U.S. Department
of Transportation
National
Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration
DOT HS 809 512 |
September 2003 |
National
Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration
DOT HS 809 512 |
September 2003 |
This publication is distributed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in the interest of information exchange. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the U.S. Department of Transportation or National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The United States Government assumes no liability for its content or use thereof. If trade or manufacturer’s names or products are mentioned, it is because they are considered essential to the object of the publication and should not be construed as an endorsement. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.
AUTOMOTIVE FUEL ECONOMY PROGRAM
ANNUAL UPDATE
CALENDAR YEAR 2002
A. Fuel Economy Performance by Manufacturer
B. Characteristics of the MY 2002 Passenger Car Fleet
C. Characteristics of the MY 2002 Light Truck Fleet
D. Passenger Car and Light Truck Fleet Economy Averages
E. Domestic and Import Fleet Fuel Economy Averages
A. Light Truck CAFE Standards
B. Low Volume Petitions
C. Enforcement
D. Carryback Plan
E. Manufacturing Incentives for Alternative Fuel Vehicles
The Automotive Fuel Economy Program Annual Update summarizes the fuel economy performance of the vehicle fleet and the activities of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) during 2002. Included in this report is a section summarizing rulemaking activities during 2002.
The Secretary of Transportation is required to administer a program for regulating the fuel economy of new passenger cars and light trucks in the United States market. The authority to administer the program was delegated by the Secretary to the Administrator of NHTSA, 49 C.F.R. 1.50(f).
NHTSA's responsibilities in the fuel economy area include:
Passenger car fuel economy standards were established by Congress for Model Year (MY) 1985 and thereafter at a level of 27.5 miles per gallon (mpg). NHTSA is authorized to amend the standard above or below that level. The agency has established light truck standards each year, but Congress mandated through the DOT Appropriations Acts for fiscal years 1996 through 2001, no increase from the MY 1996 value of 20.7 mpg for MYs 1998 through 2003. The Congressional freeze on CAFE standards was repealed in mid-December 2001. Given the short lead-time (CAFE standards must be set 18 months prior to the affected model year), in April 2002, the agency set the MY 2004 light truck standard at 20.7 mpg. All fuel economy standards through MY 2004 are listed in Table I-1.
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) is the sales weighted average fuel economy, expressed in mpg, of a manufacturer’s fleet of passenger cars or light trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 8,500 lbs. or less, manufactured for sale in the United States, for any given model year. Fuel economy is defined as the average mileage traveled by an automobile per gallon of gasoline (or equivalent amount of other fuel) consumed as measured in accordance with the testing and evaluation protocol set forth by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Manufacturers perform their own fuel economy tests of new car models and submit the results to EPA. EPA is responsible for conducting its own tests or verifying the manufacturers’ dynamometer tests. EPA also is responsible for compiling the production data from manufacturers’ reports and furnishing CAFE results to NHTSA.
Fuel economy test data from the manufacturers and EPA serves as the starting point for both CAFE values and real world fuel economy projections. For CAFE, the test data is adjusted upward to account for any credits for dual fuel and dedicated alternative fuel vehicles, and for passenger cars only, is adjusted upward for credits available to manufacturers to account for test procedure changes since the CAFE program was established. This report presents CAFE values since they are used to determine manufacturer compliance with fuel economy standards.
The Federal government provides real world fuel economy projections to consumers in several ways: on new vehicle labels, in the Fuel Economy Guide, and on EPA and Department of Energy (DOE) websites. The Fuel Economy Guide is published and distributed by DOE based on EPA data. The Fuel Economy Guide lists the city and highway fuel economy estimates that are included on the Fuel Economy label on new vehicles. A downloadable version of the Fuel Economy Guide can be found at http://www.fueleconomy.gov.These estimates are derived from the same dynamometer test values used for CAFE calculation, mentioned above. EPA adjusts these laboratory test results to account for the difference between controlled laboratory conditions and actual driving on the road. The laboratory fuel economy results are adjusted downward to derive the estimates in the Fuel Economy Guide and on new passenger cars and light trucks labels. The city test value is lowered 10 percent and the highway test value is reduced 22 percent. Thus, the city and highway fuel economy estimates used to calculate CAFE differ from the numbers in the Fuel Economy Guide and on the new car and light truck window labels.
| Model Year |
Passenger Cars |
Light Trucks (1) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |
Two-wheel |
Four-wheel |
Combined (2), (3) |
||
| 1978 |
18.0 (4) |
... |
... |
... |
|
| 1979 |
19.0 (4) |
17.2 |
15.8 |
... |
|
| 1980 |
20.0 (4) |
16.0 |
14.0 |
...(5) |
|
| 1981 |
22.0 |
16.7(6) |
15.0 |
... (5) |
|
|
1982 |
24.0 |
18.0 |
16.0 |
17.5 |
|
| 1983 |
26.0 |
19.5 |
17.5 |
19.0 |
|
| 1984 |
27.0 |
20.3 |
18.5 |
20.0 |
|
| 1985 |
27.5(4) |
19.7(7) |
18.9(7) |
19.5(7) |
|
| 1986 |
26.0(8) |
20.5 |
19.5 |
20.0 |
|
|
1987 |
26.0(9) |
21.0 |
19.5 |
20.5 |
|
| 1988 |
26.0(9) |
21.0 |
19.5 |
20.5 |
|
| 1989 |
26.5(10) |
21.5 |
19.0 |
20.5 |
|
| 1990 |
27.5(4) |
20.5 |
19.0 |
20.0 |
|
| 1991 |
27.5(4) |
20.7 |
19.1 |
20.2 |
|
|
1992 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.2 |
|
| 1993 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.4 |
|
| 1994 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.5 |
|
| 1995 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.6 |
|
| 1996 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
|
1997 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
| 1998 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
| 1999 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
| 2000 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
| 2001 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
|
2002 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
| 2003 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
| 2004 |
27.5(4) |
... |
... |
20.7 |
|
A. Fuel Economy Performance by Manufacturer
The fuel economy achievements for domestic and foreign-based manufacturers in MY 2002 were updated to include final EPA calculations, where available, since the publication of the Automotive Fuel Economy Program, Annual Update Calendar Year 2001. These fuel economy achievements and current projected data for MY 2002 are listed in Tables II-1 and II-2.
Overall fleet fuel economy for passenger cars was 28.9 mpg in MY 2002, an increase of 0.1 mpg above the MY 2001 level. For MY 2002, CAFE values increased above MY 2001 levels for 11 of 22 passenger car manufacturers' fleets. (See Table II-1.) These 11 companies accounted for more than 57 percent of the total MY 2002 production. Manufacturers continued to introduce new technologies and more fuel-efficient models, and some larger, heavier, or more powerful less fuel-efficient models. For MY 2002, the overall domestic manufacturers' sales weighted passenger car fleet average CAFE was 29.0 mpg. For MY 2002, Ford, General Motors, and Nissan domestic sales weighted passenger car CAFE values rose 0.1 mpg, 0.3 mpg, and 1.0 mpg, respectively, from their MY 2001 levels, while both DaimlerChrylser and Honda domestic sales weighted passenger car CAFE values fell 0.3 mpg from their MY 2001 levels. Overall, the domestic manufacturers’ combined sales weighted MY 2002 CAFE increased 0.3 mpg above the MY 2001 level.
| MANUFACTURER |
MODEL YEAR CAFE (MPG) |
|
|---|---|---|
| DOMESTIC | 2001 |
2002 |
| DaimlerChrysler........................................................ | 27.9 |
27.6 |
| Ford*...................................................................... | 27.7 |
27.8 |
| General Motors......................................................... | 28.3 |
28.6 |
| Honda..................................................................... | 32.7 |
32.4 |
| Nissan..................................................................... | 27.9 |
28.9 |
| Quantum................................................................. | 30.2 |
… |
| Toyota**................................................................. |
… |
33.6 |
| Sales Weighted Average (Domestic) |
28.7 |
29.0 |
IMPORT |
|
|
| BMW....................................................................... |
25.0 |
25.8 |
Daewoo................................................................... |
28.6 |
28.3 |
DaimlerChrysler........................................................ |
26.5 |
26.5 |
Fiat.......................................................................... |
13.7 |
15.1 |
Ford........................................................................ |
27.9 |
28.1 |
General Motors......................................................... |
26.5 |
27.7 |
Honda..................................................................... |
29.3 |
29.8 |
Hyundai................................................................... |
31.3 |
31.2 |
Kia.......................................................................... |
30.5 |
29.7 |
Lotus....................................................................... |
20.8 |
20.8 |
Nissan..................................................................... |
28.7 |
29.5 |
Porsche.................................................................... |
23.7 |
23.9 |
Subaru.................................................................... |
27.8 |
27.6 |
Suzuki..................................................................... |
35.1 |
33.6 |
Toyota.................................................................... |
30.6 |
29.3 |
Volkswagen............................................................. |
28.5 |
29.2 |
| SALES WEIGHTED AVERAGE (IMPORT) |
29.0 |
28.7 |
| SALES WEIGHTED TOTAL FLEET AVERAGE |
28.8 |
28.9 |
| FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS |
27.5 |
27.5 |
* Ford domestic passenger car fleet CAFE level was 27.1 mpg, for MY 2002. This manufacturer earned CAFE incentives for the sale of alternative fuel vehicles. The incentives raised its CAFE value to the figure shown above.
**The 2001 Fuel Economy Report showed that Toyota had a domestic car fleet CAFE value of 34.2 mpg in 2001. This was based on mid-model year data. Originally, Toyota estimated that the Corolla, Solara, and Avalon would be domestic vehicles in the 2001 model year. During production, the ratio of foreign to domestic parts changed in these vehicles, and they were reclassified as import vehicles.
|
Table II-2 |
||
|---|---|---|
| LIGHT
TRUCK FUEL ECONOMY PERFORMANCE BY MANUFACTURER |
||
| MANUFACTURER |
MODEL YEAR CAFE (MPG) |
|
| Combined |
||
| 2001 |
2002 |
|
BMW ..................................................................................... |
19.2 |
19.7 |
DaimlerChrysler*..................................................................... |
20.8 |
21.2 |
Ford*..................................................................................... |
20.4 |
20.7 |
General Motors*...................................................................... |
20.7 |
21.1 |
Honda.................................................................................... |
25.0 |
25.4 |
Hyundai.................................................................................. |
25.0 |
24.8 |
Isuzu...................................................................................... |
21.1 |
21.0 |
| Kia.......................................................................................... |
23.0 |
21.4 |
Nissan..................................................................................... |
20.7 |
20.7 |
Suzuki .................................................................................... |
22.1 |
21.8 |
Toyota..................................................................................... |
22.1 |
22.1 |
Volkswagen.............................................................................. |
20.4 |
20.6 |
| SALES WEIGHTED TOTAL FLEET AVERAGE |
20.9 |
21.3 |
| FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS |
20.7 |
20.7 |
*The MY 2002 light truck fuel economy values for DaimlerChrysler, Ford, and General Motors light truck fleets were 20.1 mpg, 20.3 mpg, and 20.2 mpg, respectively. These manufacturers earned CAFE incentives for the sale of alternative fuel vehicles. These incentives raised their CAFE values to the figures shown above.
In MY 2002, the sales weighted fleet average CAFE for import passenger cars decreased by 0.3 mpg below the MY 2001 CAFE level to 28.7 mpg. Eight of the 16 import car manufacturers increased their CAFE values between MYs 2001 and 2002. Figure II-1 illustrates the changes in total new passenger car fleet CAFE from MY 1978 to MY 2002.
The total sales weighted light truck fleet CAFE increased 0.4 mpg above the MY 2001 CAFE level of 20.9 mpg (see Table II-2). For MY 2002, CAFE values increased above MY 2001 values for six of 12 light truck manufacturers’ fleets. These six companies accounted for 83.3 percent of the total MY 2002 light truck production. Figure II-2 illustrates the trends in total light truck fleet CAFE from MY 1979 to MY 2002.
Five passenger car (BMW, DaimlerChrysler import, Fiat, Lotus, and Porsche) and two light truck manufacturers (BMW and Volkswagen) are projected to fail to achieve the levels of the MY 2002 CAFE standards. Some MY 2002 CAFE values may change when final figures are provided to NHTSA by EPA in 2003. In addition, several manufacturers are not expected to pay civil penalties because the credits they earned by exceeding the fuel economy standards in earlier years offset later shortfalls. Other manufacturers may file carryback plans to demonstrate that they anticipate earning credits in future model years to offset current deficits.
CAFE levels may be impacted because of changes made to a manufacturer’s vehicle fleet. Changes that occur such as an increase or decrease in vehicle weights, manufacturer’s use of materials like high- and medium-strength steel, plastic and plastic composites, or aluminum to build its vehicles, market-mix shifts due to changes in consumer demand, and the use of advanced technology may potentially impact CAFE levels.
B. Characteristics of the MY 2002 Passenger Car Fleet
The characteristics of the MY 2002 passenger car fleet reflect a continuing trend toward satisfying consumer demand for heavier cars. (See Table II-3.) Compared with MY 2001, the average curb weight for MY 2002 decreased by 16 pounds for the domestic fleet and increased by 47 pounds for the import fleet. The average curb weight for the total fleet of passenger cars increased from 3,148 pounds in MY 2001 to 3,159 pounds in MY 2002, primarily because of the average curb weight increase for the import fleet. Average engine displacement decreased from 179 to 175 cubic inches for domestic passenger cars and increased from 148 to 152 cubic inches for import passenger cars from MY 2001 to MY 2002. Overall, the average engine displacement increased from 165 to 166 cubic inches. From MY 2001 to MY 2002, horsepower/100 pounds, a measure of vehicle performance, increased from 5.35 to 5.44 for domestic passenger cars and from 5.24 to 5.36 for import passenger cars. The total fleet average for passenger cars increased from 5.30 horsepower/100 pounds in MY 2001 to 5.41 in MY 2002.
The 0.3 mpg CAFE improvement for the MY 2002 domestic passenger car fleet may be attributed in part to increased use of automatic transmissions with four or more forward speeds.
| TOTAL FLEET |
DOMESTIC |
IMPORT |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHARACTERISTICS |
2001 |
2002 |
2001 |
22002 |
2001 |
2002 |
|
| Fleet Average Fuel Economy, mpg |
28.8 |
28.9 |
28.7 |
29.0 |
29.0 |
28.7 |
|
| Fleet Average Curb Weight, lbs. |
3148 |
3159 |
3167 |
3151 |
3124 |
3171 |
|
| Fleet Average Equivalent Test Weight, lbs. |
3445 |
3454 |
3461 |
3443 |
3426 |
3479 |
|
| Fleet Average Engine Displacement, cu. in. |
165 |
166 |
179 |
175 |
148 |
152 |
|
| Fleet Average Horsepower/Weight ratio, HP/100 lbs. |
5.30 |
5.41 |
5.35 |
5.44 |
5.24 |
5.36 |
|
| % of Fleet |
100 |
100 |
55.2 |
60.3 |
44.8 |
39.7 |
|
| Segmentation by EPA Size Class, % |
|||||||
| Two-Seater |
1.5 |
1.6 |
0.8 |
1.3 |
2.4 |
2.0 |
|
| Minicompact |
1.0 |
1.4 |
0.0 |
0.4 |
2.1 |
3.1 |
|
| Subcompact* |
8.1 |
8.3 |
8.0 |
8.1 |
8.3 |
8.6 |
|
| Compact* |
40.0 |
37.1 |
36.9 |
35.4 |
43.7 |
39.6 |
|
| Mid-Size* |
32.4 |
36.2 |
26.6 |
30.3 |
39.6 |
45.0 |
|
| Large* |
17.0 |
15.5 |
27.7 |
24.6 |
3.8 |
1.7 |
|
| Diesel Engines |
0.27 |
0.38 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.6 |
1.0 |
|
| Turbo or Supercharged Engines |
3.9 |
4.3 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
7.93 |
7.82 |
|
| Fuel Injection |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
|
| Front-Wheel Drive |
84.5 |
83.8 |
89.9 |
91.1 |
78.0 |
72.7 |
|
| Automatic Transmissions |
87.4 |
87.9 |
92.0 |
91.5 |
81.7 |
82.5 |
|
| Automatic Transmissions with Lockup Clutches |
99.3 |
99.6 |
99.6 |
100.0 |
98.9 |
98.8 |
|
| Automatic Transmissions with Four or more Forward Speeds |
95.5 |
98.4 |
94.3 |
98.4 |
97.2 |
98.3 |
|
| % Electric |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
0.0 |
|
*Includes associated station wagons.
The size/class breakdown shows an increased trend primarily toward two-seater, minicompact, subcompact, and mid-size passenger cars with the reduction of compact and large passenger cars for the overall fleet. The size/class mix in the domestic fleet showed an increase in two-seater, minicompact, subcompact, and mid-size passenger cars and a decrease in compact and large passenger cars. The size/class mix in the import fleet showed an increase in minicompact, subcompact, and mid-size passenger cars and a decrease in two-seater, compact, and large passenger cars. The domestic share of the passenger car market increased 5.1 percentage points in MY 2002 to over 60 percent of the market.
The import fleet rose above its MY 2001 level in the share of diesel engines. Diesel engines were offered on certain Mercedes and Volkswagen models during MY 2002. The share of diesel engines in the import fleet increased from 0.6 percent in MY 2001 to 1.0 percent in MY 2002.
Passenger car fleet average characteristics have changed significantly since MY 1978 (the first year of fuel economy standards). (See Table II-4.) After an initial trend in weight loss (from MY 1978 to MY 1982, the average passenger car fleet curb weight decreased from 3,349 to 2,808 pounds), the curb weight stabilized between 2,800 and 3,161 pounds. However, since MY 1993, the average passenger car fleet curb weight has steadily increased and has reached a level only exceeded by the initial two years of the CAFE program. The average horsepower to weight ratio (hp/100 lb.) of the passenger car fleet has increased each year since 1981. The average horsepower to weight ratio for MY 2002 passenger car was 5.41, compared to the average of 3.43 in MY 1981. Table II-4 shows that the MY 2002 passenger car fleet has nearly equal interior volume and more than 45 percent better CAFE than the MY 1978 fleet. (See Figure II-3.)
|
Model |
Fuel
Economy |
Curb
Weight |
Equivalent |
Interior
Space |
Engine |
Horsepower/Curb
Weight |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1978 |
19.9 |
3349 |
3627 |
112 |
260 |
3.68 |
||
|
1979 |
20.3 |
3180 |
3481 |
110 |
238 |
3.72 |
||
|
1980 |
24.3 |
2867 |
3162 |
105 |
187 |
3.51 |
||
|
1981 |
25.9 |
2883 |
3154 |
108 |
182 |
3.43 |
||
|
1982 |
26.6 |
2808 |
3098 |
107 |
173 |
3.47 |
||
|
1983 |
26.4 |
2908 |
3204 |
109 |
182 |
3.57 |
||
|
1984 |
26.9 |
2878 |
3170 |
108 |
178 |
3.66 |
||
|
1985 |
27.6 |
2867 |
3177 |
108 |
177 |
3.84 |
||
|
1986 |
28.2 |
2821 |
3127 |
106 |
169 |
3.89 |
||
|
1987 |
28.5 |
2805 |
3100 |
109 |
162 |
3.98 |
||
|
1988 |
28.8 |
2831 |
3100 |
108 |
161 |
4.11 |
||
|
1989 |
28.4 |
2879 |
3181 |
109 |
163 |
4.22 |
||
|
1990 |
28.0 |
2906 |
3192 |
108 |
162 |
4.53 |
||
|
1991 |
28.4 |
2934 |
3229 |
108 |
164 |
4.42 |
||
|
1992 |
27.9 |
3007 |
3307 |
109 |
169 |
4.56 |
||
|
1993 |
28.4 |
2980 |
3328 |
109 |
166 |
4.64 |
||
|
1994 |
28.3 |
3012 |
3318 |
109 |
169 |
4.79 |
||
|
1995 |
28.6 |
3047 |
3335 |
109 |
166 |
4.87 |
||
|
1996 |
28.5 |
3049 |
3352 |
109 |
165 |
4.93 |
||
|
1997 |
28.7 |
3068 |
3362 |
109 |
163 |
4.94 |
||
|
1998 |
28.8 |
3075 |
3372 |
109 |
161 |
5.05 |
||
|
1999 |
28.3 |
3116 |
||||||