphasized.Figure 31:Station Concept Designs(HyperloopTT)Station gates enable the efficient transfer of people and goods from the station environment to the capsule environment before departure and after arrival.Fast battery and cooling recharge take place during the alighting and boarding process.49 The capsule navigates the station on powered wheels,with autonomous guidance similar to that found in autonomous guided vehicles in ports,warehouses,and other confined and controlled environments.Figure 32:Station Concept Design(HyperloopTT)Several station configurations are under development as model solutions and comparative basis for design and analysis.The Dewdrop Station is inspired by creating a central geometry for passenger guidance.Passengers can walk along the curve as an efficient form of wayfinding.Capsules turning in the same operating direction as passengers is an effective solution for high-demand capacity.One of the HyperloopTT system advantages is the ability to retrofit into existing systems and terminals.The HyperloopTT Plug-in Station is a strategy to add a new station to an existing HyperloopTT tube connecting city centers,or to retrofit a HyperloopTT portal into an existing train station,transit station,or airport.50 Infrastructural Challenges Vacuum buckling and other technical challenges have been accounted for,but some other infrastructural challenges and bottlenecks still remain.These need to be overcome for the Hyperloop to become a reality and are important future research topics.The cost of steel:as explained earlier in the post,steel has many benefits.It is strong,stiff,easy to produce and relatively inexpensive.However,creating a tube of 25 mm thick for thousands of kilometers requires enormous amounts of steel.This is not only expensive but also harmful to the environment.Different tube design could potentially reduce the material needed while still retaining the required strength and stiffness.The invention of new materials could also result in a higher strength-to-weight ratio.Moreover,research into cleaner production processes could help reduce emissions.Damage to the tube:The Hyperloop is not influenced by weather and other external factors due to the steel tube.To make sure external factors remain inconsequential,the tube must be able to withstand these external factors without being damaged.Furthermore,it is important to know what happens if the tube does get damaged.An assessment of the effect of corrosion,wind loads and other external influences on the tubes,in the form of structural health monitoring,could be used to create a robust and sustainable design.Thermal expansion:Steel experiences thermal expansion when exposed to temperature changes.Due to the tubes being clamped between two stations,compressive forces in the tube may occur.To prevent buckling of the tubes,these compressive forces need to be minimized.Solutions to this problem consist of using mechanical/thermal prestressing to reduce the compressive stresses in the tubes.Moreover,connections between tube sections can be created into expansion joints or filled with elastic material which allows the sections to elongate.High-speed Switches:In a hyperloop network,all stations are connected with links.However,there are multiple ways to connect to a station using the links.The first option is to directly connect all stations similar to a metro system.All links pass 51 through the stations where the pods have to stop.The second option is to use a highway system,using on-and off-ramps to connect to the station.This allows pods to cruise past the station and thereby create direct links throughout the whole network.This increases the efficiency of the system and reduces the average travel times.However,pods need to switch to an on-or offramp at high speeds.These high-speed switches are crucial for efficient operation of the system.Current developments on high-speed switches are in the early stages and the technological feasibility is yet to be proven.Safe Haven Design:To guarantee safety inside a hyperloop pod,an emergency system must be designed.The Safe Haven concept provides a first vision on how a safety system could take shape to maximise passenger safety,whilst minimising emergency exit costs.However,due to the uncertainty of the hyperloop design and a lack of regulation,it is still unknown how safety can be guaranteed.Emergencies in which passengers need to be evacuated are impossible to avoid.Designing emergency exits in a way that both accommodates sufficient safety and acceptable costs is a challenge that must be overcome Integration with Current Modes of Transportation:Hyperloop is a means of public transportation and does not accommodate for door-to-door travel all by itself.The hyperloop needs to connect to other modes of transportation to allow passengers to travel further to their destination.This is important for connectivity and will increase the accessibility of the hyperloop.Currently,there is not always space near the stations of existing infrastructure for the implementation of hyperloop stations.This complicates the intermodal connection of hyperloop to other modes of transportation.Finding smart ways of connecting to other public transportation or spatial planning will be challenging Crossing Waterways:In order to connect destination overseas or destinations surrounded by large waterways,such as fjords,hyperloop tubes must be able to cross waterways.Due to the large curvature radius,it is unlikely that the hyperloop can make the correct horizontal and vertical curves to follow the irregularities on the seabed.A bridge is not always the solution as the spans or water depths can be too 52 large.Therefore,connecting these destinations that are separated by large waterways will be a challenge.Tunnel Boring Machine Speed:Large operations speeds of hyperloop pods result in large curvature radii.Therefore,in densely urbanised and mountainous areas the hyperloop is required to travel underground.It is currently estimated that 50%of hyperloop infrastructure will be build underground.Current Tunnel Boring Machines(TBM)have a boring speed of approximately 15 meter per day in soft soil.To construct a single link of several hundreds of kilometers long with one TBM,multiple decades of digging is needed before completion of the link.Multiple TBMs can be used for the construction of one tunnel to significantly reduce the time needed for this process but with the current speed for TBMs this is still a long and costly process.It is of great importance to speed up the digging speeds of TBMs to both decrease the construction time of the hyperloop and to reduce the costs of the hyperloop,as this would be positive for the feasibility of the hyperloop.Technology Cost Reduction:Parts of the hyperloop rely on new innovative technologies that have not been optimised for costs.Since these technologies are going to be used in large quantities,the costs for these systems will quickly add up.Reducing the technology costs for example for levitation and propulsion could greatly reduce the total costs for the hyperloop infrastructure.Therefore,cost reduction for these technologies must be realised to increase the economic feasibility of the system.Business Case Towards Implementation:Besides the technological challenges,it is important to determine a business case for a hyperloop.The first link will be very important and crucial for the success of a hyperloop system.Many stakeholders will be involved including different levels of governments.It is desired that this first link creates sufficient passenger demand to increase the economic feasibility of the link.Data Communication:The communication system of a hyperloop depends on multiple design aspects.The choice for the levitation mechanism defines the responsibility for data collection,whether in the pod or at the infrastructure.This 53 decision still has to be made.Another decision relates to the communication between a moving pod and the tube.A potential concept is based on photoelectric sensors located in the tube that will read information displayed on the pods.A decision on what type of photoelectric sensor is best to use,and what data should be presented at the surface of the pod are two important decisions that have yet to be made.Safety and Politics Safety This chapter discusses the safety of a hyperloop system on a top-level,in order to determine the largest safety risks.First,the importance of safety in transportation is highlighted.Afterwards,the method,scope and top-level system description of the safety analysis are given.A Hazard Analysis is conducted to come up with the most important risks per subsystem,and the overall largest risks are described afterwards.Hazard mitigation methods are described for each risk,in order increase the safety of the system.To get brief understanding of the Hazard Analysis by TU Delft the following types of risks have been taken into account:Strategic risk:The strategy of a company decides how the firm is going to achieve their goals.This strategy can become less effective as time passes.This is called strategic risk.Compliance risk:Businesses must comply with all laws and regulations in the sector.This regulation constantly changes and is different in each region of the world.Breaking or not complying with these rules can pose a huge threat on a company.This is called compliance risk.54 Operational risk:Unexpected failure in the day-to-day business can have a significant impact.These internal threats are called operational risk.Financial risk:Sufficient cash flow and appropriate credit/debit is important for a business to stay afloat.The risk of for example interest rates going up suddenly is called financial risk.This risk will not be used directly in the assessment but will be kept in mind when reviewing assets.Reputational risk:Reputations of companies are important for customers,employees and suppliers.A worsening of the reputation can affect the morale of your employees,the willingness of the suppliers and the attitude of the customers.Cyber security risk:Cyber infrastructure has become crucial in various sectors over the last few decades.For example,cyber infrastructure is an important part of transport systems.To protect this crucial part of the system,cyber security needs to be improved.Several methods and control measures exist to reduce the risk related to cyber security.Change risk:The business landscape is changing rapidly nowadays due to fast technological innovation and globalization.Organizations need to adapt to this change to maintain their competitive advantage.However,adapting to this change often ends in failure.Therefore change management and the associated risk is an important risk type to consider for the hyperloop.Hazard Assessment format provides an organized,systematic framework to follow in presenting potential hazards/threats/vulnerabilities,causes,recommendations,and control measures.Furthermore,it offers the opportunity to consider and discuss potential hazards and vulnerabilities the technology could present.The complete Hazard Analysis together with the adopted Safety Framework for the European Hyperloop Network can be found in research paper of TU Delft.The largest risks lead to a conceptual Safe Haven design:a new method to guarantee safety whilst minimising the investment cost.Finally,a recommendation is given on how to mitigate hazards and to pinpoint the major safety risks of a hyperloop system.55 For a hyperloop system to be realised,the safety of the system must be guaranteed.The safety level of a hyperloop needs to be at least at the same level as other high-speed modes of transportation,to be accepted by governments and used by passengers.When designing the system,many lessons can be learned from other modes of transportation.In the past,large accidents have caused transport innovations to be slowed down or even to be withheld from implementation.An example is the accident with the Transrapid magnetic levitation train in 2006 in Lathen,Germany.During a trial run,a train collided with a maintenance vehicle,causing 23 casualties.Although the accident was caused by a human error,a Maglev train has never been realised not only in Germany but in Europe in general ever since.To avoid a similar situation,it is crucial that the hyperloop technology is tested thoroughly before the first passenger ride takes place and that possibilities of human error are minimised.Figure 33:Lathen train collision()Another accident,a train derailment in Santiago de Compostela in 2013 with 80 casualties,shows the importance of track curvatures at high speeds.With hyperloop speeds multiple times higher than a train,it is important to design all trajectories with safe track curvatures.56 Figure 34:Santiago de Compostela derailment(Eglish EL PAS)Accidents can also signify the end of fully operational modes of transportation,as can be seen with the Concorde.In 2000,an aircraft ran over debris during take-off,which was lost by the previous aircraft taking off.This caused a blown tyre and a punctured fuel tank,leading to a fire and ultimately 113 fatalities.Although the Concorde had been used for decades,after the accident,passenger numbers diminished and the Concorde ceased operation in 2003.These accidents show that it is important to focus on safety at all times:during design,testing and operation.Figure 35:Air France Flight 4590(Wikipedia Commons)57 Safety is by far the most important aspect of human transportation,since no one will travel in a vehicle that they cant trust to safely transport them.First,lets discuss safety on the pod itself.When looking at the safety for passengers in case of a malfunction in the pod itself,we can take a look at airplanes.First of all,when something happens in the pressure cabin the safety systems will have to work almost exactly the same,mainly ensuring that the emergency is suppressed,and habitable conditions are maintained.This means that for example fires must be extinguished automatically and a means to solve pressure leaks has to be present.If we assume that this part of the safety is handled,our next logical step would be to look at ways to safely exit the passenger from the pod and the tube.This comes down to emergency exits,which require air locks.These will greatly increase the cost of the system but are unavoidable.Their magnitude is something however that can be decreased.So our goal will be to maximize safety,but also minimize the cost.Although,it is maybe not logical at first sight,the safety concepts for Hyperloop can be taken from that of airplanes.Airplanes are built in such a fashion that when an emergency occurs at cruising altitude,these planes are still able to land.Figure 36:US Airways flight 1549 emergency landing,2009()58 When designing such a system for Hyperloop,this means that the emergency exits needed can greatly be reduced,perhaps to intervals of 15 km.For the design of Hyperloop,this means that all systems should either be made fully passive or redundant in such a way that during a failure,the passengers are safe and the vehicle can be moved to the nearest emergency exit.When we look at the safety inside the station,we again have a look at airports.As we are very likely to cross country borders during a trip,security will have to be similar to airports.Figure 37:Airport security customs(Wikipedia Commons)Thus,people will have to go through customs,like you do at airports.Also,cameras and other safety scans will be present.In case of an emergency,tubes would have to be present that pass by the station at lower speeds and redirect pods to other nearby stations.In addition to terminals and capsules,the security of the tube and corridor will also be important.The engineering design section identified that the tube is expected to be constructed of steel and may be reinforced with concrete.This would not only 59 provide the low-pressure environment but could also reduce the ability of external entities to cause damage to the tube.Monitoring the corridor by cameras and sensors is expected to be an important component of a network-wide security system,forming part of the operation control centre for the network.It is important to note that very little research into the unique security risks Hyperloop could create has been conducted at this stage,representing an area for significant further investigation.Politics One important characteristic of a European hyperloop network,is that it will connect numerous different countries,and therefore will cross many borders.I will highlight three important political challenges that arise for such a network:The first one is that most countries,or provinces,or even municipalities would like to have a hyperloop station to increase its connectivity within Europe.On the other hand,these parties dont want to have a hyperloop tube on their land,if there is no stop and thus,they dont benefit from it.As the hyperloop is most efficient on high speeds,it is preferred to have a large distance between stations.Furthermore,the train network on smaller distances is already quite efficient,and the hyperloop must not compete with the energy-efficient train.For these reasons,the number of stations is limited.The second challenge is that the hyperloop will need to operate in many countries,and standardization is very important.It would make no sense to have a tube diameter of 4 meters in eastern Europe,while the diameter in western Europe is 3.5 meter.Therefore,standards need to be set on a European level.This sounds obvious,but standardization is still a problem in todays rail industry.The width of European train tracks differs between countries,which used to make it complex and expensive to have trains operating internationally.Furthermore,as shown in this map,the railway electrification systems currently differ a lot between countries.60 Figure 38:Europe rail electrification(Wikipedia Commons)Standardization is a challenge for hyperloop.At this moment,multiple companies are working on the hyperloop concept,with different ideas.In the end,it is important that a hyperloop network has a single standard.Therefore,hyperloop companies should eventually converge to a standardized concept.Although it might sound logical,system parameters such as tube diameter must be the same to increase interoperability between countries.For comparison,the width of European train tracks differs between countries,which used to make it complex and expensive to have trains operating internationally.It is important that in the end,companies working on hyperloop converge to a consensus on important design parameters.These parameters lead to standards that must be determined together with governments.However,standards must not be decided upon too early in the process,as this constrains the development of innovative technologies or ideas.Multiple technologies have to be researched and developed first in order to determine what the best option is to use in the eventual standardized hyperloop system.61 The third political challenge is financing the network.Who is going to pay for it?As the hyperloop infrastructure is expensive,it is impossible to find a single party that is able to finance the construction of a hyperloop network.A public-private partnership is most likely needed,as it is also not expected that governments will fully finance the system.However,they will contribute to the project,as a hyperloop also offers socio-economic value to society.Because a European hyperloop network will be international,it is challenging to determine the amount of investment that is coming from each country.To overcome these three political challenges,the European Union is already collaborating with multiple governments and hyperloop companies and thereby thinking of the future of transportation!There will be many challenges,but in the end,a complete hyperloop network would be beneficial for many people.Hyperloop Freight Market This chapter focuses on the development of the express freight volume and revenue estimates that were used in the Great Lakes Hyperloop study(HyperloopTT).Possible Freight Target Markets Hyperloop promises to develop a freight service which is faster than truck and cheaper than air,which would undoubtedly position it as a premium freight service.It is possible that Hyperloop could also be cheaper than truck and faster than air,in which case Hyperloop would likely become a dominant mode for intercity freight transport,rather than just a niche provider of transportation services.Either way,once Hyperloop becomes a reality,existing logistics patterns will adjust to take advantage of the capabilities of this new mode of transportation.Nonetheless,the more Hyperloop can fit into existing models for freight distribution,the easier it will be for Hyperloop to quickly gain market share.Minimizing changes that shippers,carriers and consignees must make would make it easy for them to 62 add Hyperloop into their supply chains.There are at least four possible target markets that a Hyperloop could pursue:1.Full Container or Truckload Service one approach to the market would handle full sized trucks or shipping containers and move them point to point,similarly to how rail intermodal services work today as in Figure 36 and 35;but much faster and without the need for batching containers to build trains,since each container would move individually and on-demand.Such a system could handle 40 ocean containers from ports;but Hyperloop could also participate in domestic markets if it had the ability to handle the larger 53 containers that now predominate in domestic shipping lanes.For shorter trips it may even be attractive to use a roll-on-roll-off model that ferries the drivers and their tractors as in Figure 38.This would avoid the problems of needing large parking lots to store containers awaiting pickup at the destination.Figure 39:Railroad Intermodal Yard for Full Container Service()63 Figure 40:Truck Intermodal Yard(Contship Italia)The idea of shipping full truckloads or containers of freight by Hyperloop,including ocean containers,has attracted a lot of attention in the popular press.Certainly,it is technically feasible to do so,since magnetic levitation system designs have been developed specifically for this application,as in Figure 39.Figure 41:Semi-Truck Ferry Service in the EuroTunnel()64 Figure 42:Inductrak III for Magnetic Levitation of Containers()However,adding a capability for full container shipping would require a tube of a much larger internal diameter than the 4-meter tube that has been assumed for this study.Therefore,full sized ocean or domestic containers are simply too large to fit inside the tube and therefore cannot be handled.It is likely that enlarging the tube to the size needed for handling full containers would entail an increase in the cost of both civil infrastructure and guideway.Using a larger tube would likely have a large impact on tunneling costs.Elevated guideway sections would have to be strengthened to take heavier loads.As well,the maglev guideway would have to be electrically strengthened using more powerful coils,both for levitation and also for propulsion of heavier container loads.Electric supply would have to be increased and the greater internal volume of the larger tubes would require more vacuum pumps.HyperloopTT has been developing technology solutions for container shipping as part of its joint venture with HHLA(Hambur Hafen und Logistik AG)(Source:),the operator of the Hamburg port.However,the costs and benefits of increasing the tube size to develop a container-compatible system have not been assessed by the current study.However,by trans-loading freight from full sized containers into smaller“air cargo”type containers,Hyperloop could still capture some container freight,even with a smaller diameter tube.Many shipping containers(usually 30-50%of sea containers)are already trans-loaded or repacked at manufacturing and distribution sites near ports.This transload provides a ready opportunity for some of the freight to be 65 repackaged for Hyperloop.The use of air cargo containers would certainly make sense for high value commodities,where Hyperloops much higher speed would justify the small additional cost.1.Next Day Air Cargo Container Service If Hyperloop connects airports,Hyperloop can compete with air cargo service by using air cargo containers as shown in Exhibit 6-4 and would run similarly to an airline.Hyperloop would be both time and cost competitive with air service and offer a more flexible service.This service would be primarily focused on overnight or next-day delivery.Air cargo containers are much smaller and lighter than ocean shipping containers and easily fit in the Hyperloop capsule.They are usually handled on a roller bed floor system9 that can be powered for automated handling.While Hyperloop may compete with some air services,it would also connect with long haul air cargo services and would likely even exchange containers at the airports with connecting airlines.Figure 43:Air Cargo Container Service()2.LTL Ground Freight Market A Hyperloop service using air cargo containers would be attractive not only to air freight,but if costs are low enough would likely attract a substantial share of palletized Less-Than-Truckload(LTL)ground freight as well.This is because LTL freight has to go through break bulk terminals just like air freight does,so using Hyperloop to replace truck for the line haul between terminals would not add significantly to the existing LTL cost structure.This is especially true if LTL break bulk terminals are located close to 66 the Hyperloop freight depot 3.Same-day Express Parcel Service-would not likely use shipping containers at all,but rather would handle high value shipments individually or in mail bags,as the Mercitalia Fast does.Figure 44:Mercitalia Fast:parcels at 250km/h()This service would be primarily focused on same-day delivery.Express parcels could be shipped in passenger capsules as an adjunct to checked baggage service.Many airlines already move high priority freight and packages in the bellies of passenger planes along with luggage.Figure 42 shows an example of this type of cargo being loaded from a platform onto a Eurostar high-speed train.Express parcel freight will be very lightweight and relatively low volume from a tonnage perspective but will have a very high revenue yield and will generally require custom handling to meet very tight delivery deadlines.This is why these packages can even be handled in the passenger capsules,since by so doing these shipments can receive the highest possible level of expedited service.Pickup and delivery is likely to be provided by courier services(or drones in the near future)for the fastest possible delivery to customers.67 Figure 45:Express Parcels being loaded onto a Eurostar Passenger Train()These service offerings are not mutually exclusive;Hyperloop can serve all four markets at the same time.With a large diameter tube,Hyperloop could move full truckloads or containers.But even with only a small diameter tube,some Full Truckload or Container freight can still be accommodated by using the Air Container service.Air Containers can accommodate a broad spectrum of freight as shown in Figure 43.Only the same-day express parcel freight would be separately handled due to its very high value and demanding service requirements,so that each parcel can be given individual attention to make sure it is expedited to its destination.The other categories of freight could all be accommodated by Air Container service.Figure 46:Hyperloop Freight Market and Service Offerings(own elaboration)68 SUMMARY The broad objective of this study is to examine the Hyperloop transportation concept on the possible technologies.The Hyperloop will integrate engineering,operations and safety concepts from aviation and highway as well as from rail.Therefore,the Hyperloop has been called a“fifth mode”of transportation,since it doesnt fit neatly into any of the existing established models,but rather it integrates design and operational concepts from a number of different existing transportation modes.Many of Hyperloops concepts are not really new,but rather integrate already proven technologies in a new way.Although in theory it sounds fantastic,it is important to consider the several challenges Hyperloop faces in both construction and its impact on society.The biggest speed bump hyperloop faces is the cost of the technology as a brand new mode and elaborate tube system,estimated to cost millions of dollars.The vehicle is transported by electric propulsion through a low-pressure tube and floats above the track using magnetic levitation.The long vacuum chamber manufacturing requires advanced technical skills which are costly and also risky to maintain.High risk to life,limited space in the train and land use rights are some other concerns and challenges that hyperloop will face,not to mention the installation would require a large number of trees to be cut down,leading to environmental loss.Approaches to security for existing modes such as air and rail differ significantly.Safety and security are highly complex,interdependent issues and are closely connected to perception and human emotion.Given the breadth of this issue,this section aims to lay out some key features informing the transportation industrys approach to security in relation to modes such as rail and air travel.According to Preliminary Feasibility Study of Hyperloop Technology prepared by AECOM Canada Ltd.,based on all available information,some key constituent technologies of Hyperloop can be classified as TRL 7,but the technology as a whole cannot,because the required infrastructure has not yet been built and tested by any Hyperloop company over long distances.However,noted that the Hyperloop 69 companies using infrastructure-side linear motors as their propulsion technology start at an advantage as this has been proven at relatively high speeds in existing MagLev systems,while other types of propulsion technologies such as vehicle-side linear motors and axial compressors have not.Figure 47:Summary of the Technology Readiness Level of Hyperloop Components(Hyperloop feasibility prelim study)CONCLUSION The biggest issues with hyperloop technology are speed and scale.It is still unclear how to create a prototype that verifies the safety of the technology and allows testing of all necessary components.It is easy to imagine safety concerns limiting hyperloop speeds to just a fraction of its theoretical top speed or right-of-way issues keeping stations far from urban centers.These deployment details are critical issues for the hyperloop,but as long as the tests are focused on the planned 5-mile test tracks that are under development,it is not clear these issues will ever be fully understood.If one wonders how fast the hyperloop can go or how safe it will be at high speeds,a 5-mile test track will only provide the slightest glimpse of the important challenges ahead.A test track of only 5 miles falls far short of the distance needed to reach 700 miles per hour.For the same reason,these test tracks cannot address the unique safety issues that come with near-supersonic travel.The result is just a tube-powered version of conventional transportation technology such as maglev and high-speed rail.70 A possible solution proposed by Hyperloop Transportation Technologies could be to create a full-scale version on a commercial route used for freight transport only.Using this approach,all components of the system could be tested under optimized speed and acceleration conditions,and valuable data would be collected for the final design of system used to transport human passengers.In order to get up to speed and be able to slow down,a minimum length of a little over 38 km(23.61 miles)would be needed,but it would not be able to be used by people;a smooth ride would require approximately 120km(74.56 miles).As the cost for such a prototype is close to the cost of a fully operational system,it would make sense to place it in an area that has an actual need for hyperloop transportation.Nevertheless,Virgin Hyperloop hit an important milestone in November 2020:for the first time it has conducted a test of its ultra-fast transportation system with human passengers already.To be sure,the pod didnt reach the hyperloops theoretical maximum speed of 760 mph.Virgin Hyperloop projects that with enough track it can eventually get up to 670 mph but the companys record to date is 240 mph,which it hit in 2017.The test took place on Sunday afternoon at the companys DevLoop test track in the desert outside Las Vegas,Nevada.The first two passengers were Virgin Hyperloops chief technology officer and co-founder,Josh Giegel,and head of passenger experience,Sara Luchian.After strapping into their seats in the companys gleaming white and red hyperloop pod,dubbed Pegasus,they were transferred into an airlock as the air inside the enclosed vacuum tube was removed.The pod then accelerated to a brisk 100 miles per hour(160 km/h)down the length of the track,before slowing down to a stop.By analyzing the concept,technological and design options of the system as well as the infrastructural possibilities and challenges in the past several years,this thesis has shown how Hyperloop can directly and indirectly is already shape modern technology and can shape the future of mobility and transportation.This research aimed to study the fifth mode of transportation and its characteristic together with ongoing researches and constructions and identify effective directions of the Hyperloop transportation enlargement.It can be stated that the proposed paper work covers all the main concepts necessary for understanding and further research and development.71 REFERENCES/BIBLIOGRAPHY 1.Elon Musk“Hyperloop Alpha”.August 2013 2.DelftX,“Hyperloop:Changing the Future of Transportation”MOOC on EdX,February 2020 3.Delft University of Technology,Delft Hyperloop contributors:J.K.van Leeuwen,J.M.P.Lohle,T.R.Speelman,Y.van der Tang,M.H.Teeuwen,T.Vleeshouwer,“The Future of Hyperloop”,June 2019 4.Delft Hyperloop,“Safety Framework for the European Hyperloop Network”,July 2020 5.Arup,BCI,TNO&VINU(2017).Main Report:Hyperloop In The Netherlands.Report 6.TransPod.(2017).Initial Order of Magnitude Analysis for TransPod Hyperloop System Infrastructure.Report.7.H.W.Lee,K.C.Kim,and J.Lee,“Review of Maglev train technologies”IEEE Trans.Magn.,vol.42,no.7,pp.19171925,Jul.2006.8.Walker,R.(2018).Hyperloop:Cutting through the Hype.White Paper.9.Bird,J.&Lipo,T.(2019).A study of the effect of using electrodynamic wheels in series.10.Eurostat(2017a).European aviation in 2040.11.Transpod,“TransPod Hyperloop Thailand report”12.Opgenoord,M.,Merian,C.,Mayo,J.,Kirschen,P.,ORourke,C.,Izatt,G.,Monahan,G.,Paxson,D.,Wheeler,C.,Zhang,S.,Zhang,C.,Sakhibova,N.,Vancea,G.,Aggarwal,R.,Ball,S.,Caplan,P.,Chamberlain,P.,Chen,J.,Chen,S.,&Vaish,S.(2017).Mit hyperloop final report.13.Leanna Garfield on Business Insider,“15 remarkable steps that show the 200-year evolution of the Hyperloop”,February 2018,www.businessinsider.nl 14.M.A.M.Cheema,J.E.Fletcher,D.Xiao,and M.F.Rahman,“A direct thrust control scheme for linear permanent magnet synchronous motor based on online
2025-03-12
72页
5星级
Irradiance and Temperature Uniformity on Vehicle Roof 2025 PVPS Report IEA-PVPS T17-05:2025 Task 17.
2025-03-11
29页
5星级
Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile TransportI N S I G H T R E P O R TM A R C H 2 0 2 5Images:Getty Images,UnsplashDisclaimer This document is published by the World Economic Forum as a contribution to a project,insight area or interaction.The findings,interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are a result of a collaborative process facilitated and endorsed by the World Economic Forum but whose results do not necessarily represent the views of the World Economic Forum,nor the entirety of its Members,Partners or other stakeholders.2025 World Economic Forum.All rights reserved.No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,including photocopying and recording,or by any information storage and retrieval system.ContentsForeword 3Executive Summary 4Introduction 5Case Study 1:Amsterdam,the Netherlands 8Case Study 2:Dubai,United Arab Emirates 10Case Study 3:Stockholm,Sweden 12Case Study 4:Holly Springs,Fayetteville,Raeford and Granbury,USA 14Case Study 5:Varanasi,India 16Concluding Thoughts 19Contributors 21Endnotes 22Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport2ForewordPurushottam Kaushik Head,Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution,C4IR IndiaCombatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile TransportMarch 2025Most cities,designed for the past,now struggle with growing populations,higher energy demands and evolving transportation needs.The outdated reliance on single-occupancy vehicles continues to lead to congestion,pollution,longer commutes and road safety concerns,all of which harm productivity and reduce quality of life.To address these issues,cities must adopt a new mobility model that blends traditional and innovative solutions.Public and shared transport,along with walking,cycling,adoption of electric vehicles,drones and smart warehousing,can play a critical role.As transport systems face mounting pressures,there is a clear need for innovative approaches that ensure efficient and sustainable urban mobility.A crucial area for intervention is the optimization of the first and last mile of urban journeys.Enhancing the efficiency and sustainability of these segments can provide better access to mobility systems,alleviate congestion,bolster local economies,and improve overall health and quality of life in urban areas.This report presents unique strategies for improving first-and last-mile transport,showcasing global examples where policy,technology and infrastructure have been used to create less congested and more liveable cities.The case studies highlighted are by no means the only solutions needed to solve congestion,as a range of interventions and approaches are needed.However,these cases highlight the innovative options at the disposal of cities to alleviate congestion through first-and last-mile transport,and the power of public-private collaboration in driving meaningful change.Also presented in this report are the collective efforts of cities and companies worldwide to confront congestion and foster more sustainable urban environments.Through such collaborations,progress can be made towards creating cities that are not only more navigable,but also better places to live and visit healthier and more sustainable for all.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport3Executive SummaryCities and businesses around the world are adopting innovative solutions to address the challenge of congestion.Urban transport systems are facing new and growing pressures.Increasing urban populations,changing behaviours and demands around transport,and changing societal patterns such as remote and hybrid working,all pose challenges to the traditional operation of transport in cities.Among the biggest challenges facing urban transport is congestion,underpinned by transport systems dominated by single-occupancy vehicles and limited urban space.Traditional solutions to tackle congestion such as public transport,shared vehicles,walking,cycling,warehousing and pooled delivery vehicles remain vital in keeping cities moving.But,with changing societal patterns around transport,innovative solutions are needed to tackle congestion.This report focuses on the challenge of congestion in cities and explores how addressing the first and last mile of transport can mitigate this pervasive issue.Pioneering approaches are showcased across technology,policy and infrastructure,which demonstrate the necessity of innovative strategies to enhance urban mobility.Solutions like micromobility,data-driven transport management,autonomous vehicles and innovative infrastructure projects are helping cities deliver efficient first-and last-mile transport and reshape urban mobility.These innovations and many more are not only enhancing the efficiency of existing transport systems,but also future-proofing urban transport and contributing to more sustainable,liveable cities.The diversity of solutions explored in this report reflects a broad spectrum of interventions,from experimental pilots to proven strategies that significantly ease congestion and enhance first-and last-mile connectivity.These initiatives demonstrate the potential for cities of various sizes and contexts to tackle congestion effectively and highlight the importance of customizing solutions to meet local needs and conditions.As cities continue to grapple with new challenges and ever-changing transport needs,there is a clear need for collaboration among stakeholders to deliver efficient first-and last-mile transport and address congestion.Investments in infrastructure,the integration of evolving technologies and flexible policies depend on strong public-private cooperation.This report highlights innovative approaches to first-and last-mile transport,contributing to the reimagining of urban transport.Embracing these solutions can create more accessible,navigable,sustainable and healthier transport systems that meet the demands of modern cities.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport4IntroductionAddressing congestion demands innovative and focused first-and last-mile solutions for enabling sustainable mobility.Cities constitute a significant proportion of environmental pollution,accounting for approximately 60-80%of worldwide energy consumption and more than 75%of carbon emissions.1 One of the primary sources of these emissions is the transport sector,which contributes approximately one-quarter of all energy-related greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions.2 Since 1970,transport emissions have increased nearly threefold.The sector currently ranks as the second-largest contributor to global carbon emissions,3 with road-based transport accounting for around 75%of all transport emissions.4 In many cities,transport accounts for about one-third of total carbon emissions,5 and with other sectors such as energy rapidly decarbonizing,transport is the largest source of emissions for many cities throughout the world.The continued dependence on internal combustion engine vehicles,coupled with the high use of single-occupancy vehicles,makes tackling emissions from transport a major challenge.Beyond the challenge of emissions,transport systems characterized by single-occupancy vehicles mean that many cities continue to struggle with the issue of road traffic congestion.Congestion adds hundreds of hours to journey times each year in major cities around the world,causing both longer commute times and delays to the delivery of goods,costing millions of dollars in excess fuel consumption and loss of productivity.6,7 On top of delays in travel times,congestion puts pressure on cities through infrastructure strain,decreased quality of life,as well as increased emissions and pollution.8 Solutions are needed to tackle the issue of congestion and advance the transition to more efficient,sustainable transportation models in cities.Local and national authorities play a key role in addressing congestion,with one of the most effective strategies being the improvement of first-and last-mile journeys.First and last mile refers to the transportation of goods or people at the beginning or end part of a journey,which in cities,are often major contributors to congestion due to the high number of single-occupancy vehicles typically being used.Intervening in first-and last-mile transport is crucial for reducing congestion and pollution9 while improving overall transport efficiency in cities.While shared transport,public transit,walking and cycling are vital for reducing congestion,cities need new solutions to meet evolving urban transport demands.A comprehensive approach across technology,policy and infrastructure is required to deliver efficient first-and last-mile journeys.This report examines a range of innovative solutions,from proven methods with clear impacts to emerging technologies being tested to address congestion.Many of these solutions are the result of public-private collaboration,which is crucial for developing effective first-and last-mile interventions.First-and last-mile passenger transport Transport journeys encompass the movement from ones origin to the desired destination,whether it be for work,medical appointments,shopping,educational purposes,or leisure activities.When travelling by public transport,the distance individuals need to travel from the point of origin to a transit stop is commonly referred to as the first mile of the journey,whereas the distance from the arrival transit stop to the destination is referred to as the last mile of the journey.Effective first-and last-mile solutions in passenger transport play a vital role in fostering a seamless,efficient and accessible public transport experience,enabling people to easily access public transport services.Typical passenger journeyFIGURE 1.OriginFirst mileDesitinationLast mileCombatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport5Traditional first-and last-mile solutions encompass walking,cycling,private vehicle use and shared mobility services such as taxis.However,emerging alternatives such as micromobility(e.g.e-scooters),ridesharing and on-demand public transport are increasingly gaining traction globally.In addition,experimental initiatives such as pilot programmes of autonomous vehicles are being explored worldwide,offering potential solutions to alleviate urban congestion.First-and last-mile delivery in goods/freight transport The term first-mile delivery refers to the start of the delivery portion of the supply chain and the last mile to the end of the supply chain.First-mile operations get products from the manufacturer via a courier to a carrier.Last-mile operations finish when the order is delivered to the customer.10 Typical logistic transportation journeyFIGURE 2.Due to increased trends in online shopping and home deliveries,the number of delivery vehicles on city streets has grown significantly in recent years.Past studies have estimated that in the global top 100 cities,delivery vehicles may increase by 36%by 2030.Consequently,emissions from delivery traffic could increase by 32%,with congestion rising by over 21%,equalling an additional 11 minutes of commute time for each passenger on adaily basis.11 Approximately 70%of delivery companies claim that speed and estimated time of delivery(ETD)are the main challenges they face today while managing customer expectations.12 Urban freight has a disproportionately high impact on congestion and emissions due to the number and size of vehicles.Among the main barriers that prevent meeting speed and delivery time predictions are road congestion,and poor traffic routing strategies.The conventional form of freight deliveries,using high volumes of trucks and minivans,puts significant pressure on traffic congestion,as well as causing local air pollution,emissions and concerns around road safety.A range of solutions is being used to reduce the use of these large vehicles and alleviate congestion,with alternatives such as e-cargo bikes,small electric vehicles and delivery drones holding promise to replace these vehicles.Deploying these solutions,complemented by defined public policies and necessary infrastructure,will enable a more sustainable movement of goods,tackling traffic congestion and reducing the footprint of deliveries on city streets.The analysis approach This report aims to showcase innovative and unique solutions that are being deployed by cities to address congestion not solved by traditional first-and last-mile transportation solutions(i.e.walking,cycling,private vehicle use,shared mobility,shared delivery,warehousing,etc).The selection process for case studies followed the approach outlined below:OriginFirst mileDesitinationLast mileCombatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport6Approach to aselection of case studiesFIGURE3.Through an extensive literature review,a range of solutions for delivering innovative first-and last-mile transport for both passenger and freight transport were identified.Over 20 solutions were shortlisted for investigation,with six cases taken forward for investigation in this report.The five case studies were selected to meet four key parameters:emerging or innovative solutions based on unique technology,policy,or infrastructure;public-private collaboration underpinning the success of the solution;a diverse geographical representation of solutions from differing locations and urban contexts;and information availability on the existing or expected impact of thesolution to alleviate congestion and deliver efficient first-and last-mile transport.It is important to note that the aim of this report is not to present a definitive list of first-and last-mile solutions that solve on-road traffic congestion,but rather to showcase unique,innovative solutions from across the world that have created,or are predicted to create,a positive impact in tackling congestion through interventions to improve the efficiency of first-and last-mile transport.As such,solutions in the case studies cover a range of interventions from policy and infrastructure to data and new technological responses.SolutionsBroad solutions assessedShortlisting criteriaShortlised case studiesLiterature review of first/last mile solutions solving traffic congestionIdentificationof case studiesacross each solutionEmerging solutionsAmsterdam,NetherlandsDubai,UAEStockholm,SwedenNorth Carolina,USAVaranasi,IndiaPublic-Provate collaborationDiverse contextsDocumentationCombatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport7CASE STUDY 1Autonomous water taxisAmsterdam,the NetherlandsImplementedOverview of mobility challengeThe extensive canal system in Amsterdam has historically played a crucial role in the citys development having been built for various purposes,including transportation,trade and defence.However,the historic infrastructure,particularly the walls and bridges around the canal system,is now a significant concern for the city.The age and design of these structures struggle to withstand modern traffic demands,especially heavy delivery vehicles.As a result,parts of the citys legacy infrastructure are deteriorating.This issue has prompted the need for mobility solutions that can shift some of the citys traffic from the road to the waterways and also reduce the burden of deliveries in the city.Another key challenge exists for waterways a lack of skilled shippers.So while many manned boats currently operate on Amsterdam waterways,scaling these operations,or making them more on-demand and flexible in routing,requires driverless solutions.13 Solution:Roboat autonomous water taxi and sustainable inner-city logistics centresThe Roboat initiative was a collaborative research effort led by the AMS Institute,involving scholars from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,Delft University of Technology,and Wageningen University and Research supported by Waternet,the City of Amsterdam and the City of Boston.14 The project sought to leverage emerging technology to optimize Amsterdams canal system for both freight and public transport.Central to the project was the development of modular,zero-emission,autonomous boats,aimed at revitalizing the canals and the significance of the canals within the cityscape.The five key use cases envisaged for the Roboat project were:1.Passenger transport:The most apparent use of Roboats is as water taxis or passenger shuttle vessels,providing a convenient and eco-friendly mode of transportation for residents and visitors.The navigation component in the system calculates from path A to B using GPS technology with the map of thelocal environment.2.Logistics:Roboats are to be utilized for logistics and transporting various goods to different parts of the city,reducing the need for heavy trucks on the citys roads.3.Data collection:Roboats equipped with LiDAR technology and sensors could serve as valuable tools for urban data collection.For example,water quality sensors can provide real-time data on the state of Amsterdams waters,aiding in monitoring and managing water quality and environmental conditions.4.Flexible infrastructure:The modular design of these autonomous boats allows them to self-assemble and form temporary structures,such as bridges.This feature can be especially useful for reducing traffic congestion during rush hours by creating additional pathways for vehicles and pedestrians.5.Waste collection:Replacing current road transport for refuse collection along streets lined by canals will help clean up the street environment and free up space on streets.Replacing current road transport for refuse collection along canal-lined streets will help clean up the street environment and free up space on the streets.Amsterdam is also innovating sustainable goods deliveries.CTPark in Amsterdam City stands as the pioneering multimodal,multi-level inner-city logistics centre in the country,offering strategic connectivity to urban hubs via both land and water routes.CTPark is strategically designed for last-mile deliveries to densely populated regions in anemission-free manner.15 With more than 200 charging stations for electric vehicles and other emission-free transportation options,it emerges as an optimal hub for last-mile deliveries.Deudekom,a removal company with a warehouse in Amsterdams Duivendrecht area,uses its warehouse as a central hub for consolidating goods deliveries around the city.It also advocates for suppliers to consolidate deliveries to reduce mileage,CO2 emissions and the number of trips.Research indicates that urban logistics facilities,such as micro hubs,can enhance the cost-effective use of light electric freight vehicles(LEFVs)by reducing the distance to customers.Energiewacht,based in Heemstede,installs smart energy meters in the Amsterdam region.Due to scarce parking and heavy traffic in Amsterdam,mechanics waste significant time on travel and parking.To address this,a mobile hub is centrally parked in the work area throughout the day for resupply.This system potentially saves 30%on transportation costs and reduces CO2 emissions by 80%.Nedcargo,one of the Netherlands largest logistics service providers,specializes in transporting food and beverages.STATUSCombatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport8Traditionally using lorries for city deliveries,Nedcargo faced challenges due to stricter environmental regulations and safety concerns in narrow city streets.In 2018,students from the Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences established a consolidation centre to deliver goods to Nedcargos customers in the inner city of Rotterdam by different types of LEFVs.Data revealed a 30%reduction in roundtrip times,and more than 90%reduction in CO2 and NOx as compared to lorries.Customer surveys also indicated increased satisfaction with the new delivery method.16Impact and takeawaysSince its establishment in 2015,the Roboat project has amassed a substantial body of scientific knowledge through research,visualizations,experiments and prototyping.This plethora of information encompasses autonomous navigation,perception-control systems and potential applications wherein Roboats could serve as an alternative form of public transport.The first prototypes were tested in 2017,with a second demonstration taking place in 2018.17 In 2021,one water taxi and one waste collection boat were launched for live testing in Amsterdam waterways.18 Subsequently,Roboat officially launched as a start-up company in early 2023 with a focus on its autonomous system,which can be installed in new-build boats,as well as in existing vessels.Amsterdams public transport company GVB uses this system for its ferry services across the IJ river system.Roboats system can identify all objects in the water and provides this information to the captain to make the crossing safer.The company also supplied its system to a shipping provider and local operator in Paris for the 2024 Olympics to help carry passengers across the Seine.19 Roboats prototype vehicle is zero emissions,and the company is seeking to embed electrification as a principle of its plans to scale the technology in the future.20Roboats ability to operate safely and efficiently in dynamic urban environments with extensive water networks like Amsterdam holds promise for future applications.With many cities across the world still having canals as a key feature of urban form,autonomous river transport solutions such as Roboat could hold promise to alleviate pressure on the road network and provide sustainable,intelligent transport for passengers and freight,strengthening transport connections across cities.The Roboat initiative also highlights the significance of public private collaboration in deploying innovative transportation solutions.Sustainable delivery solutions and congestion alleviation can be achieved through innovative approaches in urban logistics such as CTPark.By establishing multimodal hubs strategically located within city centres,delivery operations can optimize access to densely populated areas while minimizing environmental impact.Incorporating emission-free vehicles and charging infrastructure,such hubs promote eco-friendly transportation methods.Additionally,by facilitating last-mile deliveries efficiently,they contribute to reducing congestion and improving overall urban mobility.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport9CASE STUDY 2Taxi traffic managementDubai,United Arab EmiratesImplementedSTATUSOverview of mobility challengeTaxi services,as with other shared mobility services,are widely recognized as indispensable first-and last-mile solutions in urban areas,ensuring seamless transportation and reducing dependency on private cars within cities.However,challenges stemming from disorganized passenger demand and unpredictable driver patterns have led to an unbalanced distribution of taxis in many cities,particularly during peak traffic hours.Consequently,passengers can experience longer waiting times and increased fares while taxi drivers navigate through congested traffic lanes,leading to a demand-supply gap,longer commute times and increased stress levels.Such operational inefficiency also hampers the income of taxi service providers and undermines overall passenger satisfaction,primarily attributed to prolonged wait times and the inability to access timely service when required.In Dubai,a city that has experienced significant growth in recent years and continues to grow rapidly,developing an efficient transport system is a priority.Around 60%of trips in Dubai are made by private vehicles,21 making the growth of shared and public transport services important to minimize congestion.The use of taxis and shared mobility services is on the rise,with around 114 million journeys taking place in 2023,an 8%increase from 2022.22 With taxis becoming an increasingly important mode of transport in the city,managing them efficiently is a priority.Solution:Dynamic heat mapsThe Dubai Roads and Transport Authority(RTA)launched the Dynamic Heat Maps Programme for taxis with Trapezes artificial intelligence(AI)technology,which highlights high-demand areas and potential passenger concentrations.These heat maps are dynamically updated using real-time data analysis through advanced AI within the Enterprise Command and Control Center(EC3)of the city.All taxis are equipped with smart meters that directly connect with the control room.Within the cabs,heat maps utilize three colours:green,yellow and red.Green signifies heightened passenger demand at a specific destination,while yellow suggests sufficient vehicle availability in the vicinity to meet demand.Conversely,red indicates either a scarcity of passengers in the area or an excess of available vehicles,prompting drivers to relocate to another area,optimizing efficiency and reducing wait times for travellers.23FIGURE 4.Smart meters installed in Dubai taxis24The dynamic heat maps are meticulously updated through the central control system,closely monitoring the movement of 10,800 taxis and demand fluctuations across Dubai-designated target areas,all powered by advanced AI.25 This sophisticated control mechanism systematically analyses real-time passenger demand data while gauging the presence of taxis within specific zones.By juxtaposing these insights,the system accurately assesses the overall capacity of the taxi fleet to address the prevailing demand.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport10FIGURE 5.Heat maps used for taxi traffic management,Dubai,UAE26Impact and takeawaysThe integration of the AI system within the taxi network has yielded remarkable results,notably culminating in a substantial 17%increase in taxi reservation efficiency and 40%reduction in unproductive mileage.Additionally,the system has significantly mitigated unproductive mileage by approximately 40%,consequently fostering a positive impact on both the environmental and economic landscapes.The streamlined implementation of the AI infrastructure has led to a 14%increase in the volume of bookings received,highlighting the systems pivotal role in bolstering operational efficacy and service accessibility.27Dynamic heat maps have helped identify specific locations with high congestion and alleviate the pressure on the road network.These visual representations of real-time and historical data generated from the maps could play a vital role in aiding city planners and traffic management authorities to target areas where interventions are required to remove congestion.The use of heat maps has also facilitated optimized deployment of vehicles to high-demand areas,empowering drivers with a vital resource for passenger acquisition,while concurrently curbing fuel consumption and enabling reduced emissions.Additionally,precise demand indicators displayed on the heat maps resultin improved customer experience by providing more information on journey times and helping to reduce waiting times for services.Overall,making use of cognitive technology solutions such as dynamic heat maps holds the potential to make shared mobility services a key means of reducing congestion and improving first-and last-mile journeys in cities.Area does not require more vehiclesDemand is neutralArea requires more vehiclesCombatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport11CASE STUDY 3Regulation of micromobility Stockholm,SwedenImplementedSTATUSOverview of mobility challengeThe electric scooter,or e-scooter,has become widely popular as a form of micromobility in recent years gaining particular momentum in various locations across North America and Europe.Stockholm,Sweden,emerged as one of the pioneering cities in the adoption of e-scooters,with Voi leading the way by introducing its first e-scooter service in August 2018.Subsequently,numerous other companies followed suit,resulting in more than 10 providers operating in Stockholm by the summer of 2019.These providers varied in fleet size,ranging from a few dozen to several thousand e-scooters totalling more than 20,000 e-scooters in Stockholm.28,29 However,a local survey conducted in the city presented data that citizens shared mixed opinions about the use of e-scooters as a viable first-and last-mile solution owing to the perception of e-scooters being unsafe for the elderly,and from the experience of accidents due to negligent use of e-scooters on sidewalks,and unauthorized parking.30Solution:Data-driven regulationIn 2020,to analyse the use of e-scooters in the city for better regulation,control and follow-up,city officials ideated a city third-party platform,Cityscope,provided by the French company Vianova,to increase competency in data sharing between cities and micromobility players through practical application of geofencing.31The city provided geo-spatial rules and regulations via an Application Programming Interface(API)to the operators to indicate the appropriate parking and riding locations,which operators could communicate to the users.The companies shared data through Cityscope about the location and movement of e-scooters to monitor compliance and give the city authority an insight into usage behaviours.32Official partners for this project were City of Stockholm(Traffic Administration and Environmental and Health Administration),Voi and Vianova.Many e-scooters providers(Voi,Bolt,Tier,Lime,Bird,Superpedestrian,etc.)participated and provided Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport12data via standardized open-source mobility data formats such as the Mobility Data Specification(MDS).This platform led to abilateral exchange of information,such as data on the number of e-scooter trips,and information on geofenced regulations including parking zones and curbsides from city administration.Data-sharing via Cityscope continued to be part of normal operations in theCity of Stockholm during 2022.33Impact and key takeawaysIn Stockholm,utilizing a third-party platform for data sharing was instrumental in overseeing e-scooter operators adherence to regulations.Through this platform,officials conducted athorough analysis of e-scooter movements,ensuring compliance with parking and speed regulations.Additionally,this data facilitated trend analysis,aiding in infrastructure planning for a safer and more cohesive mobility environment in the city.Comparisons of Key Performance Indicators(KPIs)between Stockholm and other cities and between operators were conducted,linking complaint levels to fleet sizes.Access to the data-sharing platform also facilitated operators to constructively engage with the city,ensuring compliance with regulations.34One of the difficulties encountered was the inadequate precision of shared e-scooter location data.This lack of accuracy poses challenges for authorities seeking to enforce regulations in narrow areas and levy fines on operators based solely on parking violation information.Moreover,operators faced obstacles in controlling speed near restricted zones due to limitations in positioning accuracy.35The above-gained insights resulted in a new form of permits in 2021 for e-scooter rentals,imposing caps for each operator on the number of electric scooters operated in the city and annual charges for each operator.Various other laws,such as prohibition of parking on pavements or cycle paths and mandating that e-scooters be parked solely in designated parking areas,came into effect.These laws make e-scooters equivalent to bicycles with regards to road traffic regulations.36 These new regulations have helped to deliver a better-managed,more consistent experience with e-scooters in the city which avoid clutter on streets,reducing conflict with pedestrians and other street space demands.While there is some evidence showing that scooter use may have declined in some instances in Stockholm since the introduction of parking regulations,evidence also shows high support for the changes to scooter management and continueduse of the scooters.37 E-scooters present a promising solution to urban congestion,offering a convenient means of first-and last-mile transport to complement public transport.However,addressing challenges such as irresponsible parking and reckless speeds is crucial for realizing its full potential.Optimizing micromobility fleet size through measures such as managing operations and enforcing strict permit criteria can significantly improve traffic flow and enhance public safety.Data-sharing platforms enable transparency and informed decision-making,supporting effective infrastructure planning and regulation enforcement.Policy-makers,operators andplanners in tandem must collaborate to successfully manage and encourage novel shared mobility solutions such as e-scooters to pave the way for a more efficient,connected mobility system.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport13CASE STUDY 4Drone delivery servicesHolly Springs,Fayetteville,Raeford and Granbury,USAImplementedSTATUSOverview of mobility challengeHome delivery volume continues to grow as shoppers move from the high street to online.Consumers are not just looking for faster delivery times,but they are also pushing for increased flexibility and visibility.Shoppers increasingly want to be able to select the timing and location of each delivery,tracking deliveries all the way and experiment with frequent orders with smaller quantities.These changing consumer behaviours and preferences around deliveries are leading to companies exploring options for more home deliveries that can be fast,reliable and economical.More delivery vehicles on the road to meet increased demand for rapid home delivery of goods inevitably puts more pressure on transport systems,including for last-mile deliveries,leading to congestion on city roads,particularly in dense urban areas.38 In the United States,demand for fast home deliveries has increased significantly in recent years.E-commerce and logistics players are recording huge increases in customers choosing next-day or even same-day delivery options,with these companies putting significant resources into expanding such services.39,40 Indeed,the market size for same-day delivery is set to increase by around 50%by 2030,41 and reports suggest that the vast majority of major retail players in the US are planning to offer same-day delivery services by 2025.42,43 Meanwhile,home food deliveries continue to increase in popularity,with the US meal deliveries market estimated to be worth almost$100 billion by 2029.44With demand for rapid home deliveries set to increase,it is vital to find solutions that can tackle congestion from last-mile deliveries while providing cost-effective,efficient,end-to-end deliveries.Solution:Flytrex autonomous delivery dronesAerial delivery drones have emerged as a promising solution in autonomous last-mile delivery services as a way to reduce traffic and emissions.In the US State of North Carolina,the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA)granted a license for drone delivery operations in the towns of Holly Springs,Fayetteville and Raeford as part of a pilot project.The town of Granbury,Texas,was also included in this trial.45 Drone delivery start-up Flytrex was selected for running delivery operations in these areas,offering fast,safe and cost-effective airborne deliveries directly to customers front and backyards.46 Through the trial,the company has been testing food deliveries from restaurants directly to customers homes in these towns.When an order is ready for collection at a restaurant,the companys drone travels to the restaurant and hovers above the collection area.It deploys a descending wire,enabling restaurant staff to affix the package directly to the tethered hook.After loading,the drone transports the order to customers homes,gradually releasing the delivery via a tether system.47Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport14Impact and takeawaysFollowing successful testing and piloting and buy-in from the FAA,Flytrexs operations have grown to a robust operation,with a substantial growth in its eligible customer base in the US a 138%increase between 2021 and 2022;2022 saw over 85,000 grocery items delivered through Flytrexs drones.48 The company grew on this success by delivering to 81%more households in 2023 compared to 2022,49 and has capitalized on successful trials in North Carolina and Texas to provide drone deliveries in new cities in the US.50 In 2022,the company carried out over 22,000 flights without any serious crashes or incidents.51 The pilots in North Carolina and Texas have shown the potential for drone delivery to provide a reliable,convenient and safe alternative for last-mile deliveries,offering thepotential to reduce vehicle numbers and tackle congestion from the deliveries sector.The ability of drones to navigate complex environments effortlessly and offer rapid delivery times,especially for urgent or time-sensitive packages,holds promise for alleviating pressure on road networks in the future.Although the initial setup costs are considerable and may affect adoption rates,operational expenses are often lower due to reduced energy consumption and fewer human resources needed for operation.However,unlocking the full potential of drones for deliveries hinges on establishing a robust regulatory framework and obtaining necessary certifications.Industry stakeholders and regulatory authorities need to collaborate in creating a framework conducive to safe and efficient drone operations.Social acceptance of drones for deliveries and other purposes will also be a crucial factor;at present,drones do not have widespread public support,particularly regarding operations near or over households.52 Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport15Varanasi,IndiaStatus:UnderwayCASE STUDY 4Inland waterways and cable car systemOverview of mobility challengeLocated in northern India,Varanasi is one of the worlds oldest cities,known for its dense population,cultural sites and narrow streets.In 2023,Indias tourism agency reported that more than 53.8 million domestic and international tourists visited the city.53 This popularity,however,strains its transport infrastructure,with three national and four state highways critical for connectivity yet overwhelmed by traffic.The congestion,especially around major hubs like the Varanasi railway station,hampers movement and complicates transport needs in this historic city.Given the impracticality of conventional public transport solutions like light rail due to space constraints,innovative alternatives are essential to alleviate congestion and enhance traffic flow.Solutions:Inland waterways and cable car systemInland waterways The establishment of inland waterways presents a more cost-effective and environmentally sustainable means of transporting people and goods over both short(within the city)and long distances(inter-city movement),fostering tourism and economic opportunities for communities residing along the riverbanks.The Inland Waterways Authority of India(IWAI),operating under the Ministry of Shipping,serves as the statutory body responsible for overseeing the development and regulation of inland waterways.54 One noteworthy initiative of the IWAI is the Jal Marg Vikas Project(JMVP),financially supported by the World Bank.55 This endeavour aims to integrate various modes of transportation,ultimately resulting in themovement of large quantities of goods and passengers in a short time span,thereby reducing congestion on railways and roads,minimizing the carbon footprint and optimizing resource utilization.Some of the major initiatives taken by this project under the Ministry of Shipping are establishing multi-modal terminals along the Ganga River(Figure 6),with Varanasi being a key location.It also includes the development of jetties within a 250-kilometre stretch between Varanasi and Ballia in Uttar Pradesh state of India.Completed components:Multi-Modal Terminal(MMT)at Varanasi:Inaugurated on 12 November 2018 by Prime Minister Narendra Modi,this terminal is fully operational,handling cargo and passenger traffic.It marked a milestone with the first cargo vessel arriving from Kolkata in 2018.Floating terminals:Operational at multiple locations,including Ghazipur,Rajghat(Varanasi),and Prayagraj,facilitating local connectivity and cargo movement.STATUSAllahabadVaranasiGhazipurKalughatPatnaMungerBhagalpurSahibganjiPakurBandelTribeniFarakkaKolkataHaldia2.2mDepth2.5m3.0mNatutanwa(Nepal)Raxaul(Nepal)Biratnagar(Nepal)Multimodal terminalsIntermodal terminalsFloating terminalsRo-Ro terminalsSmall community jettiesFerry locationsFIGURE 6.Arth Ganga masterplan Multimodal terminals along the Ganga River56Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport16Community jetties:Seven jetties were inaugurated by November 2022 along NW-1(e.g.Ravidas Ghat,Ramnagar,Kaithi),with eight more under development.Haldia MMT:Operational to a significant extent,supporting cargo movement toward Kolkatas port ecosystem.These terminals have also facilitated the introduction of roll-on roll-off vessels,ferry and cruise services for tourists.To address environmental concerns,these boats have transitioned from diesel-engine water taxis to compressed natural gas(CNG)-propelled,hydrogen-fuelled and solar-powered water taxis.57,58,59Cable car ropeway system In 2022,the Varanasi Development Authority approved a cable car ropeway system,with a central terminus at Varanasi Railway Station.60 The under construction ropeway,which will be the first of its kind in India,aims to strengthen connections throughout the city and provide residents and tourists alike with convenient access to Varanasi Railway Station,as well as key points across the city.The ropeway will provide connections tomultiple tourist attractions such as the Kashi Vishwanath Temple and the Ganga River.FIGURE 7.Cable car route in Varanasi61The cable car ropeway will cover about 4 kilometres,with a total of five major stations.The planned operating hours for the Varanasi cable car will be 16 hours per day,promising sustainable relief for traffic congestion and better connectivity to the heavily frequented temple district.62 The ropeway is anticipated to expand to cover all major city stations in Varanasi.The expanded network will also reach academic institutions,which will help to connect commuting students with the Varanasi Railway station.63 Governed by a public-private partnership(PPP),the government tendered the project,opting for the established Swiss technology provided by BARTHOLET.Following completion,the cable car system will be operated by Vishwa Samudra Ropeways for 15 years,ensuring seamless operation and management.64Main Station,Varanasi CanttKashi Vishwanath,Temple District/GodowliaSection 4Section 3Section 2Section 1Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport17Anticipated impact and key takeawaysInland waterways The multi-modal terminal is anticipated to shift local passenger travel within the city away from single-occupancy private vehicles on congested urban roads and onto the Ganga River,as well as reducing intercity passenger and freight traffic from the congested national and state highways within the city to inland waterways.According to a study conducted by the World Bank,one litre of fuel can transport 105 tonne/km via inland water transport,compared to 85 tonne/km via rail and 24 tonne/km via road.Similarly,the carbon emissions per tonne-km are significantly lower for container vessels at 32-36 grams compared to road transport vehicles,which emit 51-91 grams.65 This redirection will not only reduce the travel time,but will provide a cost-effective and sustainable local solution to first-and last-mile journeys,as well as wider travel within and between cities.Cities located on riverbanks have recognized inland waterways as a promising sustainable first-and last-mile transportation option.This mode of transport offers advantages such as time and cost savings,decreased road congestion,and improved fuel and energy efficiency.Cable car ropeway system The implementation of a cable car system is set to enhance the efficiency of the existing transportation network,particularly improving the convenience and attractiveness of first-and last-mile travel.As revealed in discussions with the Varanasi Development Authority,the ropeway project is envisioned to have a capacity of carrying 2,500 people per hour per direction,totalling 5,000 people in both directions per hour.This capacity is expected to facilitate the transfer of approximately 80,000 people daily.Notably,this shift is anticipated to alleviate congestion and air pollution,particularly for short trips that currently account for nearly more than 60%of the citys transportation as per studies carried out by Banaras Hindu University,mainly reliant on autorickshaws and two-wheelers.66The cable car ropeway project holds potential as a solution to not only tackle congestion issues in Varanasi,but also to reduce air pollution,noise pollution and carbon emissions,all while strengthening first-and last-mile connections to the citys central railway station and beyond.Alongside other initiatives,such as the Nagar Yojana project,which will see a new bus terminal and consolidation zone for freight transport in the city,67 the ropeway project could help to alleviate pressure on Varanasis road network and strengthen first-and last-mile connections across the city.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport18Concluding ThoughtsTailored solutions catalysed by public-private collaboration can address the challenge of congestion and optimize first-and last-mile transport.This report has highlighted innovative ways in which cities are finding solutions to the challenge of congestion through optimizing and enabling first-and last-mile transport,and how public-private collaboration can catalyse action on this challenge.By drawing insights from the case studies,government authorities,industry and citizens can enact measures to reinforce policies and investment decisions and societal changes to mitigate congestion,bolstering sustainability efforts and enhancing the overall well-being of residents.Key takeaways for city authorities1.Promote public private collaboration:Foster collaborations between academic institutions,private companies and government bodies to innovate and implement advanced transport solutions like Amsterdams Roboat project and Varanasis cable car system.2.Regulate and support technological innovation:Implement regulations that support the deployment of new technologies while ensuring safety and efficiency.For example,adopt AI-driven systems like Dubais Dynamic Heat Maps for optimizing taxi movements.Facilitate pilot programmes for emerging technologies such as drone deliveries,ensuring they comply with safety standards and gain public acceptance.3.Incorporate sustainable logistics hubs:Establish and promote multimodal logistics hubs similar to Amsterdams CTPark to streamline last-mile deliveries using emission-free vehicles,thereby reducing congestion and pollution.4.Implement data-driven policies:Utilize data-sharing platforms like Stockholms Cityscope to regulate and monitor micromobility solutions;ensure that data from these platforms is used to inform infrastructure planning and regulatory adjustments.5.Develop robust regulatory frameworks:Establish clear regulatory frameworks for autonomous and electric vehicles,drones and other innovative transport solutions,ensuring integration into existing urban transport systems.Key takeaways for Industry1.Invest in green and autonomous technologies:Develop and deploy zero-emission and autonomous transport solutions,such as the Roboat in Amsterdam and Flytrex drones in the US,to reduce traffic congestion and environmental impact.2.Create efficient logistics solutions:Innovate in urban logistics by creating consolidation centres and using electric freight vehicles(LEFVs)for last-mile deliveries,reducing the number of trips and emissions,as seen with Deudekom and Nedcargo in Amsterdam.3.Leverage AI and data analytics:Implement AI-driven systems like Dubais Dynamic Heat Maps to optimize fleet management,reduce idle times and enhance service efficiency.4.Collaborate with urban authorities:Work closely with city officials to ensure compliance with regulations and contribute to urban mobility planning,similar to the collaboration between e-scooter companies and Stockholms city administration.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport195.Engage in continuous improvement and scaling:Commit to continuous improvement of transport technologies and services based on real-world testing and feedback,aiming for scalable solutions like the Roboats progression from prototype to start-up.Key takeaways for citizens1.Adopt sustainable transport options:Utilize eco-friendly transport modes such as electric water taxis,e-scooters and public transport options to reduce individual carbon footprints and alleviate urban congestion.2.Participate in shared mobility:Engage in shared mobility solutions,such as carpooling,ride-sharing and bike-sharing programmes,to optimize transport efficiency and reduce the number of vehicles on the road.3.Support innovative solutions:Be open to and actively participate in pilot programmes for new transport technologies like autonomous water taxis,drones and AI-driven taxi systems to provide valuable user feedback.4.Adhere to urban mobility regulations:Comply with city regulations regarding parking,speed limits and designated transport zones for micromobility solutions to ensure safety and smooth integration into the urban transport ecosystem.5.Promote and advocate for sustainable practices:Advocate for sustainable urban transport solutions within communities and support initiatives aimed at reducing traffic congestion and pollution through public and private efforts.A range of solutions from technological innovation and infrastructural changes to government policy will be needed to tackle congestion in the short to long term.Importantly,to sustain such solutions,strong public-private collaboration will remain a fundamental feature.Channelling strengths of both the public and the private sector can effectively meet the ever-changing needs of cities and the urgent need to respond to traffic congestion.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport20ContributorsPwCNirav ShahPartner,PwC,IndiaHardik Mirani Director,PwC,IndiaDivija DedhiaSenior Associate,PwC,IndiaWorld Economic ForumPurushottam KaushikHead,Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution,C4IR IndiaShefali RaiProject Specialist,Urban Mobility Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport21Endnotes1 United Nations(2023).The Sustainable Development Goals Report(Goal 11)https:/www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/cities.2 United Nations(2021).UN Sustainable Transport Conference-Fact Sheet Climate Change.https:/www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/media_gstc/FACT_SHEET_Climate_Change.pdf.3 Statista(2024).Transportation emissions worldwide-statistics&facts.https:/ Our World in Data(2023).Cars,planes,trains:where do CO2 emissions from transport come from?https:/ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport.5 C40(2024).Transportation.https:/www.c40.org/what-we-do/scaling-up-climate-action/transportation.6 Inrix(2022).Inrix Global Traffic Scorecard.https:/ Inrix(2020).INRIX Global Traffic Scorecard:Congestion cost UK economy 6.9 billion in 2019 https:/ Moya-Gmez,B.&Garca-Palomares,J.C.(2017).The impacts of congestion on automobile accessibility.What happens in large European cities?Journal of Transport Geography,Vol.21,pp.148-159.https:/ Li(2023).Exploring the Impact of First Mile/Last Mile Solutions on Traffic Congestion and Air Quality in Urban Areas.www.paradigmpress.org/SSSH/article/download/500/431/635#:text=Overall, the literature indicates that,air quality in urban areas.10 Puri,K.(2022).What is first-mile delivery?How to optimize first-mile logistics to overcome its World Economic Forum(2020).The Future of the Last Mile Ecosystem.https:/www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-the-last-mile-ecosystem.12 Endava(2022).Transportation&Logistics Report:Navigating Technology and the Current State of the Industry.13 Curry,C.(2023),Robot:Dutch Company provides autonomous ferry solutions at Olympics!,April 19,2023,https:/ Amsterdam Smart City(2018).Roboat.https:/ CTP Invest(2024).https:/ctp.eu/industrial-warehouse-office-finder/netherlands/ctpark-amsterdam-city.16 Delft University of Technology(2019).https:/pure.tudelft.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/56796706/City_Logistics_XI_levv_conference.pdf.17 Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Metropolitan Solutions(2023).Next phase for Roboat to boost future-proof urban mobility as a spin-off company.https:/www.ams-institute.org/news/next-phase-for-roboat-to-boost-future-proof-urban-mobility-as-a-spin-off-company.18 Roboat(2019),Roboat Y3 results:moving forward towards a full scale prototype.Press Release 18 October 2019,https:/www.ams-institute.org/news/roboat-y3-results-moving-forward-towards-full-scale-prototype.19 Mols,B.(2023)Roboat is on course for the future.https:/www.tudelft.nl/en/innovation-impact/pioneering-tech/articles/roboat-is-on-course-for-the-future.20 NL(2023).Roboat:Dutch company provides autonomous ferry solution at Olympics!https:/ Deloitte(2020).Deloitte City Index:Dubai.https:/ Government of Dubai(2024).Dubai Taxi records 8%increase in growth between 2022-2023.https:/www.mediaoffice.ae/en/news/2024/March/04-03/Dubai-Taxi-records#:text=Dubais taxi sector has experienced,over the past 15 years.23 Trapeze(2018).Smart Maps in Dubai drive taxis to pasengers.https:/.au/news/article-smart-maps-in-dubai-drive-taxis-to-passengers.24 Trapeze(n.d.).Taxi Management Solution Module.https:/.au/taxi/taxi-management-solutions/driver-connect.25 Trapeze(2018).Dubai RTA on Enhancing Efficiency and the Customer Experience.https:/.au/resources/dubai-rta-on-enhancing-efficiency-and-the-customer-experience.26 Trapeze(n.d.).Taxi Management Solution Module.https:/.au/taxi/taxi-management-solutions/driver-connect.27 Roads and Transport Authority,Dubai.“RTA Sustainability Report 2019”,Page 45.https:/rta.ae/wps/wcm/connect/rta/7c3f8b71-1ebb-4e55-bfef-4d08ae394639/RTA-Sustainability-Report-2019-en.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport22pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE.Z18_N004G041LOBR60AUHP2NT32000-7c3f8b71-1ebb-4e55-bfef-4d08ae394639-nKlWuBO#:text=1.3-,RTAs Awards, r.28 City of Stockholm(2022).Data-driven regulation of micromobility-A demonstration project with e-scooter providers in the City of Stockholm.https:/miljobarometern.stockholm.se/content/docs/tema/trafik/elsparkcykel/Data driven regulation of micromoblity.pdf.29 Two Birds(2022).From scooters to sustainability-what does the logistics market look like in Sweden?https:/ Rachmanto,A.S.(2020).The Impact of E-scooters in Stockholm Public Spaces.https:/www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1502578/FULLTEXT01.pdf.31 Vianova(December 2023).Interview(Shefali Rai,Interviewer).32 Vianova(December 2023).Interview(Shefali Rai,Interviewer).33 City of Stockholm(2022).Data-driven regulation of micromobility-A demonstration project with e-scooter providers in the City of Stockholm.https:/miljobarometern.stockholm.se/content/docs/tema/trafik/elsparkcykel/Data driven regulation of micromoblity.pdf.34 Ibid.35 Ibid.36 Ibid.37 KTH(2023).Electric scooters less popular since introduction of new parking rules.https:/www.kth.se/en/om/nyheter/centrala-nyheter/elsparkcykel-mindre-popular-med-nya-p-regler-1.1256111.38 World Economic Forum(2020).The Future of the Last-Mile Ecosystem.https:/www.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-the-last-mile-ecosystem.39 Schlosser,K.(2023)Amazon delivery gets faster with 65%jump in number of same-day and overnight items in US.https:/ Brooks,K.(2024).Walmart to expand same-delivery delivery options to include early morning hours.https:/ Statista(2024).US Same-Day Delivery Market Size.https:/ Supply Chain Dive(2023).Consumers want ultrafast delivery and they want it today.https:/ Humes,H.(2018).Online Shopping Was Supposed to Keep People Out of Traffic.It Only Made Things Worse.https:/ Statista(2024).Meal Delivery United States.https:/ J.Littman,Flytrex,drone partner receives critical FAA approval for expansion,31 January 2023.Online.Available:https:/ Flytrex(2024).https:/.47 French,S.(2023).Flytrex overhaul its Drone Delivery Loading System,keeping Drones further away from people.https:/ Drone DJ(2023).Flytrex reports enormous surge in 2022 drone delivery activity.https:/ French,S.(2023).Flytrex overhaul its Drone Delivery Loading System,keeping Drones further away from people.https:/ Flytrex(2024).https:/.51 WRAL News(2023).Flytrex wants to expand food delivery by drone operation deeper into Wake County.https:/ Eifeldt,H.&Biella,M.(2022).The public acceptance of drones Challenges for advanced aerial mobility(AAM).Transport Research Procedia,Volume 66,2022,Pages 80-88.https:/ Times of India(2023)In 2023,Indias tourism department reported that more than 53.8 million domestic and international tourists visited the city.https:/ Inland Waterways Authority of India(IWAI)(2024)https:/iwai.nic.in.55“Capacity Augmentation of the National Waterway-1(JAL MARG VIKAS)Project,”The World Bank,Online.Available:https:/projects.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/project-detail/P148775.Accessed 2024.Combatting Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport2356 Government of India Press Bureau(2020).Prime Minister reviews Project Arth Ganga:Correcting imbalances;connecting people.https:/pib.gov.in/Pressreleaseshare.aspx?PRID=1624562.57 P.T.o.India,“Environment-friendly CNG replaces diesel as fuel on boats in Varanasi,”22 January 2023.Online.Available:https:/www.business- H.T.Correspondent,“U.P.:Solar-powered boats in Ayodhya,Varanasi soon,”28 June 2023.Online.Available:https:/ N.Choubey,“PM Modi Launches Indias First Hydrogen-Powered Ferry in Varanasi,”Native Planet,22 March 2024.Online.Available:https:/ Shah,V.(2023)Indias First Urban Ropeway Takes Shape in Varanasi.https:/ Weiss,V.(2023).Varanasi:Urban transport redefined with comfort above streets of India.https:/ T.o.India,“Nitin Gadkari teases India with glimpses of countrys first commercial ropeway,”29 March 2023.Online.Available:https:/ Varanasi Development Authority(January 2024).Interview(Divija Dedhia,Interviewer).64 Weiss,V.(2023).Varanasi:Urban transport redefined with comfort above streets of India.https:/ Sonowal,S.(2022).Inland waterways will reshape transportation.https:/ Choudhary,J.(2023).Feasibility Study of Personal Rapid Transit Systems(PRTS)in Varanasi City.67 Varanasi Development Authority(2023).Transport Nagar Project.https:/ Congestion:How Cities and Companies are Innovating First-and Last-Mile Transport24World Economic Forum9193 route de la CapiteCH-1223 Cologny/GenevaSwitzerland Tel.: 41(0)22 869 1212Fax: 41(0)22 786 2744contactweforum.orgwww.weforum.orgThe World Economic Forum,committed to improving the state of the world,is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation.The Forum engages the foremost political,business and other leaders of society to shape global,regional and industry agendas.
2025-03-11
25页
5星级
12ContentsITCO International Tank Container OrganisationSuite 3,Charter House,26 Claremont Road,Surbiton KT6 4QU United KingdomE:infoitco.org|W:www.itco.orgThe tank container continues to prove its value for transporting bulk cargo by sea,rail and road,and as a temporary storage unit.Introduction 3The Global Tank Container Fleet An Overview 4Top 10 Tank Container Operators(at 1 January 2025)5Top 10 Tank Container Leasing Companies(at 1 January 2025)5Global Tank Container Development by Year(1 Jan 2013 1 Jan 2025)6Comparative Tank Production and Global Fleet Growth(1991 2024)7Tank Production and Global Tank Container Fleet (1 Jan 1992-2024)8Tank Container Operators Fleets at 1 January 2025 9Tank Container Leasing Company Fleets at 1 January 2025 10Methodology 11ITCO:Presidents Report 12GLOBAL TANK CONTAINER FLEET SURVEY2025Great care has been taken to ensure the information published in this Survey is accurate,but the International Tank Container Organisation accepts no responsibility for any errors or omissions.All responsibility for action based on any information in this Survey rests with the reader.ITCO accepts no liability for any loss of whatever kind,arising from the contents of this Report.DISCLAIMER3Following several years of significant expansion in the years from 2018 to 2023,the tank container industrys growth has slowed over the past two years.The huge demand for new tank containers in 2021 and 2022 can-to a large extent-be attributed to the disruptions caused by Covid-19.With supply chains returning post Covid to normal in 2023,the tank industry has,in the meantime,inevitably been impacted by issues in the chemical industry over the past two years.The European chemical industry faced significant challenges in 2024,continuing a downward trend from previous years.High energy and feedstock costs,coupled with increased regulatory expenses and weak demand,led to a contraction in production.Reports indicated a 6.6cline in European chemical production in 2023,with only a modest 1.9%growth in 2024.Several major chemical producers announced plant closures and downsizing to mitigate financial losses.In contrast,the North American chemical industry,particularly in the United States,demonstrated resilience and growth in 2024.After a 0.6%contraction in 2023 due to high inflation and restrictive monetary policies,the sector rebounded with growth of 3%in 2024 and a similar figure estimated in 2025.Asia remained a pivotal player in the global chemical market,with China and India at the forefront.However,the Asian market faced challenges related to overcapacity,particularly in China,leading to intensified competition and consolidation efforts among producers.The global oversupply of petrochemicals prompted companies to shut down older plants,sell assets,and explore cheaper raw materials to maintain profitability.According to this years ITCO Survey of the Global Tank Container Market,a total of 42,123 tanks were manufactured and 8500 disposed of.Thus 33,620 tank containers were added to the tank container fleet in 2024,compared to 46,600 in the previous year.This years Survey estimates that,at 1 January 2025,the global tank container fleet stood at 882,023 units,compared to 848,400 tanks on 1 January 2024 a growth of 3.96%.Despite the slow-down in the growth of the industry,the massive disruption in the supply chain and the chemical industry challenges,the past four years have proved that the tank container plays a critical role in the“just-in-time”business philosophy of the major end users the shippers.The industry continues to be dominated on a global level by a relatively small number of major tank container operators and leasing companies.The top 10 operators accounted for over 301,750 tanks,representing just under 50%of the global tank container operators fleet(619,741 tanks).The top 10 lessors accounted for 322,733 tanks,representing about 84%of the total leasing fleet(381,781 tanks).As in previous years,this Survey lists those companies that are operating or leasing tank container fleets of over 1,000 units.Companies with tank container fleets of less than 1,000 units(about 200 companies)have not been named individually,but an“educated estimate”has been made for the combined fleets.The International Tank Container Organisation would like to take this opportunity to thank the various companies who have contributed to this study.Your input and information,statistics,and ideas are very much appreciated.ITCO Survey reveals industry growth of 3.96%in 2024 compared to 5.81%in 20234 The total operator and leasing fleet is based on the industry response to the Survey and other research.The leasing fleet is accounted for within both the“operator”and also the“shipper”fleets,except for those tanks which are“idle”.(Definition of“idle tanks”-see next column)“Shipper”and“others”fleet is estimated in accordance with the methodology detailed on page 13 of this Survey.The Survey indicates that there were 882,023 tank containers worldwide at the beginning of 2025 including a total of 42,123 new tanks manufactured in 2024.Taking into account an estimated 8,500 tanks which were either scrapped or sold out of the industry,the global fleet on 1 January 2025 had grown to 882,023 tanks,compared to 848,400 at the beginning of 2024.This represents a growth of 3.96%from 1 January 2024 to 1 January 2025.Table 1 shows the estimated global number of tanks by industry sector.Table 1:Global Tank Container Fleet(1 January 2025)Notes:*Idle Tanks Tanks might be“idle”because they are in the process of preparation such as maintenance and testing or in the process of being repositioned to a demand area or remaining as new manufacture stocks.The idle fleet of leasing company tanks at 1 January 2025 is calculated at 57,268 TEU(15%)*Shipper(also referred to as“Beneficial Cargo Owner”,producer or consignor)fleet The“Shipper”fleet comprises tanks owned or leased-in by producers of bulk cargoes,for shipment in tanks especially chemical and food/drinks companies.These tanks may be operated by the shipper themselves,or by an operator on their behalf These tanks can be units for specific logistics operations,dedicated services or for use within a companys own production process.They are also sometimes“special”tanks-manufactured or modified to meet a specific need and include tanks designed to transport liquefied and refrigerated gases.*Others “Others”(ie“Other Tank Users”)include the many tanks operated by organisations such as military,shipping and barge lines,rail,oil and mining industries,China domestic and companies that use tanks for storage or special transport operations such as bitumen.Some of the tanks disposed from operator and lessor fleets might be modified and utilised within this category.*Disposals Tank containers are normally depreciated over a residual life of 20 years(sometimes 25 years)-but they can remain in service for a longer period.Operators have recognised that the operational life of the tank can be extended.Evidence indicates that tanks can now last longer.The service life of the tank can be extended by remanufacture,refurbishment or good maintenance.This is an especially viable option when the price of new tanks is at a higher level.Owners might dispose of tank containers for commercial and technical reasons.These might be repurposed into other uses,such as storage.Some tanks are sold for re-cycling as scrap metal,especially if the tank is seriously damaged beyond economic repair.There are several drivers for scrapping tanks,or disposing out of the industry:-The age of the tank for example,when it reaches 20 years-The price of scrap stainless steel-Scrap might be a viable economic option when the commercial price of scrap stainless steel rises.-The price of new tanks when the price of new tanks goes down,there is more incentive to scrap old tanks and replace them In 2004,some 13,000 new tanks were manufactured.So it is reasonable to assume that 50%of these might have been scrapped in 2024,equating to 6,500.In addition,a further 2000 tanks(some older than 20 years,some newer)are estimated to have been scrapped in 2024.Precise data about tank disposal and scrapping is difficult to research.For this years survey,we have estimated a figure of 8,500 tanks being disposed of(scrapped or sold)in 2024,which is slightly fewer than the number calculated for 2023.Number of Tank Operators Worldwide240-plusNumber of Tanks in Operator Fleets(Owned&Leased-in)619,741 Number of Tank Lessors Worldwide38-plusNumber of Tanks in Lessor Fleets381,781 Tanks on Lease to Operators,Shippers and Others Users 324,513“Idle”leasing company tanks*(undergoing M&R,testing,storage)57,268 Shippers*and Others*Total number of Shipper and“Others”(Owned and leased-in)213,514 Manufactured and DisposalsTanks manufactured in 202442,123Tanks Disposed/Scrapped of in 2024*8,500Tanks added to the global fleet in 202433,623Total Global Tank Containers (Fleet size calculated as follows:Tanks in Operator Fleets Lessors“Idle”Tanks Tanks in BCOs/Shippers/“Others”Fleets.Less tanks scrapped)882,023The Global Tank Container Fleet at the beginning of 2025:Overview585,000Top Ten Leasing CompaniesThere are over 240 operators of tank containers known to ITCO,ranging from very large global companies to relatively small niche and regional players.Shown by Figure 1,at 1 January 2025,the top ten operators accounted for over 301,750 tanks representing just under 50%of the global tank container operators fleet(619,741 tanks).At the same time last year,the top ten operators accounted for over 297,955,tanks representing over 50%of the global tank container operators fleet(587,970 tanks).Figure 1:Top Ten Tank Container Operators(at 1 January 2025)At least 38 companies worldwide provide tank container leasing services.These range from large global lessors to regional and local companies.As shown in Figure 2,at 1 January 2025,the top 10 lessors accounted for 322,733 tanks,representing about 84%of the total leasing fleet(381,781 tanks).At the same time last year,the top ten lessors accounted for 317,740 tanks,representing about 85%of the total leasing fleet(376,195 tanks).Figure 2:Top Ten Tank Container Leasing Companies(at 1 January 2025)(*Same owner)Top Ten Tank Container OperatorsEXSIF Worldwide71,300Stolt TankContainers52,200Eurotainer*50,000Hoyer Group41,500Newport38,500TWS Rent-A-Tainer7,900International Equipment Leasing9,200E-way Group22,000RafflesLease*35,000China Railway Logistics27,500Bulkhaul23,250Seaco Global43,000Bertschi Group35,600CS Leasing35,250Den Hartogh25,200PeacockContainer24,100NRS OceanLogistics16,000TrifleetLeasing25,083Intermodal TankTransport20,000Triton International12,000AlbatrossTank Leasing9,9006Notes:*Disposals:Looking back at the historic quantity of annual new manufactured tanks,it is evident that an increasing number of tanks are coming to the end of their typically depreciated life of 20 years.As is demonstrated by Figure 5,the trend for increased disposals is expected to continue.More older tanks are being disposed due to age related problems,too heavy tare weight,low capacity and higher repair costs which encourage disposal,especially in times of relatively low utilisation.In its research for this edition of the fleet survey,ITCO has added a question to our members requesting data to include how many tanks have been disposed of from their fleets.In addition,we have the input from ITCO members which undertake tank recycling and second life domestic tanks.We believe this data will prove useful for our members who are actively involved in environmental sustainability.*Growth:Percentage growth is reported showing the growth for the year compared with the preceding Survey.Table 2 summarises ITCO Surveys completed since 2013.The 2014 and 2015“shipper&others owned fleet”has been adjusted,to reflect a static position,but the leased part of the fleet shows a percentage increase in line with the methodology.Table 2:Annual Global Tank Container Growth(1 Jan 2013-1 Jan 2025)YearPlayers/Tank Type2025202420232022202120202019201820172016201520142013Operators-Number240240240235230218212210209205194176116Total Operators Fleet(Owned and Leased)619,741587,970568,760489,895443,110418,500381,750365,000342,500329,080305,700265,550228,460Leasing Companies-Number38383837373735363636333427“Idle”Leasing Company Tanks57,26863,95336,93038,75544,40045,84042,78532,00028,50020,17523,40017,65015,000On-lease to Operators,Shippers,Others324,513312,242323,995284,195272,310259,775243,200213,000186,765181,575171,600158,850135,400Total Lessor Fleet381,781376,195360,925322,950316,710305,615286,000245,000215,265201,750 195,000 176,500 150,400 Shipper/OthersTotal(Owned and Leased)213,514196,477199,110211,285199,140188,010180,165155,000137,400110,950107,460103,00094,800Manufactured(in previous year approx)42,12356,60067,86553,28535,80054,65059,70048,50044,50043,78048,20042,62039,700Disposal*8,50010,0004,0003,0001,5007,0007,0004,5004,5002,0005,0001,000-Grand Total882,023848,400801,800737,935686,650652,350604,700552,000508,000458,200427,560385,200338,260Growth%compared with preceding year*3.965.818.657.35.267.8810.818.668.57.1610.9913.87n/a7 Table 3 shows:1.The estimated annual tank production since 1991.The ability to increase economic production of new manufactured tanks has been one of the drivers of the tank container industry growth 2.The estimated global tank container fleet since 1992,with the total number reflecting 8,500 tanks being disposed of in 2024.Table 3:Tank Container Production and World Fleet(1991 2024)YearProductionFleet at 1 January(of year shown)19916,50019928,00067,00019939,00073,000199411,00081,000199512,50088,800199614,00097,800199715,000110,650199813,000121,96019999,500129,640200010,500136,44020019,500144,14020029,000149,240200311,000157,400200413,000164,000200514,500172,000200616,000178,400200714,000190,000200815,000206,000200920,000220,000201025,000236,000201128,000257,000201239,700282,000201342,620338,260201448,200385,200201543,780427,500201644,500458,200201748,500508,000201859,700552,500201954,650604,700202035,800652,3502021 53,285686,650202267,865737,935202356,600801,800202442,123848,4002025882,023Data Source:tank container manufacturers,operators and leasing companies.8Figure 5:Tank Container Production(1990 to 2024)Tank production is largely centred in China where there are several manufacturers building tanks for the international and domestic market.Tanks are also manufactured in South Africa and Europe.Tanks manufactured in other parts of the world tend to be for local shippers and the domestic market.Figure 6:Total Fleet size(at 1st January of each year)70,00060,00050,00040,00030,00020,00010,0000900,000800,000700,000600,000500,000400,000300,000200,000100,0000199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023202419921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023202420259Global Tank Container Fleet:Tank Operators Fleet at 1 January 2025Tank Container Operators are third party logistics companies that provide a door-to-door service to shippers and others that require transport of bulk liquids,powders or gases.The fleet listing for each company includes all tanks operated by that company,regardless of whether the tanks are owned outright,managed,leased or any other financial structure used to acquire the asset.Table 4:Tank operators fleets(at 1 January 2025)Criteria:Companies with over 1000 tanks in their fleetNote:*There are a number of regional operators that are not readily contactable.Accordingly an estimate has been included.OPERATORHeadquarterFleetAgmark LogisticsUSA1,600Alfred TalkeGermany1,200ATI FreightUAE1,200Baltica Trans LogisticsRussia1,500Bertschi GroupSwitzerland35,600BoltSingapore 2,600Bulk Tainer LogisticsUK11,323BulkhaulUK23,250Celerity TankChina2,200Channel International FreightChina4,500Chemical ExpressItaly3,805Chemion LogistikGerman1,000China Railway LogisticsChina27,500ContankSpain1,200CrossoverSingapore6,500Curt RichterGermany2,710DaelimKorea7,000Dana Liquid BulkUSA9,200Deccan TransconIndia2,800Den HartoghNetherlands25,200DHL Global ForwardingNetherlands3,000DingesGermany1,000DJD International LogisticsChina10,103EagletainerSingapore13,500EHS LogisticsChina1,050EwayMalaysia22,000FlexitankUSA2,500GCA TransFrance4,000General Tank ContainersChina1,350Goodrich MaritimeIndia6,200GruberGermany1,280HengCheng China7,000Hoyer GroupGermany41,500Infotech-Baltika MRussia5,400Intermodal Tank TransportUSA20,000OPERATORHeadquarterFleetJOT Japan Oil TransportJapan9,000Katoen NatieTankBelgium2,850Kube&KubenzGermany1,100LanferGermany8,500LegendSingapore12,500LeschacoGermany5,050M&S LogisticsUK9,437Milky WayChina5,000Meurer IntermodalGermany1,200NewportNetherlands38,500NichiconJapan10,000NiyacJapan2,500NRS Ocean LogisticsJapan16,000PaltankUK2,475Pan BridgeKorea1,000Primy Ocean China1,650Protank Liquid LogisticsTaiwan1,200R.M.I Global LogisticsNetherlands4,600RadixKorea1,700RavianIndia2,388RinnenGermany3,500Sinochem domesticChina1,000SinotransChina1,360Spectrans/RailGarantRussia5,275Stolt Tank ContainersUK52,200Suttons InternationalUK12,995TGL Taewoong LogisticsKorea3,500UenoSingapore1,000Van den BoschNetherlands6,500Other Under 1000Estimated*Asia Pacific29,500Estimated*Europe,RU22,000Estimated*Americas16,200Estimated*India/Mid-East/Africa18,890TOTAL619,74110Global Tank Container Fleet:Leasing Companies Fleet at January 2025Tank Container Leasing companies provide tank containers to operators,shippers and others-usually on a contractual term basis,where the lessee takes“quiet”possession and operates that tank as if it were owned.Leasing company fleet listings include all tanks within the leasing company fleet including owned outright,managed on behalf of investor owners and any other financial means of acquisition.Table 5:Leasing companies fleets(at 1 January 2025)Criteria:Companies with over 1000 tanks in their fleetLESSORHeadquartersFleetAlbatross Tank LeasingChina9,900CombipassFrance1,500CS LeasingUSA35,250Eurotainer*France50,000EXSIF WorldwideUSA71,300International Equipment LeasingUSA9,200Matlack LeasingUSA2,500MCM ManagementSwitzerland3,000ModalisFrance5,000Multistar LeasingSouth Africa4,972Noble Container LeasingHong Kong2,364NRS LeaseJapan5,000Peacock ContainerNetherlands24,100LESSORHeadquartersFleetRaffles Lease*Singapore35,000Seaco GlobalSingapore43,000Tankspan LeasingUK2,012Trifleet LeasingNetherlands25,083Tristar EngineeringSwitzerland1,100Triton InternationalUSA12,000TWS Rent-A-TainerGermany7,900Unitas Container LeasingBermuda1,600VTGGermany4,000Total(above 1000)355,781Estimated total for others under 1000*26,000TOTAL 381,781Notes:*Same owner*There are a number of regional lessors that are not readily contactable.Accordingly,an estimate has been included.11MethodologyThe global tank container fleet comprises a range of tank types including tanks for liquids,liquefied gases,powders,swap tanks and specials.Tanks below 20ft length such as those typical of the offshore oil industry are not included in this Survey.The tank container is highly regulated and is required to meet stringent standards of operation,including statutory periodic inspection and renewal of test certification.However,there is no global register of tank containers.Data must be collected by systematically requesting tank owners and operators to provide company fleet numbers and manufacturers to report new production.Where firm data is not provided,this Survey provides estimates based on internet research and consultation with experienced industry representatives.Reported figures are recorded as received or,in the case of the charts within the report,the result of the percentage calculation of data.It is not intended to suggest that calculated figures are accurate to an exact number.Readers should round up,or down,as required.Leased fleet listings are not included in the total industry fleet figures,except for the relatively few estimated stocks that are idle.The balance of“on lease”tanks is typically estimated to be leased to operators(65%)and shippers and other tank users(about 30-35%).This percentage might vary by leasing company according to their market strengths and objectives,but is an estimated average.The trend is for a greater proportion leased to operators but for consistency with previous surveys the percentage breakdown remains unchanged.Whereas there is a trend to outsource tank logistics to tank operators,there remains a fleet of tanks directly controlled by shippers and others.It is a challenge to assess the fleet of tanks owned by shippers-also referred to as beneficial cargo owners(BCOs),producers or consignors and other owners/operators,because of the vast number of shippers and others worldwide.It is especially difficult to compile a list of shipper-owned tank containers,because tank ownership is a relatively small part of their core business and-as a result-fleet figures are not freely available.This also applies to other tank users such as shipping lines,military authorities,railways,oil companies,mining industry and China domestic.Estimates of the total“others”are included in the Survey.Despite the ongoing trend to outsource tank logistics,we have shown a small year-on-year increase in the the shipper/BCO and“other”fleets(ie fleets which are not tank container operator).For consistency of data charts,we have continued to apply the methodology but we are not confident in the reported higher number of shipper purchased tanks.Operators might provide logistics services for shipper-owned tanks,but the tanks are not included as operator tanks for the purpose of this survey.It is estimated that on average about 35%of the total leasing company fleet is leased directly to shippers and others.In the 2013 Survey it was estimated that shippers and others might own,on average,about the same number of tanks that are leased into their fleet.This number remains unchanged in the 2024 Survey and in preceding years.Users of the Survey can make adjustments to suit their needs.12ITCO:Continued Growth in aChallenging EnvironmentIts that time of the year,when ITCO is pleased to present the broadly anticipated Annual Global Tank Container Fleet Survey.This is the 13th Edition of our industry survey,and judging by the enquiries about the publication received from a variety of stakeholders,it remains an important reference document for companies active in the tank container industry,as well as investors,financial institutes,and consultants conducting market studies and exploring potential investment opportunities.The global economy continues to experience low growth rates,and the outlook remains cloudy.Major chemical players are not anticipating any significant upturn in the 2nd half of 2025,with the China factor being an important component in their planning.Chinas lower growth rates,significant over capacity in all major chemical products,(and continued investment)means that China will be looking for opportunistic export markets(e.g.Europe).New capacity is also being put in the ground in the Middle East,and North America which will negatively impact supply/demand balances.Rationalisation of capacity is anticipated in Korea and South East Asia,and several closures have already been announced in Europe where inflation,high energy costs,and weak demand represent a perfect storm for the industry.Key markets such as construction,automotive,and durables are all showing weakness.The exception to this picture is the North American market which continues to see positive GDP growth,although the impact of tariffs and other actions by the new administration on growth,inflation and interest rates is difficult to predict at the time of writing.The tank container industry has clearly felt the impact of these economic headwinds.After the correction in 2023 following the record year in 2022,growth rates have continued to slow in 2024.The global fleet is now 882,000 units,which represents a growth of 3.9%.A feature of the latest report is the impact of an ageing fleet.There is evidence of a trend towards increased disposal of fully depreciated tanks which have reached the end of their useful life,and where the cost of refurbishment is no longer an attractive economic proposition.Most of the 2024 growth has come from operators,whereas leasing companies have consolidated their positions,or in some cases actually reduced their fleet size.Nevertheless,considering all of the challenges of the marketplace,geopolitical tensions,weak investment and productivity growth,and ageing populations,it is encouraging to see the tank container fleet continuing to grow ahead of global GDP growth.Despite the headwindsand the industry should reckon with tough conditions for the foreseeable future,the tank container offers many supply chain advantages which will support its role as a niche mode of transportation,particularly considering the pressures being faced by its main customers in the chemicals and food-grade markets.It represents a safe and sustainable piece of equipment,ideally suited to intermodal traffic.The loaded product is subject to minimal handlingat the loading point,and at the point of dischargeunlike products moved on bulk parcel tankers.Pressures on working capital will discourage shippers from accumulating large inventories of products to be shipped in bulk tankers,and ultimately stored in bulk terminals at the discharge point,if tank containers offer a viable alternative.As we reported in last years report,there is also evidence of a gradual change from global supply chains,to more local-for-local sourcing,in which case tank containers can play a vital role in moving products to more isolated customers where infrastructure is less developed.Over 200 delegates attended the 2024 ITCO Members Meeting in Houston(October 2024)13The future of the tank container still offers much promise!As always,we want to express our appreciation to all the ITCO members who have contributed their data to this Global Fleet Survey,and to the ITCO Secretariat for burning much midnight oil in compiling and collating the data,and publishing this report within 2 months of the year-end.A year of change at ITCOOur 2024 Report concluded with the comment:“We are looking forward to an exciting and challenging 2024 as ITCO leads a transformation programme aligned to the wishes expressed by our membership.”As the expression goesbe careful what you wish for!We can confirm that it was an exciting and challenging year as we introduced a new Management Committee,created a slimmed-down Board,revisited our 2030 Vision and Strategy,created a Finance Sub Committee,and introduced Town Halls to support communication to a wider audience.In addition,we of course had a full programme of events,including a very successful meeting in Rotterdam focused on Depots,the ITCO Village at the Shanghai Transport Logistic exhibition,and our Annual Meeting in Houston.This was our first visit to the USA for many years,and was part of our strategy to build our global presence through targeted regional events.This regionalization of our activities will continue in 2025 as ITCO will be represented at the Liquid Bulk Symposium in New Orleans in March,and there will be a Digitalisation meeting in April in Antwerp featuring a very strong programme of presentations.This will be followed by the ITCO Village at Transport Logistic in Munich,and ITCOs Annual meeting is scheduled for November in Singapore.For every initiative and event,the question remains the samehow do we deliver the best value for our members?Finally,we continue to drive initiatives which raise standards,support safe working practices,and improve efficiency and environmental performance.Working Groups are actively pursuing a Digital Twin platform,and a Depot Audit and Assessment Scheme.We are also committed to our lobbying efforts at IMO and IMDG,and engaged with ADR/RID on regulatory issues.2025 is shaping up to be just like 2024an exciting and challenging year.The ITCO Tank Container Village at transport logistic 2025 is an important meeting-point for the tank industry
2025-03-11
13页
5星级
REPORTEFINANCIAMIENTO Y COMPRADORES DE VEHCULOS LIGEROSEnero-Diciembre 2024ContenidoSecciones:I.Por .
2025-03-06
12页
5星级
USING THE FUEL ECONOMY GUIDEiCONTENTSiUsing the Fuel Economy Guide1How the Guide is Organized1Why Some Vehicles Are NotListed1Vehicle Classes Used in this Guide2Understanding the Guide Listings3Tax Incentives and Disincentives3Fuel Economy Saves You Money4Fueling Options5Alternative Fueling StationLocator6Improve Your Fuel Economy7Advanced Vehicle Technologies8Annual Fuel Cost Ranges forVehicle Classes9Most Efficient Vehicles102022 Model Year Vehicles38All-Electric Vehicles42Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles47Fuel Cell Vehicles48Diesel Vehicles51Ethanol Flexible Fuel VehiclesThe U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)andU.S.Department of Energy(DOE)produce the FuelEconomy Guide to help car buyers choose the mostfuel-efficient vehicle that meets their needs.The Guideis available on the Web at fueleconomy.gov.Fuel Economy EstimatesThe purpose of EPAs fuel economy estimates is toprovide a reliable basis for comparing vehicles.Most vehicles in this guide(other than plug-in hybrids)have three fuel economy estimates:A city estimate that represents urban driving,inwhich a vehicle is started in the morning(after beingparked all night)and driven in stop-and-go trafficA highway estimate that represents a mixture ofrural and interstate highway driving in a warmed-upvehicle,typical of longer trips in free-owing trafficA combined estimate that represents acombination of city driving(55%)and highwaydriving(45%)Estimates for all vehicles are based on laboratorytesting under standardized conditions to allow for faircomparisons.Flexible fuel vehicles(FFVs),which can use gasolineand E85,have estimates for both fuels.Plug-in hybridelectric vehicles(PHEVs)have estimates for(1)electric-only or blended electric and gasoline operation and(2)gasoline-only operation.PHEVs are discussed inmore detail on page 42.For answers to frequentlyasked questions about fuel economy estimates,visitfueleconomy.gov.Annual Fuel Cost EstimatesThis guide provides annual fuel cost estimates,rounded to the nearest$50,for each vehicle.Theestimates are based on the assumptions that youtravel 15,000 miles per year(55%under city drivingconditions and 45%under highway conditions)andthat fuel costs$3.15/gallon for regular unleadedgasoline,$3.72/gallon for mid-grade unleadedgasoline,and$4.09/gallon for premium.Cost-per-gallon assumptions for vehicles that use other fueltypes are discussed at the beginning of those vehiclesections.Visit fueleconomy.gov to personalize fuel costs basedon current fuel prices and your driving habits.Your Fuel Economy Will VaryEPAs fuel economy values are good estimates ofthe fuel economy a typical driver will achieve underaverage driving conditions and provide a goodbasis to compare one vehicle to another.Still,yourfuel economy may be slightly higher or lower thanEPAs estimates.Fuel economy varies,sometimessignicantly,based on driving conditions,driving style,and other factors.To ensure that estimates are consistent acrossdifferent makes and models,the EPA estimatesare based on a standardized,repeatable testingprocedure.These tests model an average driversenvironment and behavior based on real-worldconditions,such as stop-and-go traffic.However,it is impossible for a single test topredict fuel economy precisely for all drivers in allenvironments.For example,the following factors canlower your vehicles fuel economy:Aggressive driving(speeding and hard accelerationand hard braking)Excessive idling,accelerating,and braking in stop-and-go trafficCold weather(engines are more efficient whenwarmed up).The impact is greater for short trips.Driving with a heavy load or with the air conditionerrunningImproperly tuned engine or under-inated tiresDriving on mountainous or hilly terrainHigh-performance or snow tiresUse of remote startersIn addition,small variations in vehicle manufacturingcan cause fuel economy variations in the same makeand model,and some vehicles dont attain maximumfuel economy until they are broken in(around 3,0005,000 miles).With fuel-efficient driving techniques,drivers may alsoachieve better fuel economy than the EPA estimates.See Improve Your Fuel Economy on page 6 for tipson maximizing your fuel economy.The EPA ratings are a useful tool for comparingvehicles because they are always done in preciselythe same way under the same set of conditions.However,they may not accurately predict the fueleconomy you will get.This is also true for annual fuelcost estimates.For more information on fuel economyratings and factors that affect fuel economy,visitfueleconomy.gov.FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 20221HOW THE GUIDE IS ORGANIZEDFuel economy estimates for all vehicles begin with the 2022 ModelYear Vehicles section on page 10.Vehicles are organized by EPAvehicle class and,for trucks and vans,drive type(two-or four-wheeldrive).Additional sections are dedicated to specic vehicle technology or fueltypes for consumers looking for advanced vehicles or alternatives togasoline vehiclesdiesels,plug-in hybrids,all-electric vehicles,ex-fuel vehicles,and fuel cell vehicles.WHY SOME VEHICLES ARE NOT LISTEDLight-duty fuel economy regulations do not apply toSport utility vehicles(SUVs)and passenger vans with a gross vehicleweight rating(GVWR)of more than 10,000 poundsGVWR is thevehicle weight plus carrying capacityOther vehicles with a GVWR of 8,500 pounds or moreTherefore,manufacturers do not have to estimate their fuel economy,and fuel economy labels are not posted on their windows.Also,fueleconomy information on some vehicles was not available in time to beincluded in this guide.More up-to-date information can be found atfueleconomy.gov.VEHICLE CLASSES USED IN THIS GUIDECARSTRUCKSClassPassenger&Cargo Volume(cu.ft.)TWO-SEATER CARSAnySEDANSMinicompactUnder 85Subcompact85 to 99Compact100 to 109Midsize110 to 119Large120 or moreSTATION WAGONSSmallUnder 130Midsize130 to 159Large160 or moreClassGross Vehicle Weight Rating*(pounds)PICKUP TRUCKSSmallUnder 6,000Standard6,000 to 8,500VANSPassengerUnder 10,000CargoUnder 8,500MINIVANSUnder 8,500SPORT UTILITY VEHICLESSmallUnder 6,000Standard6,000 to 9,999SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLESUnder 8,500*Gross vehicle weight rating is vehicle weight plus carrying capacity.UNDERSTANDING THE GUIDE LISTINGS2We hope you nd the Fuel Economy Guide easy to use!Fuel economyand annual fuel cost data are organized by vehicle class(see page 1 fora list of classes).Within each class,vehicles are listed alphabetically bymanufacturer and model.Vehicle models with different features,such as engine size ortransmission type,are listed separately.Engine and transmissionattributes are shown in the rst column under the model name.Additional attributes needed to distinguish among vehicles(e.g.,fuel type or suggested fuel grade)are listed in the“Notes”column.Alegend for abbreviations is provided on page 10.A P in the Notes column indicates that the manufacturer recommends that the vehicle be fueled with premium-grade gasoline,and a PR indicates that the manufacturer requires premium.Thehigher price of premium fuel is reected in the annual fuel cost ofthese vehicles.The most fuel-efficient vehicles in each class and alternative fuelvehicles are indicated with special markings(see the diagram below).Vehicles that can use more than one kind of fuel have an entry foreach fuel type.Interior passenger and cargo volumes are located inthe index at the back of the Guide.Each vehicle listing includes a greenhouse gas(GHG)rating on a scaleof 1(worst)to 10(best).This rating is a comparison of the tailpipe GHGemissions of the vehicle to those of other vehicles of the same modelyear.Highway vehicles account for about 24%(1.6 billion tons)of U.S.greenhouse gas emissions each year.The average recent-modelvehicle causes the release of 6 to 9 tons of GHGs each year.Switchingfrom a vehicle that gets 20 miles per gallon(MPG)to one that gets 25MPG can reduce GHG emissions by 1.7 tons per year.Switching to anelectric vehicle could reduce your GHG emissions even more.Checkout EPA and DOEs Beyond Tailpipe Emissions Calculator to estimatethe GHG emissions from owning a plug-in electric vehicle where youlive(fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=bt2).Annual Greenhouse Gas Emissionsby Vehicle MPG(gasoline vehicles)*Includes both tailpipe and upstream emissionsFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 20223TAX INCENTIVES AND DISINCENTIVESFederal Tax CreditsYou may be eligible for a federal income tax credit of up to$7,500 ifyou purchase a qualifying electric or plug-in hybrid vehicle in 20212022.Note that the federal tax credit begins to phase out for eachmanufacturer after it has sold more than 200,000 qualifying vehicles.Therefore,Tesla vehicles purchased after 12/31/2019 and GeneralMotors vehicles purchased after 3/31/2020 are not eligible.Visitfueleconomy.gov for more information on qualifying models,creditamounts,and phase-out dates.Gas Guzzler TaxThe Energy Tax Act of 1978 requires auto companies to pay a gasguzzler tax on the sale of cars with exceptionally low fuel economy.Such vehicles are identied in the Guide by the word Tax in theNotes column.In the dealer showroom,the words Gas Guzzler andthe tax amount are listed on the vehicles fuel economy label.The taxdoes not apply to light trucks.FUEL ECONOMY SAVES YOU MONEYThe average household spends about one-fth of its total familyexpenditures on transportation,making it the second most expensivecategory after housing.You could save as much as$1,000(or more)in fuel costs each year by choosing the most fuel-efficient vehicle in aparticular class.This can add up to thousands of dollars over a vehicleslifetime.Fuel-efficient models come in all shapes and sizes,so youneed not sacrice utility or size.Each vehicle listing in the Fuel Economy Guide provides an estimatedannual fuel cost(see page i).The Find and Compare Cars tool atfueleconomy.gov features an annual fuel cost calculator that allowsyou to insert your local gasoline prices and typical driving conditions(percentage of city and highway driving)to obtain more accurate fuelcost information for your vehicle.FUELING OPTIONS 4Ethanol BlendsE85,E15,and E10Ethanol is a domestically produced,renewable fuel made primarilyfrom corn and sugar cane.The use of ethanol as a vehicle fuel canreduce greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions.E10 is a blend of 10%ethanol and 90%gasoline and is legal for usein any gasoline-powered vehicle.Most of the gasoline sold in theU.S.contains up to 10%ethanol to boost octane,meet air qualityrequirements,or satisfy the federal Renewable Fuel Standard.As of2011,EPA began allowing the use of E15 in model year 2001 andnewer gasoline vehicles.Ethanol contains about one-third less energythan gasoline.So,vehicles will typically go 3%4wer miles pergallon on E10 and 4%5wer miles per gallon on E15 than on 100%gasoline.While E10 is available everywhere,E15 is currently availableat more than 2,000 stations in the United States.E85(or ex fuel)is a high-level ethanol-gasoline blend containing51%ethanol,depending on the season and geographic location.Drivers can use E85 in exible fuel vehicles(FFVs),which are speciallydesigned to run on gasoline,E85,or any mixture of the two.FFVsare offered by several vehicle manufacturers.To determine whetheryour vehicle is an FFV,check the inside of your cars fuel ller doorfor an identication sticker or consult your owners manual.Morethan 3,900 lling stations in the United States currently sell E85.Visitafdc.energy.gov/locator/stations to nd stations near you.FFVs typically experience a 15%drop in fuel economy whenoperating on E85 instead of regular gasoline due to ethanols lowerenergy content and other factors,assuming gasoline typicallycontains about 10%ethanol.Drivers should notice no degradationin performance.In fact,some FFVs produce more torque andhorsepower when fueled with higher-level ethanol blends.BiodieselBiodiesel is a domestically produced renewable fuel manufacturedfrom vegetable oils or animal fats for use in diesel vehicles.Usingbiodiesel in place of petroleum diesel can reduce GHG emissions.Biodiesel can be blended with petroleum diesel at any percentage.B20 is a common biodiesel blend that contains 20%biodiesel and80%petroleum diesel.B5(5%biodiesel and 95%petroleum diesel)is another common blend.All vehicle manufacturers have approvedbiodiesel blends up to and including B5 for use in all diesel engines,and some have approved the use of blends up to B20 in a few recentmodel year vehicles.Keep in mind that using higher-level biodieselblends may affect your vehicle warranty.Check your owners manualor check with your vehicle manufacturer to determine the right blendfor your vehicle.Purchase commercial-grade biodiesel from a reputable dealer.Neverrefuel with recycled grease or vegetable oil that has not been converted tobiodiesel.It will damage your engine.More than 300 stations currently dispense B20.Visit afdc.energy.gov/locator/stations to nd service stations selling biodiesel near you.Premium-vs Regular-Grade GasolineRegular unleaded(87 octane)is the recommended fuel for mostgasoline vehicles.Using a higher-octane gasoline than recommendedby the owners manual does not improve performance or fuelefficiency under normal conditions.Check your owners manualfor the recommended grade of fuel for your vehicle,and visitfueleconomy.gov for more information about selecting the rightoctane for your vehicle.FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 20225Charging Your Electric or Plug-in Hybrid VehicleElectric vehicle(EV)and plug-in hybrid owners have several chargingoptions.Many owners will do most of their charging at home.Someworkplaces,businesses,and multi-unit dwellings(condos/apartments)provide charging,and there are more than 43,000 public chargingstations across the country.There are three basic types of charging:Level 1 charging:You can plug into a regular 120-volt(V)outletthe kind found in your home.This is the slowest type of chargingabout 2 to 5 miles of range per hour of chargingbut requires nospecial charger or outlet type.Most,if not all,plug-in vehicles areequipped with a cord to allow this type of charging.Level 2 charging:These chargers supply current at 208 to 240 V andprovide 10 to 20 miles of range per hour of charging.Most publicchargers are Level 2 chargers.You can also have a Level 2 chargerinstalled at home.Most public chargers use a standard plug typethat is compatible with all vehicles from major manufacturers.Teslacharging stations use a different plug type that cannot be used byother vehicles.However,Tesla provides an adaptor that allows itsvehicles to use both Tesla and standard Level 2 charging stations.Fast charging:Also called DC fast charging or DC quick charging,this is the fastest kind of charging,providing 60 to 80 miles of range(or more)to the battery in 20 minutes.Not all vehicles can acceptfast charging,nor do all vehicles use the same type of plug forDC fast charging,so check your owners manual.Quick chargingstations are usually located along heavy traffic corridors.Due toexpense and electric current requirements,they are not practical forhome installation.Note:Charge rate can vary based on vehicle model.So,checkthe owners manual for estimated charge time.Charge rate alsodepends on other factors,such as the batterys state of chargeand the ambient temperature.Visit afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure.html for more information.ALTERNATIVE FUELING STATION LOCATORWondering where you can fuel up your alternative fuel vehicle?TheAlternative Fueling Station Locator can help you nd a station nearyou or within a given distance from a planned route.The StationLocator shows fueling locations for ethanol,electricity,biodiesel,propane,natural gas,and hydrogen.Check it out at afdc.energy.gov/stations.IMPROVE YOUR FUEL ECONOMY 6Drive More EfficientlyAggressive driving(speeding and rapid acceleration/braking)canlower your gas mileage by roughly 150%at highway speedsand 10%in stop-and-go traffic.Driver feedback devices can help you drive more efficiently,improving fuel economy by up to 10%.Observe the speed limit.Each 5 MPH you drive over 60 MPH canreduce your fuel economy by 7%.For a personalized estimate of theeffect of speeding on your fuel economy,visit fueleconomy.gov.Avoid idling.Idling gets 0 miles per gallon and costs as much as$0.02 per minute.Using cruise control on the highway helps you maintain a constantspeed and,in most cases,will save fuel.Keep Your Car in ShapeServicing a car that is noticeably out of tune can improve your gasmileage by about 4%.Keeping tires inated to the recommended pressure can typicallyimprove fuel economy by 0.6%.The manufacturers recommended tire pressure can be found on thetire information placard and/or vehicle certication label located onthe vehicle door edge,doorpost,glove-box door,or inside the trunklid.Using the recommended grade of motor oil can improve your fueleconomy by 1%2%if youve been using the wrong grade.Keep your tires aligned and balanced.Replacing a clogged air lter can improve gas mileage on older carswith carbureted engines.Plan and Combine TripsA warmed-up engine is more fuel-efficient than a cold one.Manyshort trips taken from a cold start can use twice as much fuel as onemultipurpose trip covering the same distance.Note:Letting your car idle to warm up doesnt help your fueleconomy:it actually uses more fuel and creates more pollution.Other SolutionsAvoid carrying unneeded items.An extra 100 pounds can decreasefuel economy by about 1%.Avoid carrying cargo on your roof.A large,blunt rooftop cargo box,for example,can reduce fuel economy by 2%8%in city driving,6%on the highway,and 10%at interstate speeds(65 to75 MPH).Rear-mount cargo boxes or trays reduce fuel economy by much less(1%2%in city driving and 1%5%on the highway).Use the“economy mode”feature if your vehicle has one.For more tips on improving fuel economy,such as cold-weather tips;hot-weather tips;and tips for hybrids,plug-in hybrids,and all-electricvehicles,visit fueleconomy.gov.Tips for Electric and Hybrid VehiclesMost of the driving tips for conventional vehicles will also helpincrease the range of electric vehicles and hybrids.In addition to thedriving tips above,the tips below will help you get the most out ofyour electric or hybrid vehicle.1.Read your owners manual.The automaker knows how to operateand maintain your vehicle to maximize fuel economy,drivingrange,and battery life.So,consult the owners manual for tipsspecic to your vehicle.2.Use the economy(Eco)mode.Many of these vehicles come withan economy mode or similar feature to improve fuel economy.You can often turn on this feature by just pressing a button.3.Avoid hard braking.Anticipate stops and brake gently ormoderately.This allows the regenerative braking system torecover energy from the vehicles forward motion and store it aselectricity.Hard braking causes the vehicle to use its conventionalfriction brakes,which do not recover energy.4.Keep the battery charged.Keeping your plug-in hybrids batterycharged helps you use as much electricity and as little gasoline aspossible,saving you fuel and money and extending the vehiclesrange.For EVs,it helps maximize your driving range.5.Use accessories wisely.Using accessories such as heating,airconditioning,and entertainment systems can lower fuel economymore for electric vehicles and hybrids than for conventionalvehicles.So,keep that in mind when trying to maximize fueleconomy or electric range.Pre-heating or pre-cooling the cabinof a plug-in hybrid or EV while its plugged in,for example,canextend its electric range.ADVANCED VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 20227Manufacturers are using advanced technologies to improve fueleconomy in many of their vehicles.Along with plug-in hybrids,all-electric vehicles,and fuel cell vehicles,new technologies are alsobeing used to make conventional vehicles more efficient.Someof these fuel-saving technologies are described below.For moreinformation,visit fueleconomy.gov.Hybrid VehiclesHybrids combine the best features of the internal combustion enginewith an electric motor and can signicantly improve fuel economy.They are primarily propelled by an internal combustion engine,just like conventional vehicles.However,they also use regenerativebraking to convert energy normally wasted during coasting andbraking into electricity.The recovered electricity is stored in a batteryuntil needed by the electric motor.The electric motor assists theengine when accelerating or hill climbing and at low speeds,whereinternal combustion engines are least efficient.Fuel efficiency can vary signicantly among different hybrid modelsdue to battery and electric motor size.Hybrids with larger batteriesand electric motors,sometimes called full or strong hybrids,canstore more electricity and provide more power to assist the gasolineengine.Some can even run on the electric motor alone for shortdistances.Hybrids with smaller batteries and electric motors are oftenreferred to as mild hybrids.Mild hybrid systems have a smaller effecton fuel economy.In the Guide listings,full hybrids are indicated byHEV in the Notes column,while mild hybrids are indicated byMHEV.Note:Unlike plug-in hybrids(described on page 42),conventional hybridscannot be plugged into an external source of electricity to be rechargedor run on electricity for any substantial distance.Instead,gasoline andregenerative braking provide all of the vehicles energy.Stop-Start SystemsStop-start systems(sometimes called idle-stop,smart start,or othermanufacturer-specic names)save fuel by turning off the enginewhen the vehicle comes to a stop and automatically starting it backup when you step on the accelerator.Stop-start can improve fueleconomy by up to 5%and provides the biggest benet in conditionswhere the engine would otherwise be idling,such as stop-and-go citydriving.These systems are currently available on all hybrids and onhundreds of conventional vehicle models.Cylinder DeactivationCylinder deactivation turns off some of the engines cylinders whenthey are not needed.This temporarily and seamlessly turns an 8-or 6-cylinder engine into a more efficient 4-or 3-cylinder engine.TurbochargingTurbocharging increases engine power,allowing a smaller,more fuel-efficient engine to be used in place of a larger one.Replacing an 8-cylinder engine with a turbocharged 6-cylinder or a 6-cylinder enginewith a turbocharged 4-cylinder can save fuel and still provide extrapower when needed.Advanced TransmissionsThe advanced electronics in todays vehicles can optimize gear shiftingfor improved fuel efficiency.Eight-speed automatic transmissionsare most common,and some have even more gears.Continuouslyvariable transmissions(CVTs)can change seamlessly through aninnite number of gears.Transmissions with more gears allow theengine to run at its most efficient speed more often,improving fueleconomy.Improved AerodynamicsReducing a vehicles aerodynamic drag(wind resistance)improvesfuel economy,especially at higher speeds.Many manufacturers areimproving aerodynamics by rening vehicle shapes or by employingexternal moving parts such as shutters that close off the grill,allowing air to ow smoothly around the vehicle instead of into theengine compartment,where it produces more drag.Lighter VehiclesReducing vehicle weight improves fuel economy,so manufacturersare beginning to redesign vehicles to weigh less while maintainingperformance and safety.For example,replacing a steel body with onemade from a lighter-weight material,such as aluminum,can reducevehicle weight by hundreds of pounds.ANNUAL FUEL COST RANGES FOR VEHICLE CLASSES 8The graph below provides the annual fuel cost ranges for the vehicles in each class so you can see where a given vehicles cost falls within itsclass.Annual fuel costs assume that you travel 15,000 miles each year,drive 55%in the city and 45%on the highway,and that fuel costs$3.15/gallon for regular unleaded gasoline,$4.09/gallon for premium,$3.68/gallon for diesel,and$0.15/kWh for electricity.Visit fueleconomy.gov tocalculate the annual fuel cost for a specic vehicle based on your own driving conditions and fuel prices.Annual Fuel CostFuel economy estimates on this chart do not include vehicles operating on compressed natural gas(CNG),E85,or hydrogen.MOST EFFICIENT VEHICLES FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 20229Listed below are vehicles with the highest fuel economy in the mostpopular classes.For each vehicle class,we list the most efficientvehicle.If the most fuel efficient vehicle is a plug-in hybrid(PHEV)orall-electric vehicle(EV),we also list the most fuel efficient conventionalvehicle.Rankings are based on combined city and highway fueleconomy estimates,which assume 55%city driving and 45%highwaydriving.Please note that many vehicle models come in a rangeof engine sizes and trim lines,resulting in different fuel economyvalues.If there is only one vehicle in a class,a fuel economy leaderis not listed.For an up-to-date list of fuel economy leaders,visitfueleconomy.gov.Trans Type/SpeedsEng Size/CylindersMPG(e)CombinedTWO-SEATER CARSMAZDAMX-5.A-S6.2.0L/4cyl.30MINICOMPACT CARSMINICooper Convertible.AM-S7.1.5L/3cyl.32SUBCOMPACT CARSMINICooper SE Hardtop 2 door(EV).A-1.110*CHEVROLETSpark.AV.1.4L/4cyl.33Spark.M-5.1.4L/4cyl.33Spark ACTIV.AV.1.4L/4cyl.33COMPACT CARSPORSCHETaycan GTS(EV).A-2.83*TOYOTACorolla Hybrid.AV.1.8L/4cyl.52MIDSIZE CARSTESLAModel 3 RWD(EV).A-1.132*TOYOTAPrius Eco(hybrid).AV.1.8L/4cyl.56LARGE CARSLUCIDAir G Touring AWD w/19 inch wheels(EV).A-1.131*HYUNDAIIoniq Blue(hybrid).AM-S6.1.6L/4cyl.59SMALL STATION WAGONSCHEVROLETBolt EV.AV.120*KIANiro FE(hybrid).AM-S6.1.6L/4cyl.50Trans Type/SpeedsEng Size/CylindersMPG(e)CombinedMIDSIZE STATION WAGONSVOLVOV90CC B6 AWD.A-S8.2.0L/4cyl.25SMALL PICKUP TRUCKSFORDMaverick HEV FWD(hybrid).AV.2.5L/4cyl.37STANDARD PICKUP TRUCKSFORDF-150 Lightning 4WD Extended Range(EV).A-1.70*RIVIANR1T(EV).A-1.70*CHEVROLETSilverado 2WD(diesel).A-10.3.0L/6cyl.26GMCSierra 2WD(diesel).A-10.3.0L/6cyl.26RAM1500 2WD(diesel).A-8.3.0L/6cyl.261500 HFE 2WD(diesel).A-8.3.0L/6cyl.26MINIVANSCHRYSLERPacica Hybrid(PHEV).AV.3.6L/6cyl.48TOYOTASienna 2WD(hybrid).AV-S6.2.5L/4cyl.36SMALL SPORT UTILITY VEHICLESTESLAModel Y RWD(EV).A-1.129*FORDEscape FWD HEV(hybrid).AV.2.5L/4cyl.41STANDARD SPORT UTILITY VEHICLESTESLAModel X(EV).A-1.102*TOYOTAHighlander Hybrid AWD.AV-S6.2.5L/4cyl.35Highlander Hybrid AWD LTD/PLAT.AV-S6.2.5L/4cyl.35*This is an electric vehicle.Since electricity is not measured in gallons,a conversion factor is used to translate the fuel economy into miles per gallon of gasolineequivalent(MPGe).This vehicle is a plug-in hybrid,which runs on both gasoline and electricity.Since electricity is not measured in gallons,a conversion factor is used to translatethe fuel economy when running on electricity into miles per gallon of gasoline equivalent(MPGe).The combined MPGe estimate includes both city andhighway driving and gasoline and electric energy use.2022 MODEL YEAR VEHICLES10This section contains the fuel economy values for 2022 model yearvehicles.Additional information for alternative fuel vehicles canbe found on pages 3851.Alternative fuel vehicles are highlightedwith an orange bar,and those that can use two kinds of fuel,such asexible fuel vehicles,have an entry for each fuel type.The most fuel-efficient vehicles in each class are marked with a blue pointer().ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS GUIDE:.Highest MPG in Class2WD.Two-Wheel Drive4WD.Four-Wheel DriveA.Automatic TransmissionA-S.Automatic Transmission-Select ShiftAM.Automated ManualAM-S.Automated Manual-SelectableAV.Continuously Variable TransmissionAV-S.Continuously Variable Transmission withSelect ShiftAWD.All-Wheel DriveCD.With Cylinder DeactivationCity.MPG on City Test ProcedureCyl.CylindersComb.CombinedD.Ultra-Low Sulfur DieselE85.85%Ethanol/15%GasolineEng Size.Engine Volume in LitersEV.Electric VehicleFCV.Fuel Cell VehicleFFV.Flexible Fuel VehicleFWD.Front-Wheel DriveGas.Regular GasolineGHG.Greenhouse GasGPF.Gasoline Particulate FilterGVWR.Gross Vehicle Weight RatingH.HydrogenHP.HorsepowerHEV.Hybrid-Electric VehicleHwy.MPG on Highway Test ProcedureLi-ion.Lithium ionLWB.Long WheelbaseM.Manual TransmissionMDPV.Medium-Duty Passenger VehicleMid.Midgrade GasolineMHEV.Mild Hybrid-Electric VehicleMode.Multimode TransmissionMPG.Miles per GallonNA.Not AvailableNi-MH.Nickel-Metal HydrideP.Premium Gasoline RecommendedPHEV.Plug-in Hybrid Electric VehiclePR.Premium Gasoline RequiredPT4.Part-time 4WDRWD.Rear Wheel DriveS.SuperchargerS-Mode.Transmission with Sport ModeSpt Pkg.Sport PackageSS.Stop-Start TechnologyT.TurbochargerTax.Subject to Gas Guzzler TaxTrans.TransmissionXFE.Optional Technology PackageFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202211MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesTWO-SEATER CARSACURANSX HybridAM-S9,3.5L,6cyl2121/22$2,9004PR T HEV SSASTON MARTINVantage V8A-8,4.0L,8cyl2018/24$3,0504P TAUDIR8 CoupeAM-S7,5.2L,10cyl1513/19$4,1002PR Tax CDR8 Coupe RWDAM-S7,5.2L,10cyl1714/23$3,6003PR Tax CDR8 SpyderAM-S7,5.2L,10cyl1513/19$4,1002PR Tax CDR8 Spyder RWDAM-S7,5.2L,10cyl1714/23$3,6003PR Tax CDTT Roadster quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005T SSBMWZ4 M40iA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505P T SSZ4 sDrive30iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/32$2,2006P T SSBUGATTIChironAM-S7,8.0L,16cyl119/14$5,6001PR T TaxChiron Pur SportAM-S7,8.0L,16cyl98/11$6,8001PR T TaxChiron Super SportAM-S7,8.0L,16cyl98/11$6,8001PR T TaxCHEVROLETCorvetteA-S8,6.2L,8cyl1916/24$3,2504PR CDFERRARI296 GTBAM-S8,2.9L,6cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SS812 CompetizioneAM-7,6.5L,12cyl1412/16$4,4002PR Tax SS812 GTSAM-7,6.5L,12cyl1312/15$4,7001PR Tax SSF8 SpiderAM-7,3.9L,8cyl1615/18$3,8503PR T Tax SSF8 TributoAM-7,3.9L,8cyl1615/19$3,8503PR T Tax SSSF90 SpiderAM-8,3.9L,8cylSee page 42.PR T Tax PHEV SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesSF90 StradaleAM-8,3.9L,8cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSFORDGTAM-7,3.5L,6cyl1412/18$4,4002PR T TaxJAGUARF-Type P450 AWD R-Dynamic ConvertibleA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1816/24$3,4003P S SSF-Type P450 AWD R-Dynamic CoupeA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1816/24$3,4003P S SSF-Type P450 RWD ConvertibleA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1917/24$3,2504P S SSF-Type P450 RWD CoupeA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1917/24$3,2504P S SSF-Type R AWD ConvertibleA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1816/24$3,4003P S SSF-Type R AWD CoupeA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1816/24$3,4003P S SSLAMBORGHINIAventador CountachAM-S7,6.5L,12cyl119/16$5,6001PR Tax CD SSAventador CoupeAM-S7,6.5L,12cyl119/16$5,6001PR Tax CD SSAventador RoadsterAM-S7,6.5L,12cyl119/16$5,6001PR Tax CD SSHuracan CoupeAM-S7,5.2L,10cyl1513/18$4,1002PR Tax CDHuracan Coupe RWDAM-S7,5.2L,10cyl1513/18$4,1002PR Tax CDHuracan SpyderAM-S7,5.2L,10cyl1513/18$4,1002PR Tax CDHuracan Spyder RWDAM-S7,5.2L,10cyl1513/18$4,1002PR Tax CDMASERATIMC20A-S8,3.0L,6cyl1815/25$3,4003PR TMAZDAMX-5 A-S6,2.0L,4cyl3026/35$2,0506PM-6,2.0L,4cyl2926/34$2,1006PMCLAREN AUTOMOTIVE720S CoupeAM-S7,4.0L,8cyl1815/22$3,4003P T720S SpiderAM-S7,4.0L,8cyl1815/22$3,4003P T765LT SpiderAM-S7,4.0L,8cyl1614/18$3,8503P T Tax12MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesGTAM-S7,4.0L,8cyl1815/22$3,4003P TPORSCHE718 BoxsterAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2421/27$2,5505PR T SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl2220/26$2,8005PR T SS718 Boxster GTSAM-S7,4.0L,6cyl2119/24$2,9004PM-6,4.0L,6cyl1917/24$3,2504PR718 Boxster SAM-S7,2.5L,4cyl2219/25$2,8005PR T SSM-6,2.5L,4cyl2119/24$2,9004PR T SS718 Boxster TAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2321/27$2,6505PR T SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl2220/26$2,8005PR T SS718 CaymanAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2421/27$2,5505PR T SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl2220/26$2,8005PR T SS718 Cayman GT4AM-S7,4.0L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PRM-6,4.0L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR718 Cayman GTSAM-S7,4.0L,6cyl2119/24$2,9004PM-6,4.0L,6cyl1917/24$3,2504PR718 Cayman SAM-S7,2.5L,4cyl2219/25$2,8005PR T SSM-6,2.5L,4cyl2119/24$2,9004PR T SS718 Cayman TAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2321/27$2,6505PR T SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl2220/26$2,8005PR T SS718 SpyderAM-S7,4.0L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PRM-6,4.0L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR911 GT3AM-S7,4.0L,6cyl1615/18$3,8503PR Tax SSM-6,4.0L,6cyl1614/18$3,8503PR Tax911 GT3 TouringAM-S7,4.0L,6cyl1615/18$3,8503PR Tax SSM-6,4.0L,6cyl1614/18$3,8503PR TaxTOYOTAGR SupraA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/32$2,2006P T SSA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2522/30$2,4505P T SSMINICOMPACT CARSASTON MARTINDB11 V12A-S8,5.2L,12cyl1714/22$3,6003P T Tax CDDB11 V8A-8,4.0L,8cyl2018/24$3,0504P TDBSA-S8,5.2L,12cyl1714/22$3,6003P T Tax CDMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesBENTLEYContinental GT Speed ConvertibleAM-S8,6.0L,12cyl1412/18$4,4002P T Tax CD SSContinental GT V8 ConvertibleAM-S8,4.0L,8cyl1916/26$3,2504P T CD SSFERRARIPortono MAM-8,3.9L,8cyl1916/23$3,2504PR T SSLEXUSLC 500 ConvertibleA-S10,5.0L,8cyl1815/25$3,4003PRMERCEDES-BENZAMG SL55 4matic PlusA-9,4.0L,8cyl1614/21$3,8503PR T Tax SSAMG SL63 4matic PlusA-9,4.0L,8cyl1614/21$3,8503PR T Tax SSMINICooper Convertible AM-S7,1.5L,3cyl3229/38$1,9007P T SSM-6,1.5L,3cyl3127/37$2,0007P T SSCooper S ConvertibleAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl3027/36$2,0506P TM-6,2.0L,4cyl2623/33$2,3505P TJohn Cooper Works ConvertibleA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2824/33$2,2006P T SSPORSCHE911 CarreraAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T SS911 Carrera 4AM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T SS911 Carrera 4 CabrioletAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T SS911 Carrera 4 GTSAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR T SS911 Carrera 4 GTS CabrioletAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/22$3,2504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl1916/23$3,2504PR T SS911 Carrera 4SAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl2017/25$3,0504PR T SS911 Carrera 4S CabrioletAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl2017/24$3,0504PR T SS911 Carrera CabrioletAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T SS911 Carrera GTSAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl2017/24$3,0504PR T SSFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202213MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotes911 Carrera GTS CabrioletAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl2017/24$3,0504PR T SS911 Carrera SAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl2118/25$2,9004PR T SS911 Carrera S CabrioletAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl2017/25$3,0504PR T SS911 Targa 4AM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T SS911 Targa 4 GTSAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/22$3,2504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl1916/23$3,2504PR T SS911 Targa 4SAM-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504PR T SSM-7,3.0L,6cyl2017/24$3,0504PR T SS911 TurboAM-S8,3.7L,6cyl1715/20$3,6003PR T Tax SS911 Turbo CabrioletAM-S8,3.7L,6cyl1715/20$3,6003PR T Tax SS911 Turbo SAM-S8,3.7L,6cyl1715/20$3,6003PR T SS911 Turbo S CabrioletAM-S8,3.7L,6cyl1715/20$3,6003PR T Tax SSSUBARUBRZA-S6,2.4L,4cyl2521/30$2,4505PRM-6,2.4L,4cyl2220/27$2,8005PRTOYOTAGR 86A-S6,2.4L,4cyl2521/31$2,4505PRM-6,2.4L,4cyl2220/27$2,8005PRSUBCOMPACT CARSAUDIA3AM-S7,2.0L,4cyl3229/38$1,5007T MHEV SSA3 quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl3128/36$1,5007T MHEV SSA5 Cabriolet quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$2,3505P T MHEV SSA5 Coupe quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2724/31$2,2506P T MHEV SSRS 3AM-S7,2.5L,5cyl2320/29$2,6505P TRS 5 CoupeA-S8,2.9L,6cyl2118/25$2,9004P TS3AM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2723/32$2,2506P T SSS5 CabrioletA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2321/28$2,6505P T SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesS5 CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2421/30$2,5505P T SSTT Coupe quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005T SSTT RS CoupeAM-S7,2.5L,5cyl2320/29$2,6505P TTTS Coupe quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$2,3505P T SSBENTLEYContinental GTAM-S8,4.0L,8cyl1916/26$3,2504P T CD SSContinental GT SpeedAM-S8,6.0L,12cyl1512/20$4,1002P T Tax CD SSBMW230i CoupeA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2926/35$2,1006P T SS430i ConvertibleA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/34$2,2006P T SS430i CoupeA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/34$2,2006P T SS430i xDrive ConvertibleA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2723/33$2,2506P T SS430i xDrive CoupeA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2723/33$2,2506P T SS840i ConvertibleA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505P T SS840i CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2523/30$2,4505P T SS840i xDrive ConvertibleA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2320/27$2,6505P T SS840i xDrive CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2320/27$2,6505P T SSi4 eDrive40 Gran Coupe(18 inch wheels)A-1109109/108$70010EVi4 eDrive40 Gran Coupe(19 inch wheels)A-199100/98$75010EVi4 M50 Gran Coupe(19 inch wheels)A-19694/98$80010EVi4 M50 Gran Coupe(20 inch wheels)A-18079/80$95010EVM240i xDrive CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2623/32$2,3505P T SSM4 Competition CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1916/23$3,2504PR T SSM4 Competition M xDrive ConvertibleA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1816/23$3,4003PR T SSM4 Competition M xDrive CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1816/22$3,4003PR T SSM4 CoupeM-6,3.0L,6cyl1916/23$3,2504PR T SS14MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesM440i ConvertibleA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2623/31$2,3505P T MHEV SSM440i CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2825/34$2,2006P T MHEV SSM440i xDrive ConvertibleA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2623/31$2,3505P T MHEV SSM440i xDrive CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2623/32$2,3505P T MHEV SSM8 Competition ConvertibleA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T Tax SSM8 Competition CoupeA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T Tax SSM850i xDrive ConvertibleA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1917/24$3,2504P T SSM850i xDrive CoupeA-S8,4.4L,8cyl2017/25$3,0504P T SSCHEVROLETCamaroA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505PR TM-6,2.0L,4cyl2219/29$2,8005PR TA-S10,3.6L,6cyl2218/29$2,1505CDM-6,3.6L,6cyl2016/26$2,3504A-S10,6.2L,8cyl2016/26$3,0504PR CDA-S10,6.2L,8cyl1613/21$3,8503PR S TaxM-6,6.2L,8cyl1916/24$3,2504PRM-6,6.2L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503PR S TaxSpark AV,1.4L,4cyl3330/38$1,4507 M-5,1.4L,4cyl3329/38$1,4507Spark ACTIV AV,1.4L,4cyl3330/37$1,4507M-5,1.4L,4cyl3229/37$1,5007FERRARIRomaAM-8,3.9L,8cyl1917/22$3,2504PR T SSFORDMustangA-10,2.3L,4cyl2522/32$1,9005T SSA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2521/32$1,9005T SSM-6,2.3L,4cyl2421/29$1,9505TA-S10,5.0L,8cyl1915/24$2,5004SSM-6,5.0L,8cyl1815/24$2,6003Mustang ConvertibleA-10,2.3L,4cyl2320/28$2,0505T SSA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2320/28$2,0505T SSM-6,2.3L,4cyl2320/27$2,0505TA-S10,5.0L,8cyl1815/23$2,6003SSMustang HO ConvertibleA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2219/26$2,1505T SSM-6,2.3L,4cyl2119/25$2,2504TMustang HO CoupeA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2320/27$2,0505T SSM-6,2.3L,4cyl2220/27$2,1505TMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesMustang Mach 1A-S10,5.0L,8cyl1815/23$2,6003SSM-6,5.0L,8cyl1714/22$2,8003TaxShelby GT500 MustangAM-S7,5.2L,8cyl1412/18$4,4002PR S TaxINFINITIQ60A-S7,3.0L,6cyl2219/28$2,8005PR TQ60 AWDA-S7,3.0L,6cyl2219/27$2,8005PR TQ60 Red SportA-S7,3.0L,6cyl2220/27$2,8005PR TQ60 Red Sport AWDA-S7,3.0L,6cyl2119/26$2,9004PR TLEXUSLC 500A-S10,5.0L,8cyl1916/25$3,2504PRLC 500hAV-S10,3.5L,6cyl2926/34$2,1006PR HEV SSRC 300A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2521/31$2,4505PR TRC 300 AWDA-S6,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,8005PRRC 350A-S8,3.5L,6cyl2320/28$2,6505PRRC 350 AWDA-S6,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,8005PRRC FA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1916/24$3,2504PRMERCEDES-BENZA220AM-7,2.0L,4cyl2824/35$2,2006PR T SSA220 4maticAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2825/35$2,2006PR T SSAMG A35 4maticAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505PR T SSAMG C43 4matic ConvertibleA-9,3.0L,6cyl2219/28$2,8005PR T SSAMG C43 4matic CoupeA-9,3.0L,6cyl2219/28$2,8005PR T SSAMG E53 4matic Plus ConvertibleA-9,3.0L,6cyl2220/27$2,8005PR MHEV SSAMG E53 4matic Plus CoupeA-9,3.0L,6cyl2320/28$2,6505PR MHEV SSC300 4matic ConvertibleA-9,2.0L,4cyl2421/30$2,5505PR T SSC300 4matic CoupeA-9,2.0L,4cyl2522/31$2,4505PR T SSC300 ConvertibleA-9,2.0L,4cyl2421/28$2,5505PR T SSFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202215MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesC300 CoupeA-9,2.0L,4cyl2522/31$2,4505PR T SSE450 4matic ConvertibleA-9,3.0L,6cyl2422/29$2,5505PR T MHEV SSE450 4matic CoupeA-9,3.0L,6cyl2421/30$2,5505PR T MHEV SSE450 ConvertibleA-9,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505PR T MHEV SSE450 CoupeA-9,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505PR T MHEV SSMINICooper Hardtop 2 doorAM-S7,1.5L,3cyl3229/38$1,9007P T SSM-6,1.5L,3cyl3127/37$2,0007P T SSCooper Hardtop 4 doorAM-S7,1.5L,3cyl3229/38$1,9007P T SSM-6,1.5L,3cyl3127/37$2,0007P T SSCooper S Hardtop 2 doorAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl3128/38$2,0007P TM-6,2.0L,4cyl2723/33$2,2506P TCooper S Hardtop 4 doorAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl3128/38$2,0007P TM-6,2.0L,4cyl2723/33$2,2506P TCooper SE Hardtop 2 door A-1110119/100$70010EVJohn Cooper Works Hardtop 2 doorA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2925/34$2,1006P TM-6,2.0L,4cyl2522/31$2,4505P TCOMPACT CARSACURAILXAM-S8,2.4L,4cyl2824/34$2,2006PTLX AWDA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2421/29$2,5505P T SSTLX AWD A-SPECA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2421/29$2,5505P T SSTLX FWDA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2522/31$2,4505P T SSTLX FWD A-SPECA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505P T SSTLX Type-SA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2119/25$2,9004P T CD SSTLX Type-S Perf TireA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2119/24$2,9004P T CD SSAUDIA4 quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2926/34$2,1006P T MHEV SSA4 S line quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2724/31$2,2506P T MHEV SSS4A-S8,3.0L,6cyl2421/30$2,5505P T SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesBMW228i Gran CoupeA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2824/34$2,2006P T SS228i xDrive Gran CoupeA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2723/33$2,2506P T SS330e SedanA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SS330e xDrive SedanA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SS330i SedanA-S8,2.0L,4cyl3026/36$2,0506P T SS330i xDrive SedanA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/34$2,2006P T SS430i Gran CoupeA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/34$2,2006P T SS530e SedanA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SS530e xDrive SedanA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSM235i xDrive Gran CoupeA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/32$2,3505PR T SSM3 Competition M xDrive SedanA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1816/22$3,4003PR T SSM3 Competition SedanA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1916/23$3,2504PR T SSM3 SedanM-6,3.0L,6cyl1916/23$3,2504PR T SSM340i SedanA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2623/32$2,3505P T MHEV SSM340i xDrive SedanA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2623/32$2,3505P T MHEV SSM440i xDrive Gran CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505P T MHEV SSCADILLACCT4A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2723/34$2,2506PR T CD SSA-S10,2.7L,4cyl2521/31$2,4505PR T CD SSCT4 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2622/31$2,3505PR T CD SSA-S10,2.7L,4cyl2421/29$2,5505PR T CD SSCT4 VA-S10,2.7L,4cyl2320/29$2,6505PR T CD SSA-S10,3.6L,6cyl1916/24$3,2504PR TM-6,3.6L,6cyl1815/23$3,4003PR TCT4 V AWDA-S10,2.7L,4cyl2320/28$2,6505PR T CD SSGENESISG70 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2320/28$2,6505P TA-S8,3.3L,6cyl2017/25$3,0504P T16MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesG70 RWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2421/31$2,5505P TA-S8,3.3L,6cyl2118/27$2,9004P THONDAInsight TouringAV,1.5L,4cyl4851/45$1,0009HEV SSHYUNDAIAccentAV-S1,1.6L,4cyl3633/41$1,3007Veloster NAM-S8,2.0L,4cyl2220/27$2,8005P TM-6,2.0L,4cyl2522/28$2,4505P TKIARioAV-S1,1.6L,4cyl3633/41$1,3007LEXUSIS 300A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2521/31$2,4505PR TIS 300 AWDA-S6,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,8005PRIS 350A-S8,3.5L,6cyl2320/28$2,6505PRIS 350 AWDA-S6,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,8005PRIS 500A-S8,5.0L,8cyl2017/25$3,0504PRUX 250hAV-S6,2.0L,4cyl4243/41$1,1008HEV SSUX 250h AWDAV-S6,2.0L,4cyl3941/38$1,2008HEV SSMAZDA3 4-Door 2WDA-S6,2.0L,4cyl3128/36$1,5007A-S6,2.5L,4cyl3026/35$1,60063 4-Door 4WDA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2825/33$1,7006A-S6,2.5L,4cyl2723/32$1,7506TMERCEDES-BENZAMG CLA35 4maticAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2421/29$2,5505PR T SSAMG CLA45 4maticAM-8,2.0L,4cyl2320/28$2,6505PR T SSAMG GT 43 4matic PlusA-9,3.0L,6cyl2119/25$2,9004PR MHEV SSAMG GT 53 4matic PlusA-9,3.0L,6cyl2119/25$2,9004PR MHEV SSC300A-9,2.0L,4cyl2925/35$2,1006PR T MHEV SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesC300 4maticA-9,2.0L,4cyl2723/33$2,2506PR T MHEV SSCLA250AM-7,2.0L,4cyl2925/36$2,1006PR T SSCLA250 4maticAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2724/33$2,2506PR T SSCLS450 4maticA-9,3.0L,6cyl2522/30$2,4505PR T MHEV SSMITSUBISHIMirageAV,1.2L,3cyl3936/43$1,2008M-5,1.2L,3cyl3633/41$1,3007Mirage G4AV,1.2L,3cyl3735/41$1,3008M-5,1.2L,3cyl3533/40$1,3507NISSANVersaAV,1.6L,4cyl3532/40$1,3507M-5,1.6L,4cyl3027/35$1,6006PORSCHETaycan 4S Perf BatteryA-27979/80$95010EVTaycan 4S Perf Battery PlusA-27775/81$1,00010EVTaycan GTS A-28383/82$90010EVTaycan GTS STA-28080/80$95010EVTaycan Perf BatteryA-27976/84$95010EVTaycan Perf Battery PlusA-27571/80$1,00010EVTaycan TurboA-27371/75$1,05010EVTaycan Turbo SA-27069/71$1,10010EVTOYOTAC-HRAV-S7,2.0L,4cyl2927/31$1,6506CorollaAV,1.8L,4cyl3330/38$1,4507M-6,1.8L,4cyl3329/39$1,4507AV-S10,2.0L,4cyl3431/40$1,4007M-6,2.0L,4cyl3229/36$1,5007Corolla APEXAV-S10,2.0L,4cyl3431/38$1,4007M-6,2.0L,4cyl3128/36$1,5007Corolla HatchbackAV-S10,2.0L,4cyl3532/41$1,3507M-6,2.0L,4cyl3128/36$1,5007FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202217MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesCorolla Hatchback XSEAV-S10,2.0L,4cyl3330/38$1,4507Corolla Hybrid AV,1.8L,4cyl5253/52$9009HEV SSCorolla XLEAV,1.8L,4cyl3229/37$1,5007Corolla XSEAV-S10,2.0L,4cyl3431/38$1,4007Mirai LEAV7476/71NA10H FCVMirai LimitedAV6567/64NA10H FCVMirai XLEAV7476/71NA10H FCVVOLKSWAGENGLIAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl3026/36$1,6006T SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl3026/37$1,6006TJettaA-S8,1.5L,4cyl3531/41$1,3507T SSM-6,1.5L,4cyl3429/43$1,4007TJetta SE/SELA-S8,1.5L,4cyl3329/40$1,4507T SSVOLVOS60 B5A-S8,2.0L,4cyl3026/35$2,0506PR T SSS60 B5 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/33$2,2006PR T SSS60 T8 AWD RechargeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T S PHEV SSS60 T8 AWD Recharge ext.RangeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSMIDSIZE CARSALFA ROMEOGiuliaA-8,2.0L,4cyl2724/33$2,2506P T SSA-8,2.9L,6cyl2017/25$3,0504P T CD SSGiulia AWDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$2,3505P T SSAUDIA5 Sportback quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2926/34$2,1006P T MHEV SSA5 Sportback S line quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2724/31$2,2506P T MHEV SSA6 quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2623/32$2,3505P T MHEV SSAM-S7,3.0L,6cyl2421/30$2,5505P T MHEV SSA7 quattroAM-S7,3.0L,6cyl2421/30$2,5505P T MHEV SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesA7 TFSI e quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSe-tron GTA-28281/83$95010EVRS 5 SportbackA-S8,2.9L,6cyl2118/25$2,9004P TRS 7A-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/22$3,6003P T CD MHEV SSRS e-tron GTA-28179/82$95010EVS5 SportbackA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2421/30$2,5505P T SSS6A-S8,2.9L,6cyl2218/28$2,8005P T MHEV SSS7A-S8,2.9L,6cyl2218/28$2,8005P T MHEV SSBENTLEYFlying SpurAM-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/20$3,6003P T Tax CD SSAM-S8,6.0L,12cyl1512/19$4,1002P T Tax CD SSFlying Spur HybridAM-S8,2.9L,6cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSBMW530i SedanA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/33$2,2006P T SS530i xDrive SedanA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/32$2,3505P T SS540i SedanA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2725/32$2,2506P T MHEV SS540i xDrive SedanA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505P T MHEV SS840i Gran CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505P T SS840i xDrive Gran CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2320/27$2,6505P T SSAlpina B8 Gran CoupeA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1917/24$3,2504P T SSM5 Competition SedanA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T Tax SSM5 CS SedanA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T Tax SSM5 SedanA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T Tax SSM550i xDrive SedanA-S8,4.4L,8cyl2017/25$3,0504P T SSM8 Competition Gran CoupeA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T Tax SSM850i xDrive Gran CoupeA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1917/24$3,2504P T SSX2 M35iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$2,3505P T SS18MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesX2 sDrive28iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2724/32$2,2506P T SSX2 xDrive28iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2724/31$2,2506P T SSCADILLACCT5A-S10,2.0L,4cyl2723/33$2,2506PR T CD SSA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2219/27$2,8005PR T CD SSCT5 AWDA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505PR T CD SSA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2118/26$2,9004PR T CD SSCT5 VA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2118/27$2,9004PR T CD SSA-S10,6.2L,8cyl1613/22$3,8503PR S Tax CDM-6,6.2L,8cyl1513/21$4,1002PR S TaxCT5 V AWDA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2118/26$2,9004PR T CD SSCHEVROLETMalibuAV,1.5L,4cyl3229/36$1,5007T SSA-9,2.0L,4cyl2622/33$2,3505PR TDODGEChallengerA-8,3.6L,6cyl2319/30$2,0505A-8,5.7L,8cyl1916/25$2,9504Mid CDM-6,5.7L,8cyl1815/23$3,4003PA-8,6.4L,8cyl1815/24$3,4003P CDM-6,6.4L,8cyl1714/23$3,6003P Tax CDChallenger AWDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2118/27$2,2504Challenger SRTA-8,6.2L,8cyl1613/22$3,8503P S TaxM-6,6.2L,8cyl1613/21$3,8503P S TaxChallenger SRT WidebodyA-8,6.2L,8cyl1513/21$4,1002P S TaxM-6,6.2L,8cyl1613/21$3,8503P S TaxChallenger WidebodyA-8,6.4L,8cyl1815/24$3,4003P CDM-6,6.4L,8cyl1714/23$3,6003P Tax CDHONDACivic 4DrAV,1.5L,4cyl3633/42$1,3007T SSAV-S7,1.5L,4cyl3431/38$1,4007T SSM-6,1.5L,4cyl3127/37$2,0007P T SSAV,2.0L,4cyl3531/40$1,3507SSAV-S7,2.0L,4cyl3330/37$1,4507SSInsightAV,1.5L,4cyl5255/49$9009HEV SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesHYUNDAIElantraAM-S7,1.6L,4cyl3128/36$1,5007TM-6,1.6L,4cyl2825/34$1,7006TAV-S1,2.0L,4cyl3733/43$1,3008SSAV-S1,2.0L,4cyl3531/41$1,3507Elantra HybridAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl5049/52$9509HEV SSElantra Hybrid BlueAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl5453/56$9009HEV SSElantra NAM-S8,2.0L,4cyl2320/30$2,6505P TM-6,2.0L,4cyl2522/31$2,4505P TIoniq Plug-in HybridAM-S6,1.6L,4cylSee page 42.PHEV SSVenueAV-S1,1.6L,4cyl3129/33$1,5007INFINITIQ50A-S7,3.0L,6cyl2320/29$2,6505PR TQ50 AWDA-S7,3.0L,6cyl2219/27$2,8005PR TQ50 Red SportA-S7,3.0L,6cyl2220/26$2,8005PR TQ50 Red Sport AWDA-S7,3.0L,6cyl2219/26$2,8005PR TJAGUARXF P250A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/33$2,2006P T SSXF P250 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/32$2,3505P T SSXF P300 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505P T SSKIAForteAM-S7,1.6L,4cyl3027/35$1,6006TM-6,1.6L,4cyl2622/31$1,8005TAV,2.0L,4cyl3329/39$1,4507Forte FEAV,2.0L,4cyl3531/41$1,3507Stinger AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2421/29$2,5505P T SSA-S8,3.3L,6cyl2017/24$3,0504P T SSStinger RWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2522/32$2,4505P T SSA-S8,3.3L,6cyl2018/25$3,0504P T SSLEXUSES 250 AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2825/34$1,7006FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202219MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesES 300hAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl4443/44$1,0508HEV SSES 350A-S8,3.5L,6cyl2622/32$1,8005ES 350 F SportA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2522/31$1,9005LS 500A-S10,3.4L,6cyl2218/29$2,8005PR TLS 500 AWDA-S10,3.4L,6cyl2117/27$2,9004PR TLS 500h AWDAV-S10,3.5L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505PR HEV SSUX 200AV-S10,2.0L,4cyl3229/37$1,5007MASERATIGhibli GTA-8,3.0L,6cyl2018/25$3,0504PR T SSGhibli Modena AWDA-8,3.0L,6cyl1916/24$3,2504PR T SSGhibli Modena RWDA-8,3.0L,6cyl2018/25$3,0504PR T SSGhibli TrofeoA-8,3.8L,8cyl1613/20$3,8503PR T Tax SSMAZDA3 5-Door 2WDA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2926/34$1,6506M-6,2.5L,4cyl2724/33$1,75063 5-Door 4WDA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2725/31$1,7506A-S6,2.5L,4cyl2623/31$1,8005TMX-30A-19298/85$85010EVMERCEDES-BENZAMG E53 4matic PlusA-9,3.0L,6cyl2421/29$2,5505PR MHEV SSE350A-9,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$2,3505PR T SSE350 4maticA-9,2.0L,4cyl2421/29$2,5505PR T SSE450 4maticA-9,3.0L,6cyl2523/30$2,4505PR T MHEV SSMINICooper CountrymanAM-S7,1.5L,3cyl2926/33$2,1006P T SSCooper Countryman All4A-S8,1.5L,3cyl2623/30$2,3505P T SSCooper S ClubmanAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2925/35$2,1006P TM-6,2.0L,4cyl2623/33$2,3505P TMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesCooper S Clubman All4A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/32$2,3505P T SSCooper S CountrymanAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2824/33$2,2006P TCooper S Countryman All4A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$2,3505P T SSCooper SE Countryman All4A-S6,1.5L,3cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSJCW Countryman All4A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$2,3505P T SSJohn Cooper Works Clubman All4A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$2,3505P T SSNISSANAltimaAV,2.5L,4cyl3228/39$1,5007Altima AWDAV,2.5L,4cyl3026/36$1,6006Altima AWD SR/PlatinumAV,2.5L,4cyl2925/35$1,6506Altima SRAV-S8,2.0L,4cyl2925/34$1,6506TAV,2.5L,4cyl3127/37$1,5007Altima SV/SLAV,2.5L,4cyl3127/37$1,5007KicksAV,1.6L,4cyl3331/36$1,4507Leaf(40 kW-hr battery pack)A-1111123/99$70010EVLeaf(62 kW-hr battery pack)A-1108118/97$70010EVLeaf SV/SL(62 kW-hr battery pack)A-1104114/94$75010EVMaximaAV-S7,3.5L,6cyl2420/30$2,5505PSentraAV,2.0L,4cyl3329/39$1,4507Sentra SRAV,2.0L,4cyl3228/37$1,5007POLESTAR2 Dual MotorA-18994/84$85010EV2 Single MotorA-1107113/100$70010EVPORSCHETaycan 4 Cross TurismoA-27676/77$1,00010EVTaycan 4S Cross TurismoA-27575/75$1,00010EVTaycan Turbo Cross TurismoA-27272/72$1,05010EV20MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesTaycan Turbo S Cross TurismoA-27374/73$1,05010EVSUBARUImpreza 4-DoorAV-S7,2.0L,4cyl3228/36$1,5007M-5,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$1,8005Impreza Sport 4-DoorAV-S7,2.0L,4cyl3027/36$1,6006WRXAV-S8,2.4L,4cyl2119/25$2,9004P TM-6,2.4L,4cyl2219/26$2,8005P TTESLAModel 3 Long Range AWDA-1131134/126$60010EVModel 3 Performance AWDA-1113118/107$65010EVModel 3 RWD A-1132138/126$55010EVTOYOTAAvalonA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2522/31$1,9005Avalon HybridAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl4343/43$1,1008HEV SSAvalon Hybrid XLEAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl4443/44$1,0508HEV SSAvalon XLEA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2622/32$1,8005CamryA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2622/33$1,8005Camry AWD LE/SEA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2925/34$1,6506Camry AWD XLE/XSEA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2825/34$1,7006Camry Hybrid LEAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl5251/53$9009HEV SSCamry Hybrid SE/XLE/XSEAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl4644/47$1,0509HEV SSCamry LE/SEA-S8,2.5L,4cyl3228/39$1,5007Camry TRDA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2522/31$1,9005Camry XLE/XSEA-S8,2.5L,4cyl3127/38$1,5007Camry XSEA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2622/32$1,8005PriusAV,1.8L,4cyl5254/50$9009HEV SSPrius AWDAV,1.8L,4cyl4951/47$9509PT4 HEV SSPrius Eco AV,1.8L,4cyl5658/53$8509HEV SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesPrius PrimeAV,1.8L,4cylSee page 42.PHEV SSVOLKSWAGENGolf-RAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$2,3505P T SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl2320/28$2,6505P TGTIAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2825/34$1,7006T SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl2824/34$1,7006TPassatA-S6,2.0L,4cyl2824/36$1,7006T SSVOLVOS90 B6 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$2,3505PR T S SSS90 T8 AWD RechargeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T S PHEV SSS90 T8 AWD Recharge ext.RangeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSLARGE CARSAUDIA8 L quattroA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2219/28$2,8005P T MHEV SSS8A-S8,4.0L,8cyl1714/23$3,6003P T Tax CD MHEVSSBMW740i SedanA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,4505P T SS740i xDrive SedanA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2320/27$2,6505P T SS745e xDriveA-S8,3.0L,6cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SS750i xDrive SedanA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1917/24$3,2504P T SSAlpina B7 xDriveA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1917/24$3,2504P T SSM760i xDrive SedanA-S8,6.6L,12cyl1613/20$3,8503P T Tax SSX1 sDrive28iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2724/33$2,2506P T SSX1 xDrive28iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$2,3505P T SSCHRYSLER300A-8,3.6L,6cyl2319/30$2,0505A-8,5.7L,8cyl1916/25$2,9504Mid CD300 AWDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2118/27$2,2504FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202221MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesDODGEChargerA-8,3.6L,6cyl2319/30$2,0505A-8,5.7L,8cyl1916/25$2,9504Mid CDA-8,6.4L,8cyl1815/24$3,4003P CDCharger AWDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2118/27$2,2504Charger SRT WidebodyA-8,6.2L,8cyl1512/21$4,1002P S TaxCharger WidebodyA-8,6.4L,8cyl1815/24$3,4003P CDGENESISG80 AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505P T SSA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2017/26$3,0504P T SSG80 RWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2623/32$2,3505P T SSG90 AWDA-S8,3.3L,6cyl2017/24$3,0504P TA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1816/23$3,4003PG90 RWDA-S8,3.3L,6cyl1917/24$3,2504P TA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1916/24$3,2504PHONDAAccordAV,1.5L,4cyl3330/38$1,4507T SSAccord HybridAV,2.0L,4cyl4748/47$1,0009HEV SSAccord Hybrid Sport/TouringAV,2.0L,4cyl4344/41$1,1008HEV SSAccord Sport/TouringAV-S7,1.5L,4cyl3229/35$1,5007T SSA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2622/32$1,8005TCivic 5DrAV,1.5L,4cyl3531/39$1,3507T SSAV-S7,1.5L,4cyl3330/37$1,4507T SSM-6,1.5L,4cyl3128/37$1,5007T SSAV,2.0L,4cyl3330/38$1,4507SSAV-S7,2.0L,4cyl3229/37$1,5007SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl2926/36$1,6506SSHYUNDAIIoniqAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl5554/57$8509HEV SSIoniq 5 AWD(Long Range)A-198110/87$75010EVIoniq 5 RWD(Long Range)A-1114132/98$70010EVIoniq 5 RWD(Standard Range)A-1110127/94$70010EVIoniq Blue AM-S6,1.6L,4cyl5958/60$80010HEV SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesSonataA-S8,1.6L,4cyl3127/37$1,5007TA-S8,2.5L,4cyl3228/38$1,5007SSA-S8,2.5L,4cyl3127/37$1,5007AM-S8,2.5L,4cyl2723/33$1,7506TSonata HybridAM-S6,2.0L,4cyl4745/51$1,0009HEV SSSonata Hybrid BlueAM-S6,2.0L,4cyl5250/54$9009HEV SSKIAK5A-S8,1.6L,4cyl3229/38$1,5007T SSA-S8,1.6L,4cyl3127/37$1,5007TAM-S8,2.5L,4cyl2724/32$1,7506TK5 AWDA-S8,1.6L,4cyl2825/33$1,7006TLUCIDAir Dream P AWD w/19 inch wheelsA-1116117/114$65010EVAir Dream P AWD w/21 inch wheelsA-1111110/111$70010EVAir Dream R AWD w/19 inch wheelsA-1125126/125$60010EVAir Dream R AWD w/21 inch wheelsA-1116115/117$65010EVAir G Touring AWD w/19 inch wheels A-1131130/132$60010EVAir G Touring AWD w/21 inch wheelsA-1121121/122$65010EVMASERATIQuattroporte GTA-8,3.0L,6cyl1916/25$3,2504PR T SSQuattroporte Modena AWDA-8,3.0L,6cyl1916/24$3,2504PR T SSQuattroporte Modena RWDA-8,3.0L,6cyl1916/25$3,2504PR T SSQuattroporte TrofeoA-8,3.8L,8cyl1613/20$3,8503PR T Tax SSMERCEDES-BENZAMG EQS 4matic PlusA-17776/78$1,00010EV SSEQS 450 PlusA-19797/97$80010EV SSEQS 580 4maticA-19592/99$80010EV SSMaybach S680 4maticA-9,6.0L,12cyl1512/21$4,1002PR T Tax SSS500 4maticA-9,3.0L,6cyl2421/30$2,5505PR MHEV SSS580 4maticA-9,4.0L,8cyl1916/25$3,2504PR T MHEV SS22MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesS580 4matic MaybachA-9,4.0L,8cyl1815/24$3,4003PR T MHEV SSPORSCHEPanameraAM-S8,2.9L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T SSPanamera 4AM-S8,2.9L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T SSPanamera 4 E-Hybrid/Exec/STAM-S8,2.9L,6cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSPanamera 4 ExecutiveAM-S8,2.9L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR T SSPanamera 4 STAM-S8,2.9L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504PR T SSPanamera 4SAM-S8,2.9L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T SSPanamera 4S E-Hybrid/Exec/STAM-S8,2.9L,6cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSPanamera 4S ExecutiveAM-S8,2.9L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR T SSPanamera 4S STAM-S8,2.9L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR T SSPanamera GTSAM-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003PR T CD SSPanamera GTS STAM-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/20$3,6003PR T CD SSPanamera Turbo S E-Hybrid/Exec/STAM-S8,4.0L,8cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSPanamera Turbo S/Exec/STAM-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003PR T CD SSROLLS-ROYCEGhostA-S8,6.7L,12cyl1412/19$4,4002P T TaxGhost Black BadgeA-S8,6.7L,12cyl1412/19$4,4002P T TaxGhost ExtendedA-S8,6.7L,12cyl1412/19$4,4002P T TaxPhantomA-S8,6.7L,12cyl1412/20$4,4002P T TaxPhantom ExtendedA-S8,6.7L,12cyl1412/20$4,4002P T TaxSUBARULegacy AWDAV-S8,2.4L,4cyl2724/32$1,7506T SSAV-S8,2.5L,4cyl3027/35$1,6006SSTESLAModel SA-1120124/115$65010EVModel S Plaid(19 inch wheels)A-1116119/112$65010EVMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesModel S Plaid(21 inch wheels)A-1101102/99$75010EVVOLKSWAGENArteonAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2824/34$2,2006P T SSArteon 4motionAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505P T SSSMALL STATION WAGONSAUDIA4 allroad quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2624/30$2,3505P T MHEV SSCHEVROLETBolt EUVAV115125/104$65010EVBolt EV AV120131/109$65010EVHONDAHR-V AWDAV,1.8L,4cyl2927/31$1,6506AV-S7,1.8L,4cyl2826/31$1,7006HR-V FWDAV,1.8L,4cyl3028/34$1,6006AV-S7,1.8L,4cyl3028/34$1,6006KIAEV6 AWD(Long Range)A-1105116/94$70010EVEV6 RWD(Long Range)A-1117134/101$65010EVEV6 RWD(Standard Range)A-1117136/100$65010EVNiroAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl4951/46$9509HEV SSNiro ElectricA-1112123/102$70010EVNiro FE AM-S6,1.6L,4cyl5053/48$9509HEV SSNiro Plug-in HybridAM-S6,1.6L,4cylSee page 42.PHEV SSNiro TouringAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl4346/40$1,1008HEV SSSoulAM-S7,1.6L,4cyl2927/32$1,6506T SSAV,2.0L,4cyl3028/33$1,6006SSSoul Eco dynamicsAV,2.0L,4cyl3129/35$1,5007SSMERCEDES-BENZAMG GLA35 4maticAM-8,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505PR T SSFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202223MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesAMG GLA45 4maticAM-8,2.0L,4cyl2219/25$2,8005PR T SSNISSANRogue SportAV-S8,2.0L,4cyl2825/32$1,7006Rogue Sport AWDAV-S8,2.0L,4cyl2724/30$1,7506SUBARUImpreza 5-DoorAV-S7,2.0L,4cyl3128/36$1,5007M-5,2.0L,4cyl2624/31$1,8005Impreza Sport 5-DoorAV-S7,2.0L,4cyl3027/35$1,6006M-5,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$1,9005VOLVOV60 T8 AWD RechargeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T S PHEV SSV60 T8 AWD Recharge ext.RangeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSV60CC T5 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/31$2,4505PR T SSMIDSIZE STATION WAGONSAUDIA6 Allroad quattroAM-S7,3.0L,6cyl2321/28$2,6505P T MHEV SSRS 6 AvantA-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/22$3,6003P T CD MHEV SSMERCEDES-BENZAMG GLB35 4maticAM-8,2.0L,4cyl2220/27$2,8005PR T SSE450 4matic All-Terrain(wagon)A-9,3.0L,6cyl2421/28$2,5505PR T MHEV SSNISSANMurano AWDAV-S7,3.5L,6cyl2320/28$2,0505Murano FWDAV-S7,3.5L,6cyl2320/28$2,0505ROLLS-ROYCECullinanA-S8,6.7L,12cyl1412/20$4,4002P T TaxCullinan Black BadgeA-S8,6.7L,12cyl1412/20$4,4002P T TaxVOLVOV90CC B6 AWD A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$2,4505PR T S SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesSMALL PICKUP TRUCKS 2WDCHEVROLETColorado 2WDA-6,2.5L,4cyl2219/25$2,1505A-6,2.8L,4cyl2320/30$2,4004D TA-8,3.6L,6cyl2118/25$2,2504CDFORDMaverick FWDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005T SSMaverick HEV FWD AV,2.5L,4cyl3742/33$1,3008HEV SSGMCCanyon 2WDA-6,2.5L,4cyl2219/25$2,1505A-6,2.8L,4cyl2320/30$2,4004D TA-8,3.6L,6cyl2118/25$2,2504CDTOYOTATacoma 2WDA-S6,2.7L,4cyl2120/23$2,2504A-S6,3.5L,6cyl2119/24$2,2504SMALL PICKUP TRUCKS 4WDCHEVROLETColorado 4WDA-6,2.5L,4cyl2119/24$2,2504A-6,2.8L,4cyl2219/28$2,5004D TA-8,3.6L,6cyl1917/24$2,5004CDColorado ZR2 4WDA-6,2.8L,4cyl1918/22$2,9003D TA-8,3.6L,6cyl1716/18$2,8003CDFORDMaverick AWDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$1,9005T SSGMCCanyon 4WDA-6,2.5L,4cyl2119/24$2,2504A-6,2.8L,4cyl2219/28$2,5004D TA-8,3.6L,6cyl1917/24$2,5004CDTOYOTATacoma 4WDA-S6,2.7L,4cyl2019/22$2,3504PT4A-S6,3.5L,6cyl2018/22$2,3504PT4M-6,3.5L,6cyl1817/21$2,6003PT4Tacoma 4WD D-CAB MT TRD-ORP/PROM-6,3.5L,6cyl1817/20$2,6003PT424MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesSTANDARD PICKUP TRUCKS 2WDCHEVROLETSilverado 2WDA-8,2.7L,4cyl2019/22$2,3504T CD SSA-8,2.7L,4cyl2019/22$2,3504T CD S-Mode SS A-10,3.0L,6cyl2623/31$2,1005D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1816/21$2,6003CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1816/21$2,6003CD SSA-6,5.3L,8cyl1615/19$2,9503Gas CD1211/15$3,4003E85A-8,5.3L,8cyl1816/21$2,6003CD S-Mode SSA-8,5.3L,8cyl1816/21$2,6003CD SSFORDF150 Pickup 2WDA-S10,2.7L,6cyl2220/26$2,1505T SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl2018/24$2,3504T SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl2017/24$2,3504TF150 Pickup 2WD FFVA-S10,3.3L,6cyl2119/24$2,2504Gas SS1614/18$2,5505E85A-S10,5.0L,8cyl2017/24$2,3504Gas CD SS1411/18$2,9504E85A-S10,5.0L,8cyl1917/24$2,5004Gas CD1412/18$2,9504E85F150 Pickup 2WD HEVA-S10,3.5L,6cyl2525/25$1,9005T HEV SSRanger 2WDA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2321/26$2,0505T SSA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2220/26$2,1505TGMCSierra 2WDA-8,2.7L,4cyl2019/22$2,3504T CD SSA-8,2.7L,4cyl2019/22$2,3504T CD S-Mode SS A-10,3.0L,6cyl2623/30$2,1005D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1816/21$2,6003CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1816/21$2,6003CD SSA-6,5.3L,8cyl1615/19$2,9503Gas CD1211/15$3,4003E85A-8,5.3L,8cyl1816/21$2,6003CD S-Mode SSA-8,5.3L,8cyl1816/21$2,6003CD SSNISSANFrontier 2WDA-S9,3.8L,6cyl2018/24$2,3504Titan 2WDA-S9,5.6L,8cyl1816/21$3,4003PRAM1500 2WD A-8,3.0L,6cyl2622/32$2,1005D TA-8,3.6L,6cyl2220/25$2,1505MHEV SSA-8,5.7L,8cyl2018/23$2,8004Mid CD MHEV SSA-8,5.7L,8cyl1715/22$3,3003Mid CDMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotes1500 Classic 2WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2017/25$2,3504A-8,5.7L,8cyl1715/21$3,3003Mid CD1500 HFE 2WD A-8,3.0L,6cyl2623/33$2,1005D TA-8,3.6L,6cyl2320/26$2,0505MHEV SSTOYOTATundra 2WDA-S10,3.4L,6cyl2018/24$2,3504T SSA-S10,3.4L,6cyl2220/24$2,1505T HEV SSA-S10,3.4L,6cyl2018/23$2,3504T 3-Mode SSSTANDARD PICKUP TRUCKS 4WDCHEVROLETSilverado 4WDA-8,2.7L,4cyl1817/20$2,6003T CD SSA-8,2.7L,4cyl1817/20$2,6003T CD S-Mode SSA-10,3.0L,6cyl2422/26$2,3004D T S-Mode SSA-10,3.0L,6cyl2322/26$2,4004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1816/20$2,6003CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1615/19$2,9503CDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/19$2,8003CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1614/19$2,9503S-Mode SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1614/19$2,9503SSA-6,5.3L,8cyl1614/18$2,9503Gas CD1211/13$3,4003E85A-8,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD S-Mode SSA-8,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1715/20$3,6003P CD S-Mode SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CD 2 modeA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/18$3,8503P CDSilverado 4WD ZR2A-10,6.2L,8cyl1514/17$4,1002P CD SSSilverado Mud Terrain Tires 4WDA-8,2.7L,4cyl1716/18$2,8003T CD SSA-10,3.0L,6cyl2120/23$2,6504D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1514/17$3,1502CDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1514/17$3,1502CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1513/17$3,1502SSA-6,5.3L,8cyl1514/16$3,1502Gas CD1110/12$3,7503E85A-8,5.3L,8cyl1514/18$3,1502CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/18$3,8503P CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1413/17$4,4002P CDFORDF-150 Lightning 4WDA-16876/61$1,10010EVF-150 Lightning 4WD Extended Range A-17078/63$1,10010EVF-150 Lightning Platinum 4WDA-16673/60$1,15010EVF150 Pickup 4WDA-S10,2.7L,6cyl2119/24$2,2504T PT4 SSA-S10,2.7L,6cyl2017/23$2,3504T PT4A-S10,3.5L,6cyl2018/23$2,3504T PT4 SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1917/23$2,5004T PT4FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202225MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesF150 Pickup 4WD FFVA-S10,3.3L,6cyl2019/22$2,3504Gas PT4 SS1514/18$2,7505E85A-S10,5.0L,8cyl1916/22$2,5004Gas PT4 CD SS1311/17$3,1504E85A-S10,5.0L,8cyl1816/22$2,6003Gas PT4 CD1412/17$2,9504E85F150 Pickup 4WD HEVA-S10,3.5L,6cyl2323/23$2,0505T PT4 HEV SSF150 Pickup Tremor 4WDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1816/20$2,6003T PT4 SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1816/20$2,6003T PT4F150 RAPTOR 37 4WDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1515/16$3,1502T PT4 SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1514/16$3,1502T PT4F150 RAPTOR 4WDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1615/18$2,9503T PT4 SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1514/18$3,1502T PT4Ranger 4WDA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2220/24$2,1505T PT4 SSA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2119/24$2,2504T PT4Ranger Tremor 4WDA-S10,2.3L,4cyl1919/19$2,5004T PT4 SSGMCSierra 4WDA-8,2.7L,4cyl1817/20$2,6003T CD SSA-8,2.7L,4cyl1817/20$2,6003T CD S-Mode SSA-10,3.0L,6cyl2422/26$2,3004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1716/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1615/19$2,9503CDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/19$2,8003CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1614/19$2,9503SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1614/19$2,9503SSA-6,5.3L,8cyl1614/18$2,9503Gas CD1211/13$3,4003E85A-8,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD S-Mode SSA-8,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1715/20$3,6003P CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CDSierra Mud Terrain Tires 4WDA-8,2.7L,4cyl1716/18$2,8003T CD SSA-10,3.0L,6cyl2120/23$2,6504D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1514/17$3,1502CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1513/17$3,1502SSA-6,5.3L,8cyl1514/16$3,1502Gas CD1110/12$3,7503E85A-8,5.3L,8cyl1514/18$3,1502CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/18$3,8503P CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1413/17$4,4002P CDHONDARidgeline AWDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2118/24$2,2504CD SSJEEPGladiator 4WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl1917/22$2,5004SSM-6,3.6L,6cyl1916/23$2,5004SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesGladiator EcoDiesel 4WDA-8,3.0L,6cyl2422/28$2,3004D T SSGladiator Rubic EcoDiesel 4WDA-8,3.0L,6cyl2421/27$2,3004D T SSNISSANFrontier 4WDA-S9,3.8L,6cyl1917/22$2,5004PT4Titan 4WDA-S9,5.6L,8cyl1815/21$3,4003P PT4Titan 4WD PRO4XA-S9,5.6L,8cyl1715/20$3,6003P PT4RAM1500 4WDA-8,3.0L,6cyl2421/29$2,3004D TA-8,3.6L,6cyl2119/24$2,2504MHEV SSA-8,5.7L,8cyl1918/22$2,9504Mid CD MHEV SSA-8,5.7L,8cyl1715/21$3,3003Mid CD1500 Classic 4WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl1916/23$2,5004A-8,5.7L,8cyl1715/21$3,3003Mid CD1500 TRX 4WDA-8,6.2L,8cyl1210/14$5,1001P SRIVIANR1T A-17074/66$1,10010PT4 EVTOYOTATundra 4WDA-S10,3.4L,6cyl1917/23$2,5004T PT4 SSA-S10,3.4L,6cyl1917/22$2,5004T PT4 3-Mode SSA-S10,3.4L,6cyl2019/22$2,3504T PT4 HEV SSTundra 4WD PROA-S10,3.4L,6cyl1918/20$2,5004T PT4 HEV SSVANS,PASSENGER TYPEFORDTransit T150 Wagon 2WD FFVA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1715/19$2,8003Gas1211/15$3,4003E85Transit T150 Wagon 4WD FFVA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1614/18$2,9503Gas1211/14$3,4003E85SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLES 2WDCADILLACXT5 Hearse FWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2120/23$2,9004PR T CD SSXT5 Limo FWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2120/23$2,9004PR T CD SS26MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesCHEVROLETSilverado Cab Chassis 2WDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/18$2,8003CD SSA-8,5.3L,8cyl1514/17$3,1502CD SSFORDTransit Connect USPSA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2220/27$2,1505Transit Connect Van FFVA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2524/27$1,9005Gas SS1918/20$2,1505E85Transit Connect Van FWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2524/27$1,9005SSA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2220/26$2,1505Transit Connect Wagon LWB FFVA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2624/28$1,8005Gas SS1816/21$2,3005E85Transit Connect Wagon LWB FWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2624/28$1,8005SSA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2220/26$2,1505GMCSierra Cab Chassis 2WDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/18$2,8003CD SSA-8,5.3L,8cyl1514/17$3,1502CD SSMERCEDES-BENZGLA250AM-8,2.0L,4cyl2824/34$2,2006PR T SSGLB250AM-8,2.0L,4cyl2724/32$2,2506PR T SSMetris(Cargo Van)A-9,2.0L,4cyl2119/23$2,9004PR TMetris(Cargo Van,LWB)A-9,2.0L,4cyl2119/23$2,9004PR TMetris(Passenger Van)A-9,2.0L,4cyl1918/22$3,2504PR TMetris(US Postal Long)A-9,2.0L,4cyl2220/25$2,8005PR TMetris(US Postal)A-9,2.0L,4cyl2220/25$2,8005PR TRAMPromaster CityA-9,2.4L,4cyl2421/28$1,9505SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLES 4WDCADILLACXT5 Hearse AWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2120/23$2,9004PR T CD SSXT5 Limo AWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2120/23$2,9004PR T CD SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesCHEVROLETSilverado Cab Chassis 4WDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1615/17$2,9503CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1513/17$3,1502SSA-8,5.3L,8cyl1514/17$3,1502CD SSGMCSierra Cab Chassis 4WDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1615/17$2,9503CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1513/17$3,1502SSA-8,5.3L,8cyl1514/17$3,1502CD SSMINIVANS 2WDCHRYSLERPacicaA-9,3.6L,6cyl2219/28$2,1505SSPacica Hybrid AV,3.6L,6cylSee page 42.PHEV SSVoyagerA-9,3.6L,6cyl2219/28$2,1505SSHONDAOdysseyA-S10,3.5L,6cyl2219/28$2,1505CD SSKIACarnivalA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,1505TOYOTASienna 2WD AV-S6,2.5L,4cyl3636/36$1,3007HEV SSMINIVANS 4WDCHRYSLERPacica AWDA-9,3.6L,6cyl2017/25$2,3504SSTOYOTASienna AWDAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl3535/36$1,3507HEV SSSMALL SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES 2WDACURAMDX FWDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,8005P CD SSRDX FWDA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2422/28$2,5505P T SSRDX FWD A-SPECA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2422/27$2,5505P T SSFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202227MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesALFA ROMEOStelvioA-8,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$2,4505P T SSBMWX3 sDrive30iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2523/29$2,4505P T SSBUICKEncore FWDA-S6,1.4L,4cyl2724/32$1,7506TEncore GX FWDAV,1.2L,3cyl3029/31$1,6006T SSAV,1.3L,3cyl3029/32$1,6006T SSEnvision FWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2624/31$1,8005T CD SSCADILLACXT4 FWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2624/30$2,3505PR T CD SSXT5 FWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2422/29$2,5505PR T CD SSA-S9,3.6L,6cyl2119/26$2,2504CD SSXT6 FWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2321/27$2,6505PR T CD SSA-S9,3.6L,6cyl2119/26$2,2504CD SSCHEVROLETBlazer FWDA-9,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$1,9005T CD SSA-9,3.6L,6cyl2219/27$2,1505CD SSEquinox FWDA-6,1.5L,4cyl2826/31$1,7006T SSTrailblazer FWDAV,1.2L,3cyl3029/31$1,6006T SSAV,1.3L,3cyl3129/33$1,5007T SSTrax FWDA-S6,1.4L,4cyl2724/32$1,7506TFORDEscape FWDA-8,1.5L,3cyl3028/34$1,6006T CD SSEscape FWD HEV AV,2.5L,4cyl4144/37$1,1508HEV SSEscape FWD PHEVAV,2.5L,4cylSee page 42.PHEV SSMustang Mach-E CAL RT 1 ER RWDA-1101108/94$75010EVMustang Mach-E RWDA-1103110/96$75010EVMustang Mach-E RWD ExtendedA-197104/90$80010EVMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesGENESISGV80 RWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2321/25$2,6505P T SSGMCTerrain FWDA-9,1.5L,4cyl2725/30$1,7506T SSHONDACR-V FWDAV,1.5L,4cyl3028/34$1,6006T SSPassport FWDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2220/25$2,1505CD SSPilot FWDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2320/27$2,0505CD SSHYUNDAIKona ElectricA-1120132/108$65010EVKona FWDAM-S7,1.6L,4cyl3229/35$1,5007T SSAV-S1,2.0L,4cyl3230/35$1,5007SSKona NAM-S8,2.0L,4cyl2320/27$2,6505P TNexoA-15759/54NA10H FCVNexo BlueA-16165/58NA10H FCVSanta Cruz FWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2321/26$2,0505Santa Fe FWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2625/28$1,8005SSAM-S8,2.5L,4cyl2522/28$1,9005T SSTucson FWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2926/33$1,6506SSINFINITIQX50AV-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/29$2,3505PR TJEEPCherokee FWDA-9,2.0L,4cyl2623/31$1,8005T SSA-9,2.4L,4cyl2522/31$1,9005SSA-9,3.2L,6cyl2320/29$2,0505SSCompass FWDA-6,2.4L,4cyl2522/31$1,9005SSRenegade 2WDA-9,1.3L,4cyl2724/32$1,7506T SSKIASeltos FWDAV-S8,2.0L,4cyl3129/35$1,5007SS28MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesSorento FWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2624/29$1,8005SSAM-S8,2.5L,4cyl2522/29$1,9005T SSSorento Hybrid FWDAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl3739/35$1,3008T HEV SSSportage FWDA-S6,2.0L,4cyl2320/28$2,0505TA-S6,2.4L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005Telluride FWDA-S8,3.8L,6cyl2320/26$2,0505SSLEXUSNX 250A-S8,2.5L,4cyl2826/33$1,7006SSRX 350A-S8,3.5L,6cyl2320/27$2,0505RX 350 LA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,1505LINCOLNCorsair FWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$1,9005T SSNautilus FWDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2321/26$2,0505T SSA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2321/26$2,0505T SSMERCEDES-BENZGLC300A-9,2.0L,4cyl2422/27$2,5505PR T SSMITSUBISHIEclipse Cross 2WDAV-S8,1.5L,4cyl2625/28$1,8005TEclipse Cross ES 2WDAV-S8,1.5L,4cyl2726/29$1,7506TOutlander 2WDAV-S8,2.5L,4cyl2724/31$1,7506Outlander Sport 2WDAV-S6,2.0L,4cyl2724/30$1,7506AV-S6,2.4L,4cyl2523/29$1,9005NISSANPathnder 2WDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2321/26$2,0505SSRogue FWDAV-S8,1.5L,3cyl3330/37$1,4507TRogue FWD SL/PlatinumAV-S8,1.5L,3cyl3229/36$1,5007TTESLAModel Y RWD A-1129140/119$60010EVMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesTOYOTACorolla CrossAV-S10,2.0L,4cyl3231/33$1,5007SSHighlanderA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2421/29$1,9505SSA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2320/28$2,0505Highlander HybridAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl3636/35$1,3007HEV SSRAV4A-S8,2.5L,4cyl3027/35$1,6006A-S8,2.5L,4cyl3027/35$1,6006SSVOLKSWAGENAtlasA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2321/25$2,0505T SSA-S8,3.6L,6cyl2018/24$2,3504SSAtlas Cross SportA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2321/25$2,0505T SSA-S8,3.6L,6cyl2018/24$2,3504SSID.4 ProA-1107116/98$70010EVID.4 Pro SA-1102110/93$75010EVTaosA-8,1.5L,4cyl3128/36$1,5007T SSTiguanA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005T SSVOLVOXC40 T4A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/32$1,8005T SSXC60 B5A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$2,3505PR T SSSMALL SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES 4WDACURAMDX AWDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl2119/25$2,9004P CD SSRDX AWDA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2321/27$2,6505P T SSRDX AWD A-SPECA-S10,2.0L,4cyl2321/26$2,6505P T SSALFA ROMEOStelvio AWDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2422/28$2,5505P T SSA-8,2.9L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504P T CD SSAUDIQ3 quattroA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005T SSQ3 S line quattroA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2421/28$1,9505T SSFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202229MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesQ5 quattroAM-7,2.0L,4cyl2523/29$2,4505P T MHEV SSQ5 S line quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2523/28$2,4505P T MHEV SSQ5 Sportback S line quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2523/28$2,4505P T MHEV SSQ5 TFSI e quattroAM-S7,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSSQ5A-S8,3.0L,6cyl2119/24$2,9004P T SSSQ5 SportbackA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2119/24$2,9004P T SSBMWX3 MA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1715/20$3,6003P T SSX3 M CompetitionA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1715/20$3,6003P T SSX3 M40iA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2321/26$2,6505P T MHEV SSX3 xDrive30iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2421/28$2,5505P T SSX4 MA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1715/20$3,6003P T SSX4 M CompetitionA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1715/20$3,6003P T SSX4 M40iA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2321/26$2,6505P T MHEV SSX4 xDrive30iA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2421/28$2,5505P T SSBUICKEncore AWDA-S6,1.4L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005TEncore GX AWDA-9,1.3L,3cyl2726/29$1,7506T SSEnvision AWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$1,9005T CD SSCADILLACXT4 AWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2422/29$2,5505PR T CD SSXT5 AWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2321/27$2,6505PR T CD SSA-S9,3.6L,6cyl2118/26$2,2504CD SSXT6 AWDA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2321/26$2,6505PR T CD SSA-S9,3.6L,6cyl2118/25$2,2504CD SSCHEVROLETBlazer AWDA-9,2.0L,4cyl2422/27$1,9505T CD SSA-9,3.6L,6cyl2119/26$2,2504CD SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesEquinox AWDA-6,1.5L,4cyl2725/30$1,7506T SSTrailblazer AWDA-9,1.3L,3cyl2826/30$1,7006T SSTrax AWDA-S6,1.4L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005TFIAT500X AWDA-9,1.3L,4cyl2624/30$1,8005T SSFORDBronco 4WDA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2020/21$2,3504T PT4 SSM-7,2.3L,4cyl2020/21$2,3504T PT4 SSA-S10,2.7L,6cyl1919/20$2,5004T PT4 SSBronco Badlands 4WDA-S10,2.3L,4cyl1717/17$2,8003T PT4 SSM-7,2.3L,4cyl1716/17$2,8003T PT4 SSA-S10,2.7L,6cyl1717/17$2,8003T PT4 SSBronco Black Diamond 4WDA-S10,2.3L,4cyl1818/18$2,6003T PT4 SSM-7,2.3L,4cyl1817/19$2,6003T PT4 SSBronco Sasquatch 4WDA-S10,2.3L,4cyl1818/17$2,6003T PT4 SSM-7,2.3L,4cyl1817/18$2,6003T PT4 SSA-S10,2.7L,6cyl1717/17$2,8003T PT4 SSBronco Sport 4WDA-8,1.5L,3cyl2625/28$1,8005T CD SSA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2321/26$2,0505T PT4 SSEcoSport AWDA-S6,2.0L,4cyl2523/29$1,9005SSEdge AWDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2321/28$2,0505T SSA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2320/28$2,0505T SSA-S8,2.7L,6cyl2119/25$2,2504T SSEscape AWDA-8,1.5L,3cyl2826/31$1,7006T CD SSA-8,2.0L,4cyl2622/31$1,8005T SSEscape AWD HEVAV,2.5L,4cyl4043/37$1,2008PT4 HEV SSMustang Mach-E AWDA-19399/86$80010EVMustang Mach-E AWD ExtendedA-19197/84$85010EVMustang Mach-E CAL RT 1 ER AWDA-198105/91$75010EVMustang Mach-E GTA-18490/77$90010EVMustang Mach-E GT PerformanceA-18288/75$95010EV30MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesGENESISGV70 AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2422/28$2,5505P T SSA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2219/26$2,8005P T Spt Pkg SSA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2119/25$2,9004P T SSGMCTerrain AWDA-9,1.5L,4cyl2625/28$1,8005T SSHONDACR-V AWDAV,1.5L,4cyl2927/32$1,6506T SSCR-V Hybrid AWDAV,2.0L,4cyl3840/35$1,2508HEV SSPassport AWDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2119/24$2,2504CD SSPilot AWDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,1505CD SSPilot AWD TrailSportA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2119/25$2,2504CD SSHYUNDAIKona AWDAM-S7,1.6L,4cyl2927/32$1,6506T SSAV-S1,2.0L,4cyl3028/33$1,6006SSSanta Cruz AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2321/27$2,0505AM-S8,2.5L,4cyl2219/27$2,1505TSanta Fe AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2422/25$1,9505SSAM-S8,2.5L,4cyl2421/28$1,9505T SSSanta Fe HybridAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl3233/30$1,5007T HEV SSSanta Fe Hybrid BlueAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl3436/31$1,4007T HEV SSSanta Fe Plug-in HybridAM-S6,1.6L,4cylSee page 42.T PHEV SSTucson AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2624/29$1,8005Tucson HybridAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl3737/36$1,3008T HEV SSTucson Hybrid BlueAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl3838/38$1,2508T HEV SSTucson Plug-in HybridAM-S6,1.6L,4cylSee page 42.T PHEV SSINFINITIQX50 AWDAV-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/28$2,4505PR TQX55 AWDAV-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/28$2,4505PR TMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesJAGUARE-PaceA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2320/26$2,6505P T SSE-Pace MHEVA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2321/26$2,6505P T MHEV SSF-PaceA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2422/27$2,5505P T SSF-Pace P340 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2220/27$2,8005P T S MHEV SSF-Pace P400 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2219/26$2,8005P T S MHEV SSF-Pace SVRA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P S SSJEEPCherokee 4WDA-9,2.0L,4cyl2421/29$1,9505T SSA-9,2.4L,4cyl2421/29$1,9505SSA-9,3.2L,6cyl2219/27$2,1505SSCherokee Trailhawk 4WDA-9,3.2L,6cyl2118/24$2,2504SSCompass 4WDA-9,2.4L,4cyl2522/30$1,9005SSRenegade 4WDA-9,1.3L,4cyl2623/29$1,8005T SSRenegade Trailhawk 4WDA-9,1.3L,4cyl2422/27$1,9505T SSWrangler 2dr 4WDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2322/24$2,0505T SSA-8,3.6L,6cyl2120/24$2,2504MHEV SSA-8,3.6L,6cyl2018/23$2,3504SSM-6,3.6L,6cyl2017/25$2,3504SSWrangler 4dr 4WDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2221/24$2,1505T SSA-8,3.6L,6cyl2119/24$2,2504MHEV SSA-8,3.6L,6cyl2018/23$2,3504SSM-6,3.6L,6cyl1917/23$2,5004SSA-8,6.4L,8cyl1413/17$4,4002P CDWrangler 4dr 4xeA-8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.T PHEV SSWrangler 4dr EcoDiesel 4WDA-8,3.0L,6cyl2522/29$2,2005D T SSWrangler Rubic 4dr EcoDiesel 4WDA-8,3.0L,6cyl2321/26$2,4004D T SSKIASeltos AWDAM-S7,1.6L,4cyl2725/30$1,7506T SSAV-S8,2.0L,4cyl2927/31$1,6506SSSorento AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2423/25$1,9505SSAM-S8,2.5L,4cyl2422/27$1,9505T SSSorento Hybrid AWDAM-S6,1.6L,4cyl3536/33$1,3507T HEV SSFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202231MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesSorento Plug-in HybridAM-S6,1.6L,4cylSee page 42.T PHEV SSSportage AWDA-S6,2.0L,4cyl2119/24$2,2504TA-S6,2.4L,4cyl2322/26$2,0505Telluride AWDA-S8,3.8L,6cyl2119/24$2,2504SSLAND ROVERDiscovery SportA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2019/23$3,0504P T SSRange Rover EvoqueA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2220/27$2,8005P T SSRange Rover Evoque MHEVA-S9,2.0L,4cyl2321/26$2,6505P T MHEV SSRange Rover VelarA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2320/26$2,6505P T SSRange Rover Velar P340 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2220/26$2,8005P T S MHEV SSRange Rover Velar P400 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2119/25$2,9004P T S MHEV SSLEXUSNX 250 AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2825/32$1,7006SSNX 350 AWDA-S8,2.4L,4cyl2522/29$2,4505PR T SSA-S8,2.4L,4cyl2522/28$2,4505PR T F-Sport SSNX 350h AWDAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl3941/37$1,5508P HEV SSNX 450h Plus AWDAV-S6,2.5L,4cylSee page 42.P PHEV SSRX 350 AWDA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2219/26$2,1505RX 350 L AWDA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2118/25$2,2504LINCOLNCorsair AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2421/29$1,9505T SSA-S8,2.3L,4cyl2421/28$1,9505T SSCorsair AWD PHEVAV,2.5L,4cylSee page 42.PT4 PHEV SSNautilus AWDA-8,2.0L,4cyl2220/25$2,1505T SSA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2220/25$2,1505T SSA-S8,2.7L,6cyl2119/25$2,2504T SSMAZDACX-30 4WDA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2624/31$1,8005A-S6,2.5L,4cyl2522/30$1,9005TCX-5 4WDA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2624/30$1,8005CDA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2422/27$1,9505TMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesCX-9 4WDA-S6,2.5L,4cyl2320/26$2,0505TMERCEDES-BENZAMG GLC43 4maticA-9,3.0L,6cyl2118/25$2,9004PR T SSAMG GLC43 4matic CoupeA-9,3.0L,6cyl1916/24$3,2504PR T SSEQB 300 4maticA-1101104/98$75010EV SSEQB 350 4maticA-19698/93$80010EV SSGLA250 4maticAM-8,2.0L,4cyl2623/32$2,3505PR T SSGLB250 4maticAM-8,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505PR T SSGLC300 4maticA-9,2.0L,4cyl2421/28$2,5505PR T SSGLC300 4matic CoupeA-9,2.0L,4cyl2321/27$2,6505PR T SSGLE350A-9,2.0L,4cyl2219/27$2,8005PR T SSGLE350 4maticA-9,2.0L,4cyl2219/26$2,8005PR T SSMITSUBISHIEclipse Cross 4WDAV-S8,1.5L,4cyl2525/26$1,9005TEclipse Cross ES 4WDAV-S8,1.5L,4cyl2625/28$1,8005TOutlander 4WDAV-S8,2.5L,4cyl2624/30$1,8005Outlander PHEVA-1,2.4L,4cylSee page 42.PHEVOutlander Sport 4WDAV-S6,2.0L,4cyl2623/29$1,8005AV-S6,2.4L,4cyl2523/28$1,9005NISSANPathnder 4WDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2321/27$2,0505SSRogue AWDAV-S8,1.5L,3cyl3128/35$1,5007TRogue AWD SL/PlatinumAV-S8,1.5L,3cyl3128/34$1,5007TPORSCHEMacanAM-S7,2.0L,4cyl2119/25$2,9004PR T SSMacan GTSAM-S7,2.9L,6cyl1917/22$3,2504PR T SSMacan SAM-S7,2.9L,6cyl1917/23$3,2504PR T SS32MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesSUBARUCrosstrek AWDAV-S8,2.0L,4cyl3028/33$1,6006SSM-6,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$1,9005AV-S8,2.5L,4cyl2927/34$1,6506SSForester AWDAV-S7,2.5L,4cyl2926/33$1,6506SSForester Wilderness AWDAV-S8,2.5L,4cyl2625/28$1,8005SSOutback AWDAV-S8,2.4L,4cyl2623/30$1,8005T SSAV-S8,2.5L,4cyl2926/33$1,6506SSOutback Wilderness AWDAV-S8,2.4L,4cyl2422/26$1,9505T SSTESLAModel Y AWDA-1123129/116$60010EVModel Y Long Range AWDA-1122127/117$60010EVModel Y Performance AWDA-1111115/106$70010EVTOYOTACorolla Cross 4WDAV-S10,2.0L,4cyl3029/32$1,6006SSHighlander AWDA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2320/27$2,0505SSRAV4 AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2927/33$1,6506SSA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2825/33$1,7006RAV4 AWD LEA-S8,2.5L,4cyl3027/34$1,6006SSRAV4 AWD TRD OFFROADA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2825/32$1,7006RAV4 Hybrid AWDAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl4041/38$1,2008HEV SSRAV4 Prime 4WDAV-S6,2.5L,4cylSee page 42.PHEV SSVenza AWDAV-S6,2.5L,4cyl3940/37$1,2008HEV SSVOLKSWAGENAtlas 4motionA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2220/24$2,1505T SSA-S8,3.6L,6cyl1917/23$2,5004SSAtlas Cross Sport 4motionA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2220/24$2,1505T SSA-S8,3.6L,6cyl2018/24$2,3504SSID.4 AWD ProA-1101106/96$75010EVID.4 AWD Pro SA-195100/90$80010EVMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesTaos 4motionA-7,1.5L,4cyl2825/32$1,7006T SSTiguan 4motionA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$1,9005T SSTiguan R-Line 4motionA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2421/28$1,9505T SSVOLVOC40 Recharge twinA-18794/80$85010EVXC40 Recharge twinA-18592/79$90010EVXC40 T5 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2522/30$2,4505PR T SSXC60 B5 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2422/28$2,5505PR T SSXC60 B6 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2421/27$2,5505PR T S SSXC60 T8 AWD RechargeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T S PHEV SSXC60 T8 AWD Recharge ext.RangeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSSTANDARD SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES 2WDBMWX5 sDrive40iA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2321/26$2,6505P T MHEV SSBUICKEnclave FWDA-9,3.6L,6cyl2118/26$2,2504SSCADILLACEscalade 2WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2321/27$2,4004D T SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CD SSCHEVROLETSuburban 2WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2321/27$2,4004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503P CD SSTahoe 2WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2421/28$2,3004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503P CD SSTraverse FWDA-9,3.6L,6cyl2118/27$2,2504SSFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202233MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesDODGEDurango RWDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2119/26$2,2504SSA-8,5.7L,8cyl1714/22$3,3003Mid CDFORDExpedition 2WDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1917/23$2,5004T SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1916/23$2,5004TExplorer HEV RWDA-S10,3.3L,6cyl2727/28$1,7506HEV SSExplorer Platinum HEV RWDA-S10,3.3L,6cyl2625/26$1,8005HEV SSExplorer RWDA-10,2.3L,4cyl2421/28$1,9505T SSA-10,2.3L,4cyl2320/28$2,0505TA-10,3.0L,6cyl2118/26$2,2504T SSA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2018/25$2,3504T SSGMCAcadia FWDA-9,2.0L,4cyl2522/29$1,9005T CD SSA-9,3.6L,6cyl2219/27$2,1505CD SSYukon 2WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2321/27$2,4004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503P CD SSYukon XL 2WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2321/27$2,4004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CDA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CD SSHYUNDAIPalisade FWDA-S8,3.8L,6cyl2219/26$2,1505INFINITIQX60 FWDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2321/26$2,6505P SSQX80 2WDA-S7,5.6L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503PJEEPGrand Cherokee 2WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2219/26$2,1505SSGrand Cherokee L 2WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2119/26$2,2504SSGrand Cherokee WK 2WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2119/26$2,2504SSGrand Wagoneer 2WDA-8,3.0L,6cyl1715/21$3,6003PR T SSA-8,6.4L,8cyl1513/19$4,1002P CDMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesWagoneer 2WDA-8,5.7L,8cyl1816/22$3,1003Mid CD MHEV SSLINCOLNAviator RWDA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2118/26$2,2504T SSNavigator 2WDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1917/23$2,5004T SSNISSANArmada 2WDA-S7,5.6L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503PTOYOTA4Runner 2WDA-S5,4.0L,6cyl1716/19$2,8003Sequoia 2WDA-S6,5.7L,8cyl1513/17$3,1502VOLVOXC90 T5A-S8,2.0L,4cyl2521/30$2,4505PR T SSSTANDARD SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES 4WDACURAMDX AWD Type-SA-S10,3.0L,6cyl1917/21$3,2504P T CD SSASTON MARTINDBX V8A-9,4.0L,8cyl1614/20$3,8503P T CDAUDIe-tron quattroA-17878/77$1,00010EVe-tron S(20in wheels)A-17372/75$1,05010EVe-tron S(21/22 inch wheels)A-16362/64$1,20010EVe-tron S Sportback(20 inch wheels)A-17573/78$1,00010EVe-tron S Sportback(21/22 inch wheels)A-16564/66$1,15010EVe-tron Sportback quattroA-17776/78$1,00010EVQ4 e-tron quattroA-195100/89$80010EVQ4 e-tron Sportback quattroA-195100/89$80010EVQ7 quattroA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2220/25$2,8005P T SSA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504P T MHEV SSQ8 quattroA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504P T MHEV SS34MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesRS Q8A-S8,4.0L,8cyl1513/19$4,1002P T CD MHEV SSSQ7A-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T CD SSSQ8A-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T CD SSBENTLEYBentaygaA-S8,4.0L,8cyl1815/24$3,4003P T CD SSBentayga SpeedA-S8,6.0L,12cyl1412/18$4,4002P T CD SSBMWAlpina XB7A-S8,4.4L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T SSiX xDrive50(20 inch wheels)A-18686/87$90010EViX xDrive50(21 inch wheels)A-18382/84$90010EViX xDrive50(22 inch wheels)A-18686/85$90010EVX5 MA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1513/18$4,1002P T SSX5 M CompetitionA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1513/18$4,1002P T SSX5 M50iA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1816/22$3,4003P T SSX5 xDrive40iA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2321/25$2,6505P T MHEV SSX5 xDrive45eA-S8,3.0L,6cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSX6 MA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1513/18$4,1002P T SSX6 M CompetitionA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1513/18$4,1002P T SSX6 M50iA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1816/22$3,4003P T SSX6 xDrive40iA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2321/25$2,6505P T MHEV SSX7 M50iA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1715/21$3,6003P T SSX7 xDrive40iA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2119/24$2,9004P T MHEV SSBUICKEnclave AWDA-9,3.6L,6cyl2017/25$2,3504SSCADILLACEscalade 4WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2220/26$2,5004D T SSA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CD SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesCHEVROLETSuburban 4WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2220/26$2,5004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1615/19$2,9503CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1614/19$2,9503CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CD SSTahoe 4WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2220/26$2,5004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1614/19$2,9503CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CD SSTraverse AWDA-9,3.6L,6cyl2017/25$2,3504SSDODGEDurango AWDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2118/25$2,2504SSA-8,5.7L,8cyl1714/22$3,3003Mid CDDurango SRT AWDA-8,6.4L,8cyl1513/19$4,1002P CDFORDBronco Raptor 4WDA-S10,3.0L,6cyl1515/16$3,1502T PT4 SSExpedition 4WDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1816/22$2,6003T PT4 SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1816/21$2,6003T PT4Expedition Timberline AWDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1716/19$2,8003T PT4 SSA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1715/19$2,8003T PT4Explorer AWDA-10,2.3L,4cyl2320/27$2,0505T PT4 SSA-10,2.3L,4cyl2220/26$2,1505T PT4 SSA-10,3.0L,6cyl2018/24$2,3504T PT4 SSA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2018/24$2,3504T PT4 SSExplorer FFV AWDA-10,3.3L,6cyl1916/24$2,5004Gas PT4 SS1311/15$3,1503E85Explorer HEV AWDA-S10,3.3L,6cyl2523/26$1,9005PT4 HEV SSExplorer Platinum HEV AWDA-S10,3.3L,6cyl2323/24$2,0505PT4 HEV SSExplorer Timberline AWDA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2119/22$2,2504T PT4 SSA-S10,2.3L,4cyl2019/21$2,3504T PT4GENESISGV80 AWDA-S8,2.5L,4cyl2221/25$2,8005P T SSA-S8,3.5L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504P T SSFUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202235MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesGMCAcadia AWDA-9,2.0L,4cyl2422/27$1,9505T CD SSA-9,3.6L,6cyl2119/26$2,2504CD SSYukon 4WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2220/26$2,5004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1715/20$2,8003CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1614/19$2,9503CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CD SSYukon XL 4WDA-10,3.0L,6cyl2220/26$2,5004D T SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1615/19$2,9503CD SSA-10,5.3L,8cyl1614/19$2,9503CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CDA-10,6.2L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P CD SSHYUNDAIPalisade AWDA-S8,3.8L,6cyl2119/24$2,2504INFINITIQX60 AWDA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2220/25$2,8005P SSQX80 4WDA-S7,5.6L,8cyl1513/19$4,1002PA-S7,5.6L,8cyl1513/19$4,1002P MDPVJEEPGrand Cherokee 4WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2219/26$2,1505SSA-8,5.7L,8cyl1714/22$3,3003Mid CDGrand Cherokee 4xeA-8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.T PHEV SSGrand Cherokee L 4WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2118/25$2,2504SSA-8,5.7L,8cyl1714/22$3,3003Mid CDGrand Cherokee WK 4WDA-8,3.6L,6cyl2118/25$2,2504SSGrand Wagoneer 4WDA-8,3.0L,6cyl1714/20$3,6003PR T SSA-8,6.4L,8cyl1513/18$4,1002P CDWagoneer 4WDA-8,5.7L,8cyl1715/20$3,3003Mid CD MHEV SSLAMBORGHINIUrusA-S8,4.0L,8cyl1412/17$4,4002P T CD SSLAND ROVERDefender 110A-S8,2.0L,4cyl1817/20$3,4003P T SSA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P S SSDefender 110 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/22$3,2504P T S MHEV SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesDefender 90A-S8,2.0L,4cyl1918/21$3,2504P T SSA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1615/19$3,8503P S SSDefender 90 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/22$3,2504P T S MHEV SSDiscoveryA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2119/22$2,9004P T SSDiscovery MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2118/24$2,9004P MHEV SSNew Range RoverA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1816/21$3,4003P T SSNew Range Rover LWBA-S8,4.4L,8cyl1816/21$3,4003P T SSNew Range Rover P360 LWB MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2118/26$2,9004P T S MHEV SSNew Range Rover P360 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2118/26$2,9004P T S MHEV SSNew Range Rover P400 LWB MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2118/26$2,9004P T S MHEV SSNew Range Rover P400 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2118/26$2,9004P T S MHEV SSRange RoverA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1816/21$3,4003P S SSRange Rover LWBA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1816/21$3,4003P S SSRange Rover LWB SVAA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1513/19$4,1002P S SSRange Rover P360 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504P T S MHEV SSRange Rover P400 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2018/23$3,0504P T S MHEV SSRange Rover SportA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1917/22$3,2504P S SSRange Rover Sport P360 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2119/24$2,9004P T S MHEV SSRange Rover Sport P400 MHEVA-S8,3.0L,6cyl2119/24$2,9004P T S MHEV SSRange Rover Sport PHEVA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSRange Rover Sport SVRA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1615/20$3,8503P S SSRange Rover SVAA-S8,5.0L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503P S SSLEXUSGX 460A-S6,4.6L,8cyl1615/19$3,8503PRLX 600A-S10,3.4L,6cyl1917/22$3,2504PR T SSRX 450h AWDAV-S6,3.5L,6cyl3031/28$2,0506PR HEV SSRX 450h L AWDAV-S6,3.5L,6cyl2929/28$2,1006PR HEV SS36MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesLINCOLNAviator AWDA-S10,3.0L,6cyl2017/24$2,3504T PT4 SSAviator PHEV AWDA-S10,3.0L,6cylSee page 42.T PT4 PHEV SSNavigator 4WDA-S10,3.5L,6cyl1816/22$2,6003T PT4 SSMASERATILevante GTA-8,3.0L,6cyl1816/22$3,4003PR T SSLevante ModenaA-8,3.0L,6cyl1816/22$3,4003PR T SSLevante Modena V8A-8,3.8L,8cyl1613/20$3,8503PR T SSLevante TrofeoA-8,3.8L,8cyl1613/20$3,8503PR T SSMERCEDES-BENZAMG G63A-9,4.0L,8cyl1413/16$4,4002PR T CD SSAMG GLE53 4matic PlusA-9,3.0L,6cyl1918/22$3,2504PR MHEV SSAMG GLE53 4matic Plus CoupeA-9,3.0L,6cyl1917/21$3,2504PR MHEV SSAMG GLE63 S 4matic PlusA-9,4.0L,8cyl1615/19$3,8503PR T CD MHEV SSAMG GLE63 S 4matic Plus CoupeA-9,4.0L,8cyl1615/19$3,8503PR T CD MHEV SSAMG GLS63 4matic PlusA-9,4.0L,8cyl1514/18$4,1002PR T CD MHEV SSG550A-9,4.0L,8cyl1614/17$3,8503PR T CD SSGLE450 4maticA-9,3.0L,6cyl2220/26$2,8005PR T MHEV SSA-9,3.0L,6cyl2220/25$2,8005PR T MHEV SSGLE580 4maticA-9,4.0L,8cyl1816/21$3,4003PR T CD MHEV SSGLS450 4maticA-9,3.0L,6cyl2018/24$3,0504PR T MHEV SSGLS580 4maticA-9,4.0L,8cyl1816/21$3,4003PR T CD MHEV SSGLS600 4matic MaybachA-9,4.0L,8cyl1714/20$3,6003PR T CD MHEV SSNISSANArmada 4WDA-S7,5.6L,8cyl1513/18$4,1002PA-S7,5.6L,8cyl1513/18$4,1002P MDPVPathnder 4WD PlatinumA-S9,3.5L,6cyl2220/25$2,1505SSMPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesPORSCHECayenneA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/22$3,2504PR T SSCayenne/Cayenne CoupeA-S8,3.0L,6cyl1917/22$3,2504PR T SSCayenne GTSA-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/19$3,6003PR T CD SSCayenne GTS CoupeA-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/19$3,6003PR T CD SSCayenne SA-S8,2.9L,6cyl1816/22$3,4003PR T SSCayenne S CoupeA-S8,2.9L,6cyl1816/21$3,4003PR T SSCayenne TurboA-S8,4.0L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503PR T CD SSCayenne Turbo CoupeA-S8,4.0L,8cyl1715/20$3,6003PR T CD SSCayenne Turbo GT CoupeA-S8,4.0L,8cyl1614/19$3,8503PR T CD SSCayenne Turbo S/Coupe E-HybridA-S8,4.0L,8cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSCayenne/Coupe E-HybridA-S8,3.0L,6cylSee page 42.P T PHEV SSRIVIANR1SA-16973/65$1,10010PT4 EVSUBARUAscentAV-S8,2.4L,4cyl2321/27$2,0505TAscent Limited/Touring/Onyx AWDAV-S8,2.4L,4cyl2220/26$2,1505TTESLAModel X A-1102107/97$75010EVModel X Plaid(20 inch wheels)A-198103/93$75010EVModel X Plaid(22 inch wheels)A-19194/88$85010EVTOYOTA4Runner 4WDA-S5,4.0L,6cyl1716/19$2,8003PT4A-S5,4.0L,6cyl1716/19$2,8003Highlander Hybrid AWD AV-S6,2.5L,4cyl3535/35$1,3507HEV SSHighlander Hybrid AWD LTD/PLAT AV-S6,2.5L,4cyl3535/34$1,3507HEV SSSequoia 4WDA-S6,5.7L,8cyl1413/17$3,4002PT4FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202237MPGManufacturerModelConguration(trans,eng size,cyl)Comb City/HwyAnnualFuelCostGHGRatingNotesVOLVOXC90 T5 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2320/28$2,6505PR T SSXC90 T6 AWDA-S8,2.0L,4cyl2219/27$2,8005PR T S SSXC90 T8 AWD RechargeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T S PHEV SSXC90 T8 AWD Recharge ext.RangeA-S8,2.0L,4cylSee page 42.PR T PHEV SSALL-ELECTRIC VEHICLES38All-electric vehicles(EVs)are propelled by one or more electricmotors powered by a rechargeable battery.EVs are energy efficientand emit no tailpipe pollutants,although the power plant producingthe electricity may emit pollution.Electric motors have several performance benets.They are quiet,have instant torque for quick acceleration,enable regenerativebraking,and require less maintenance than internal combustionengines.Current EVs typically have a shorter driving range than comparablegasoline or hybrid vehicles,and their range is more sensitive todriving style,driving conditions,and accessory use.Fully rechargingthe battery can take several hoursthough a“fast charge”to80pacity may take as little as 30 minutes.Charging optionsoutside the home are expanding.More than 43,000 public and 1,000workplace charging stations are available.EVs are typically moreexpensive than comparable conventional vehicles and hybrids dueto the cost of the large battery.However,as manufacturers continueto improve the driving range and reduce the cost of these vehicles,they are becoming more practical and affordable for a wider range ofconsumers.A federal income tax credit of up to$7,500 is currently available toconsumers purchasing a qualifying EV.(Note that the federal taxcredit begins to phase out after the manufacturer has sold more than200,000 qualifying vehicles.)State and/or local incentives may alsoapply.For additional information on EVs,including tax incentives andphase-out dates,visit fueleconomy.gov.FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202239Fuel Economy(comb/city/hwy)ModelMotorBatteryTypeMPGekWh/100 miDrivingRange*(miles)ChargeTime(hrs 240 V)AnnualFuelCostGHGRatingTWO-SEATER CARSHISPANO SUIZA CARSCarmen Boulogne820 kW AC InductionLi-IonPolymerNANANANANANARIMAC AUTOMOBILINevera2 Front 250 kW Rear 450kW each AC InductionLi-IonNANANANANANASUBCOMPACT CARSBMWi4 eDrive40 Gran Coupe(18 inch wheels)250 kW EESMLi-Ion109/109/10831/31/3130110$70010i4 eDrive40 Gran Coupe(19 inch wheels)250 kW EESMLi-Ion99/100/9834/34/3428210$75010i4 M50 Gran Coupe(19 inch wheels)190 and 230 kW EESMLi-Ion96/94/9835/36/3427010$80010i4 M50 Gran Coupe(20 inch wheels)190 and 230 kW EESMLi-Ion80/79/8042/43/4222710$95010MINICooper SE Hardtop 2 door135 kW DCPMLi-Ion110/119/10031/28/341144$70010COMPACT CARSPORSCHETaycan 4S Perf Battery150 and 270 kW ACPMLi-Ion79/79/8042/43/421999.5$95010Taycan 4S Perf Battery Plus175 and 320 kW ACPMLi-Ion77/75/8143/45/4222710.5$1,00010Taycan GTS194 and 360 kW ACPMLi-Ion83/83/8241/40/4124610.5$90010Taycan GTS ST194 and 360 kW ACPMLi-Ion80/80/8042/42/4223310.5$95010Taycan Perf Battery240 kW ACPMLi-Ion79/76/8442/44/402009.5$95010Taycan Perf Battery Plus280 kW ACPMLi-Ion75/71/8045/47/4222510.5$1,00010Taycan Turbo170 and 335 kW ACPMLi-Ion73/71/7546/46/4321210.5$1,05010Taycan Turbo S190 and 335 kW ACPMLi-Ion70/69/7148/49/4720110.5$1,10010SC AUTOSPORTS,LLCKandi K2745 kW AC InductionLi-IonNANANANANANAMIDSIZE CARSAUDIe-tron GT175 kW Asynchron 3-PhaseLi-Ion82/81/8341/42/4123810$95010RS e-tron GT335 kW Asynchron 3-PhaseLi-Ion81/79/8242/42/4123210$95010MAZDAMX-3081 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion92/98/8537/34/401005.3$85010NISSANLeaf(40 kW-hr battery pack)110 kW DCPMLi-Ion111/123/9930/27/341498$70010Leaf(62 kW-hr battery pack)160 kW DCPMLi-Ion108/118/9731/29/3522611$70010Leaf SV/SL(62 kW-hr battery pack)160 kW DCPMLi-Ion104/114/9432/29/3621511$75010POLESTAR2 Dual Motor150 and 150kW AC PMSMLi-Ion89/94/8438/36/402498$850102 Single Motor170 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion107/113/10031/30/342708$70010PORSCHETaycan 4 Cross Turismo175 and 320 kW ACPMLi-Ion76/76/7744/44/4421510.5$1,00010Taycan 4S Cross Turismo175 and 320 kW ACPMLi-Ion75/75/7545/45/4521510.5$1,00010Taycan Turbo Cross Turismo175 and 355 kW ACPMLi-Ion72/72/7247/47/4720410.5$1,05010Taycan Turbo S Cross Turismo190 and 335 kW ACPMLi-Ion73/74/7346/46/4620210.5$1,05010TESLAModel 3 Long Range AWD98 and 195 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion131/134/12626/25/273589.6/11.5$60010Model 3 Performance AWD131 and 190 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion113/118/10730/29/323159.6/10$65010Model 3 RWD192 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion132/138/12625/25/272725.8/10.4$5501040Fuel Economy(comb/city/hwy)ModelMotorBatteryTypeMPGekWh/100 miDrivingRange*(miles)ChargeTime(hrs 240 V)AnnualFuelCostGHGRatingLARGE CARSHYUNDAIIoniq 5 AWD(Long Range)74 and 165 kW PMSMLi-Ion98/110/8734/31/392568.5$75010Ioniq 5 RWD(Long Range)168 kW PMSMLi-Ion114/132/9830/25/343038.5$70010Ioniq 5 RWD(Standard Range)125 kW PMSMLi-Ion110/127/9431/26/352206.3$70010LUCIDAir Dream P AWD w/19 inch wheels370 and 459kW ACPMLi-Ion116/117/11429/29/2947113$65010Air Dream P AWD w/21 inch wheels370 and 459kW ACPMLi-Ion111/110/11130/31/3045113$70010Air Dream R AWD w/19 inch wheels198 and 498kW ACPMLi-Ion125/126/12527/27/2752013$60010Air Dream R AWD w/21 inch wheels198 and 498kW ACPMLi-Ion116/115/11729/29/2948113$65010Air G Touring AWD w/19 inch wheels178 and 433kW ACPMLi-Ion131/130/13226/26/2551613$60010Air G Touring AWD w/21 inch wheels178 and 433kW ACPMLi-Ion121/121/12228/28/2846913$65010MERCEDES-BENZAMG EQS 4matic Plus174 and 310 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion77/76/7844/45/4327712.5$1,00010EQS 450 Plus245 kW ACPM 6-PhaseLi-Ion97/97/9735/35/3535012.5$80010EQS 580 4matic135 and 255 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion95/92/9936/37/3434012.5$80010SC AUTOSPORTS,LLCKandi K2349 kW AC IndutionLi-IonNANANANANANATESLAModel S247 and 247 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion120/124/11528/27/294058.3/15$65010Model S Plaid(19 inch wheels)250,250 and 250 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion116/119/11229/28/303968/15$65010Model S Plaid(21 inch wheels)250,250 and 250 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion101/102/9933/33/343488/15$75010SMALL STATION WAGONSCHEVROLETBolt EUV150 kW ACPMLi-Ion115/125/10429/27/322477.5$65010Bolt EV150 kW ACPMLi-Ion120/131/10928/26/312597.5$65010KIAEV6 AWD(Long Range)74 and 165 kW PMSMLi-Ion105/116/9432/29/362748.4$70010EV6 RWD(Long Range)168 kW PMSMLi-Ion117/134/10129/25/333108.7$65010EV6 RWD(Standard Range)125 kW PMSMLi-Ion117/136/10029/25/342326.3$65010Niro Electric150 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion112/123/10230/27/332399.5$70010STANDARD PICKUP TRUCKS 2WDFORDF-150 BEV 4X2NALi-IonNANANANANANASTANDARD PICKUP TRUCKS 4WDFORDF-150 Lightning 4WD358 and 358 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion68/76/6149/44/5623011.9$1,10010F-150 Lightning 4WD Extended Range210 and 210 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion70/78/6348/43/5432010.1$1,10010F-150 Lightning Platinum 4WD210 and 210 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion66/73/6051/46/563009.3$1,15010RIVIANR1T162,162,163,163kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion70/74/6648/45/5131413$1,10010SMALL SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES 2WDFORDMustang Mach-E CAL RT 1 ER RWD216 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion101/108/9433/31/3631410.1$75010Mustang Mach-E RWD198 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion103/110/9633/31/352478.1$75010Mustang Mach-E RWD Extended216 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion97/104/9035/32/3730310.9$80010HYUNDAIKona Electric150 kW AC PMSMLi-Ion120/132/10828/26/312589.5$65010TESLAModel Y RWD209 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion129/140/11926/24/282444.4/8$60010FUEL ECONOMY GUIDE 202241Fuel Economy(comb/city/hwy)ModelMotorBatteryTypeMPGekWh/100 miDrivingRange*(miles)ChargeTime(hrs 240 V)AnnualFuelCostGHGRatingVOLKSWAGENID.4 Pro150 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion107/116/9832/29/352757.5$70010ID.4 Pro S150 kW AC 3-PhaseLi-Ion102/110/9333/31/362627.5$75010SMALL SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES 4
2025-03-04
60页
5星级
Oliver Wyman 1 Oliver Wyman 2 Oliver Wyman 3 25 YEARS OF THE GLOBAL FLEET AND MRO MARKET FORECAST O.
2025-03-04
47页
5星级
罗兰贝格：预见2026：中国行业趋势报告（90页）.pdf
智源研究院：2026十大AI技术趋势报告（34页）.pdf
中国互联网协会：智能体应用发展报告（2025）（124页）.pdf
三个皮匠报告：2025银发经济生态：中国与全球实践白皮书（150页）.pdf
三个皮匠报告：2025中国商业航天市场洞察报告-中国商业航天新格局全景洞察（25页）.pdf
国声智库：全球AI创造力发展报告2025（77页）.pdf
中国电子技术标准化研究院：2025知识图谱与大模型融合实践案例集（354页）.pdf
三个皮匠报告：2025中国情绪消费市场洞察报告（24页）.pdf
中国银行：2026中国高净值人群财富管理白皮书（66页）.pdf
亿欧智库：2025全球人工智能技术应用洞察报告（43页）.pdf
0731-84720580
商务合作：really158d
友链申请 (QQ)：1737380874
最新报告
中英对照
全文搜索
报告精选
PDF上传翻译
多格式文档互转
入驻&报告售卖
会员权益
机构报告
券商研报
财报库
专题合集
英文报告
数据图表
会议报告
其他资源
研报
新质生产力
DeepSeek
低空经济
大模型
AI Agent
AI Infra
具身智能
自动驾驶
宠物
银发经济
人形机器人
企业出海
算力
微短剧
薪酬
白皮书
创新药
行业分析
个股研究
年报财报
IPO招股书
会议纪要
宏观策略
政策法规
其他
人工智能
信息科技
互联网
消费经济
汽车交通
电商零售
传媒娱乐
医疗健康
投资金融
能源环境
地产建筑
传统产业
英文报告
其它
行业聚焦
芯片产业
热点概念
全球咨询智库
人工智能
500强
新质生产力
会议峰会
新能源汽车
企业年报
互联网
公司研究
行业综观
消费教育
科技通信
医药健康
人力资源
投资金融
汽车产业
物流地产
电子商务
传统产业
传媒营销
其它
十五五规划系列报告合集（共48套打包）
2026低空经济/低空产业报告合集（共47套打包）
AI、科技与通信
广告、传媒与营销
消费、零售与支付
HR、文化与旅游
金融、保险与投资
能源、环境与工业
医疗制药与大健康
物流、地产与建筑
其他行业
AI ▪ 科技 ▪ 通信
数字化
金融财经
智能制造
电商传媒
地产建筑
医疗医学
能源化工
其他行业
收藏
下载
2026-02-02
AI查数
行业数据
政策法规
商业模式
产业链
竞争格局
市场规模
产业概述
其它
2026年
AI读财报
年报
一季报
半年报
三季报
IPO招股书
社会责任报告
A股
IPO申报
港股
美股&全球
新三板
微信扫码登录
手机快捷登录
账号登录
