World Auto Steel General Presentation 20090630


Published on

This is a presentation that talks about WorldAutoSteel\'s position on vehicle emissions and what we\'re doing about it.

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • NOTE TO MEMBERS: Please reference the WorldAutoSteel Brand Guidelines (see extranet, WorldAutoSteel Communications) for placement of member logos on interior pages. (Greeting / Acknowledgements) __________ I am here on behalf of WorldAutoSteel.
  • I want to briefly tell you about reinventing automotive steel to reduce weight and to mitigate automotive greenhouse gas emissions while maintaining steel’s outstanding safety and affordability.
  • WorldAutoSteel is the automotive group of the World Steel Association. We are a consortium of eighteen major steel companies from around the world who supply the global automotive market. Our members engage in the research and development, technical exchange and strategic direction of the global automotive/steel communities. The work that you will see in this presentation is a result of their investment and support.
  • In this presentation, we will cover three topics. The 1st is to explain how the global steel industry has been reinventing automotive steel with new Advanced High-Strength Steel (AHSS) grades along with clever design optimization to achieve dramatic mass (weight) reduction in automotive structures which leads to a very positive environmental or climate change impact . The 2nd topic, and main focus of this presentation, is to make the point that the environmental impact of automotive material decisions must be evaluated in a life cycle assessment or “LCA” context. You will see that IF decisions are not based on total life cycle data the end result can lead to unintended consequences . The 3rd presentation topic is to show automotive steel’s innovation for the future and introduce the Future Steel Vehicle programme..
  • As we start, let me point out what we mean by Advanced High-Strength Steels. (Click) AHSS grades such as Dual Phase, TRIP, and Martensitic Steels provide unique characteristics because they are very high strength, and yet can be easily formed to make complex automotive parts. Research is underway (Click) to develop next generation AHSS grades that are even stronger and more formable. This area of research moves toward (Click) the Austenitic-Based Steels. Projects sponsored by WorldAutoSteel and prior consortiums such as ULSAB developed well-documented design and material application concepts that utilize the new AHSS grades to squeeze all fat out of automotive structures and replace it with high-strength steel muscle . WorldAutoSteel also sponsored benchmarking studies to compare weight reduction potential and environmental impacts of AHSS and competing materials.
  • To talk about recent study results and mass reduction comparisons, we must first define what is the basis for comparison. People often make comparisons to “steel” designs – whereby they mean a former, mild steel, conventional design. Therefore, we use that baseline definition here as well. Fka , the automotive engineering services company associated with Aachen University in Germany, conducted a mass reduction study that provides comparisons between steel and aluminium body-in-white designs. The findings show . . ( click) that optimized advanced high-strength steel designs have demonstrated 17 to 25 percent mass savings relative to ‘baseline’ designs. And, this change from conventional steel to AHSS does not drive up costs . ( click ) The Fka study also shows that aluminium body structures have demonstrated mass savings between 21 and 40 percent relative to ‘baseline’ steel designs and that aluminium designs can provide 10 to 20 percent mass savings relative to AHSS designs with the average near the low side of that range at only 11%. At the same time, the use of aluminium structures can significantly increase costs. This design optimization and mass reduction is important . . . BECAUSE . . . it has a significant effect on the environment .
  • We know that climate change is a critical issue and that our continued success across all industries is contingent on improving environmental performance. It’s that simple. In the next few minutes I would like to talk about how mass reduction with steel improves automotive environmental performance . In addition , I want us to look at two viewpoints of how to measure that performance.
  • The short answer to the question, “What is steel doing?”, is this: Steel is reinventing itself to lower the GHG output of cars and trucks at little or no additional cost to automotive manufacturers or consumers. New grades of AHSS from steel companies around the globe provide lighter, optimized body designs that enable improved vehicle crashworthiness , improved fuel economy and lower total greenhouse gas emissions .
  • Here is what it looks like for steel to reinvent itself from conventional steel to Advanced High-Strength Steel optimized designs? For a typical 5 passenger compact vehicle, evidence shows that replacing former conventional steel designs with optimized AHSS designs will, on average, gain: 25% reduction of body structure weight 9% reduction of the vehicle weight 5% reduced fuel consumption 6% reduced lifecycle GHG emissions And, all this is accomplished with little or no increase in total system costs.
  • One of the challenges concerning automotive emission regulations is to achieve the intended control without creating unintended consequences or unexpected results . Climate change and energy concerns prompt increased fuel efficiency standards or tailpipe emission regulations. And we certainly agree that Improving fuel economy and reducing tailpipe emissions during the “use” phase of a vehicle is very important . However , the “use” phase represents only part of the total emissions associated with a vehicle throughout its life. A more comprehensive evaluation can be achieved if all phases of a vehicle’s life are considered – from materials production through the end-of-life disposal. We feel strongly that both approaches—tailpipe emission regulations and life cycle assessment—have usefulness in looking at the issue of GHG emissions.
  • This slide simply illustrates the total life cycle – from raw materials out the ground, through material production, vehicle production, vehicle use and, finally, end-of-life recycling and disposal.
  • A recent study by Dr. Roland Geyer at the University of California Santa Barbara developed a very good comparison model for use in evaluating GHG emissions related to automotive materials. Hereafter we refer to this university as UCSB. The study methodology and model have been validated by an ISO Critical Review Panel.
  • The UCSB model utilizes the previously described mass reduction data and scientifically compares differences in life cycle GHG emissions resulting from different material choices and vehicle design assumptions. This slide shows the basic elements of the model covering the full vehicle life cycle to thoroughly analyze greenhouse gas emissions on a comparative basis.
  • The model is in an Excel spreadsheet format that is freely available . It is a very thorough , but yet very user friendly model. This screen shot shows the model ‘results’ page. This model has been well tested and shown to completely reproduce results from other life cycle assessment studies.
  • Now, let’s look graphically at how the UCSB Model calculates GHG emissions (left, ‘y’ axis) over the total vehicle life cycle (bottom, ‘x’ axis). Here we show ( click) a conventional steel vehicle (represented by the blue line), an ( click) Advanced High-Strength Steel vehicle (represented by the orange line) and ( click) an aluminium vehicle (represented by the gray line) during only the ‘use’ phase or the driving life of a vehicle. Reducing the weight of the vehicle by going from conventional steel to Advanced High-Strength Steel reduces use phase GHG emissions and, of course, reducing the vehicle weight even further with aluminium further reduces the use phase emissions.
  • There is more to the story of total life cycle GHG emissions however. ( click) Here is a picture of drastically different levels of GHG emissions from the material production stage of competing automotive materials. Please notice that all of our GHG data is shown in Carbon Dioxide Equivalents (CO2 eq) which includes carbon dioxide plus the carbon dioxide equivalent of other emissions such as PFCs. Material production for alternative material vehicles will load the environment with significantly more GHG emissions than that of a steel vehicle.
  • Now, let’s look at the total impact on the environment instead of only tailpipe emissions during the use phase. (Explain Conventional Steel versus AHSS) First ( click) conventional steel . . . Then, ( click) AHSS and reduced GHG.
  • (Explain – re-draw same AHSS lines (orange) and ( click) compare aluminium with AHSS) ( click) As a point of reference for later slides, I will put bars here to represent the total life cycle emissions of the Advanced High Strength Steel vehicle (in orange) and ( click) the aluminium vehicle (in gray). It seems logical enough then that auto companies would embrace an LCA approach. However , many existing or proposed government-driven regulations address the use phase only. Use-phase only regulations can lead auto manufacturers to select GHG intensive materials that may improve the use phase but increase the total life cycle greenhouse gasses. In other words – leading to unintended consequences or wrong choices from the planet’s point of view .
  • The two bars at the left are the same reference bars shown on the previous slide comparing an AHSS intensive vehicle and an aluminum intensive vehicle. As we move to the right with the comparison bars, you see that significant improvements in reducing automotive GHG emissions will not be made by material substitution alone. The material impact stays the same because we assume exactly the same vehicle structure with only different powertrains and fuel. ( click) The other comparison bars show the cumulative impact of upcoming technologies. The use of advanced powertrains (such as hybrids and fuel cells) and more efficient fuels (such as grain and cellulose ethanol) can result in a dramatic reduction in the use phase emissions. The material impacts stay the same. The use phase changes dramatically due to powertrain and fuel changes. As technologies that improve vehicle fuel efficiency are implemented, the emissions from material production becomes relatively more important in the total life cycle. For example, compare the first set of bars with and the last set of bars. ( click) When new technologies are utilized, GHG emissions from the materials production phase grow in relative proportion from 9% to 18% of the total because the use phase emissions are reduced. This places greater emphasis on selecting low GHG-intensive materials such as steel.
  • So, let’s summarize the conclusions from this Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) information: It is a “no regrets” decision to change from former conventional steel designs to optimized AHSS designs, since there are no significant trade offs required. From a rigorous scientific point of view, it is erroneous to claim that aluminium intensive vehicles produce less greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than steel intensive vehicles. Production of steel causes significantly less greenhouse gasses emissions than does production of aluminium. As fuel efficiency and powertrain improvements reduce use phase GHG emissions, it is critical to choose materials that not only reduce weight in vehicle structures for use phase savings, but that are cleaner in the materials manufacturing phase as well.
  • Now, I will close with an introduction of how WorldAutoSteel member companies are providing innovation for the future with a bold and far-reaching new initiative. As global automotive steel continues to re-invent itself – like I have been describing – we also want to position steel for the future. To that end, WorldAutoSteel has begun a multi-million dollar new initiative called Future Steel Vehicle . This new initiative will develop steel auto body concepts that address alternative powertrains such as advanced hybrid, electric, and fuel cell systems. The goal of the research is to demonstrate safe, light weight steel bodies for future vehicles that reduce GHG emissions over the entire life cycle. Future Steel Vehicle consists of 3 phases over as many years: Phase 1 includes an Engineering Study; Phase 2 will develop Concept Designs; and Phase 3 will build Demonstration Hardware.
  • WorldAutoSteel commissioned the EDAG Engineering + Design AG, headquartered in Fulda, Germany to complete the first phase Engineering Study. Development work will be based at EDAG’s Auburn Hills, Michigan, USA facility. Phase 1 will examine changes affected by new powertrain systems that may radically change the structure of automobiles and will provide input for Phase 2 design concepts.
  • (explain outline of Phase 1 contents)
  • Future Steel Vehicle is the fifth in a series of global auto steel research projects. The previous four – UltraLight Steel Auto Body, known as ULSAB, (click) UltraLight Steel Auto Closures, (click) Suspensions, and (click) ULSAB-AVC (Advanced Vehicle Concepts), represented over sixty million dollars in steel industry investment. These programs demonstrated the application of new steel grades, design techniques and manufacturing technologies that significantly reduced vehicle weight while improving safety and performance and maintaining affordability. (click) Future Steel Vehicle focuses on radical change in the future and is further evidence of the steel industry’s commitment to solutions that benefit the environment, automakers and end consumers. We are proud to take this positive step for the sake of our planet.
  • Thank you very much for your attention.
  • World Auto Steel General Presentation 20090630

    1. 1. Reinventing Steel Reinventing Steel (Presenter Name) (Conference Name-Location) (date) Member Logo
    2. 2. Reinventing Steel Reinventing Steel Mass Reduction and Climate Change Mitigation Member Logo
    3. 3. <ul><li>WorldAutoSteel </li></ul>Automotive Group of the World Steel Association MEMBER COMPANIES: Ansteel Hyundai-Steel Sumitomo ArcelorMittal Kobe ThyssenKrupp Baosteel Nippon Steel USIMINAS China Steel NUCOR U.S. Steel Corus-Tata POSCO voestalpine JFE Severstal
    4. 4. <ul><li>Presentation Topics </li></ul><ul><li>Reinventing Automotive Steel </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Advanced High Strength Steels (AHSS) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Design Optimization & Mass Reduction </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Climate Change Impact </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) </li></ul><ul><li>Innovation for the Future </li></ul>
    5. 5. Re-Inventing Automotive Steel Advanced High Strength Steels (AHSS)
    6. 6. Recent Study Results Re-Inventing Automotive Steel Optimized Design and Mass Reduction Baseline: former, mild steel design Optimized Advanced High Strength (AHSS) design Optimized aluminium design -21 to 40% -17 to 25% Avg Diff -11%
    7. 7. Climate change is a critical issue . . .
    8. 8. . . . and steel is part of the solution Advanced High-Strength Steel & Optimized Design <ul><li>Mass-efficient designs </li></ul><ul><li>Improved crashworthiness </li></ul><ul><li>Improved fuel economy </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced GHG emissions </li></ul><ul><li>Affordability </li></ul>
    9. 9. Advanced High-Strength Steel (AHSS) vs. Conventional Steel Little or no system cost increase BIW Mass Curb Mass Fuel Usage LCA GHG Emissions Steel is successfully reinventing itself BIW Cost -25% -9% -5.1% -5.7%
    10. 10. Challenge concerning automotive regulations Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to avoid unintended consequences Tailpipe emission regulations – yes, but only part of the story An important metric
    11. 11. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) Disposal Material Production Production Use and Maintenance Recycling Raw Material Extraction
    12. 12. <ul><li>Validated Model: ISO Critical Review Panel: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>2 university professors (Japan, U.S.) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Automotive manufacturer (U.S.) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>International Aluminium Institute (Europe) </li></ul></ul>Dr. Roland Geyer The Donald Bren School of Environmental Science and Management University of California at Santa Barbara LCA / GHG Comparison Model Life Cycle GHG Comparison Analysis
    13. 13. Impact of material choices on total life cycle GHG: Recent Study Results Life Cycle GHG Comparison Analysis – UCSB Model Material Choices Vehicle Use Greenhouse Gases Greenhouse Gases Materials Production Vehicle Manufacturing Greenhouse Gases Recycling & Disposal Greenhouse Gases
    14. 14. UCSB Model: User Friendly and Available
    15. 15. Use Phase greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: Importance of Life Cycle Assessment Use Phase: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Use Phase Vehicle use – Driven distance (GHG) CO 2 eq AHSS Conv. Steel Aluminium “ Use” GHG reduction and more
    16. 16. Material production greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: Importance of Life Cycle Assessment Steel AHSS Aluminium Magnesium (electrolysis) Magnesium (pigeon) Carbon FRP Current Average GHG Emissions Primary Production GHG from Production (in kg CO 2 eq/kg of material) 40 – 45 2.3 – 2.7 2.3 – 2.7 21 – 23 18 – 24.8 13.9 – 15.5
    17. 17. Material & production End-of-life recycling credits Vehicle use – Driven distance (GHG) CO 2 eq Total life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: AHSS Importance of Life Cycle Assessment STEEL RE-INVENTS ITSELF Conventional steel vs. AHSS Conventional Steel Conv. Steel Total Life Total GHG reduction AHSS
    18. 18. Material & production End-of-life recycling credits (GHG) CO 2 eq Total life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: AHSS Importance of Life Cycle Assessment AHSS vs. aluminium Aluminium Vehicle use – Driven distance INCREASED TOTAL GHG AHSS Alum Total Life
    19. 19. Effect of powertrain and fuel efficiency improvements Importance of Life Cycle Assessment Source: UCSB Model 9% 10% 12% 13% 18%
    20. 20. Summary <ul><ul><li>Changing former conventional steel designs to optimized AHSS designs is a “no regrets” decision (no significant trade offs between weight, cost and emissions savings). </li></ul></ul>Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) - Conclusions <ul><ul><li>It is erroneous to claim that aluminium intensive vehicles produce less greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than steel intensive vehicles. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Changing former conventional steel designs to optimized AHSS designs is a “no regrets” decision (no significant trade offs between weight, cost and emissions savings). </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Production of steel causes significantly less greenhouse gas than does aluminium - and, none of the potent perfluorocarbons (PFCs). </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>It is erroneous to claim that aluminium intensive vehicles produce less greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than steel intensive vehicles. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>As powertrain & fuel technology reduce greenhouse gas emissions of the vehicle use phase, it is critical to choose materials that are also cleaner in the manufacturing phase. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Production of steel causes significantly less greenhouse gas than does aluminium - and, none of the potent perfluorocarbons (PFCs). </li></ul></ul>
    21. 21. New Global Steel Project: Future Steel Vehicle Lighter Stronger Fewer GHG Emissions
    22. 22. <ul><li>EDAG Eng’r’g + Design AG Fulda, Germany </li></ul><ul><li>Based at EDAG’s Auburn Hills, MI, USA facility </li></ul><ul><li>Engineering Team Members: </li></ul><ul><li> Quantum – Irvin, CA, USA </li></ul><ul><li> Tongji SFCV – Shanghai, China </li></ul><ul><li> Advanced Lithium Power – Canada </li></ul><ul><li> ETA – Detroit, USA </li></ul><ul><li> Schuler – Germany & USA </li></ul><ul><li>Examines structure changes due to new powertrain systems </li></ul>Future Steel Vehicle Part I – Engineering Study:
    23. 23. Future Steel Vehicle – Phase 1 Engineering Study OEM’s Directions Trends Phase 1 Deliverables Vehicle Package VTS (Vehicle Tech Spec) Plug-in hybrid Fuel cell hybrid Electrical vehicle Benchmarking Size and type of vehicle (2020) Performance NA-Europe-Asia (EDAG, Germany, India & China) Technology Assessment Latest auto technologies Low friction tires Light weight Glass Seats LED Lighting & Displays Technology Assessment Batteries Wheel motors Drive by wire Fuel cell Hydrogen storage and infrastructure (Corland Study?) E85 and bio-diesel Styling / CFD CAE Future (2020) safety and structural: Performance requirements Future CO2/fuel efficiency requirements Environmental Impact CO 2 greenhouse gasses Well to wheel efficiency Life cycle assessment Energy sources and usage CO 2 sequestration Drive Train Module Technical Specs Quantum SFCV / Tongij IISI Existing and Ongoing Programs ULSAB ULSAC ULSAS ULSAB-AVC FPC Weight Compounding-ASD Light Weight AHSS Body Structure Concepts and New Opportunities for Steel Structural Optimization
    24. 24. Steel industry’s ongoing commitment ULSAB UltraLight Steel Auto Body ULSAS UltraLight Steel Auto Suspensions ULSAB-AVC Advanced Vehicle Concepts Future Steel Vehicle RADICAL CHANGE ULSAC UltraLight Steel Auto Closures ULSAB UltraLight Steel Auto Body ULSAS UltraLight Steel Auto Suspensions ULSAB-AVC Advanced Vehicle Concepts
    25. 25. Strong, Safe, Sustainable Thank you for your attention