AIAIVI The World?s Leading Automakers? Chairman T. ELLIOTT Honda Vice Chairman Commercial Affairs GAGNON Mitsubishi Vice Chairman Technical Affairs G. MULLER Subaru Secretary D. CHASIN 8 Saab Treasurer F. Hyundai Daewoo Honda Acura Hyundai Isuzu Kia Mitsubishi Nissan Infiniti Peugeot Renault Saab Subaru Suzuki Toyota Lexus President T. Da? Theie'slusilao Mamie lose 5/30/00 . TO: AIAM Environment Energy Subcommittee FROM: John M. Cabaniss, Jr. Director, Environment Energy RE: ENVIRONMENTAL ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE - Congressional Briefing on Air Pollution, Global Warming, and Petroleum Security - May 18, 2000 On May 18, 2000, the Environmental Energy Institute sponsored a Congressional briefing entitled Air Pollution, Global Warming, and Petroleum Security: ls Vehicle Technology the Answer? Attached is the notice for the meeting and copies of the presentations by John German of Honda and John DeCicco of American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURERS, INC. 1001 19TH ST. NORTH I SUITE 1200 I ARLINGTON, VA 22209 I TELEPHONE 703.525.7788 I FAX 703.525.8817 INTERNET: AIAM-055618 AIAM-055619 ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE mum l l ll l CmeEma 122 swanw, Sum: 700 war-{momma 20001 a 202423-1400 a EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Air Pollution, Global Warming and Petroleum Security: Is Vehicle Technology the Answer? Thursday, May 18, 2000, 3:30 - 5:00 p.m. 1539 Longworth House Of?ce Building EESI invites you to a Congressional brie?ng on the technology revolution taking place in the automobile industry. While Congress and the Administration continue to debate and promulgate new laws and regulations that affect automobiles, questions arise regarding how new technologies might transform the future of cars and trucks. This brie?ng is being sponsored in conjunction with the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association (NESEA) American Tour de Sol, the national championship for electric vehicles. The Tour displays dozens of the latest ?green? vehicles that will travel from New York City to Washington, showcasing some of the best electric and hybrid?electric vehicles in the world. This is the twelfth anniversary of the NESEA American Tour de Sol, a challenging real?world demonstration for automakers and students from the best universities and high schools around the country. The road rally ends Thursday, May 18 in Washington, DC on the Mall near the US. Capitol. Displays and ride-and-drives of the vehicles will be available. . Fundamental technology changes in the automobile are taking place right now that would have been inconceivable even ?ve or tens years ago. Jack Smith, CEO of General Motors has stated ?No car company will be able .to thrive in the 21St century if it relies solely on the internal combustion engine.? A Wall Street Journal article stated ?Automakers. . .have reached a surprising consensus on an idea deemed heretical not long ago: A fundamental shift in engine technology is needed.? Now billions of dollars are being invested in fuel cells, hybrids?electric drivetrains and advanced energy storage devices. Several key federal policies will both impact and be impacted by this unknown future. Some of these major federal policies include the: 0 Clean Air Act: Achieve federal standards for healthy air, establish state and regional implementation plans, and establish vehicle emissions standards. (over) AIAM-055620 0 Energy Policy Act: Reduce oil imports by 10% by the year 2000, and 30% by 2010, require purchase of vehicles that are ?substantially non?petroleum.? 0 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards: Establish miles per gallon corporate averages for passenger cars (27 mpg) and light trucks (20.7 mpg, includes sport utilities, pickup trucks and minivans) that are technically feasibility, economically practical and conserve energy. 0 Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles: Partnership with the federal government and domestic automakers to produce a production prototype vehicle that achieves up to three times the or CAFE standard. 0 Climate Change Action Plan: Stabilize greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2000. Kyoto Protocol: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2008?2012. 0 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21): Fund highway, transit, safety, and environmental transportation programs. What are the promising future vehicle technologies? How fast will they penetrate the market? What impacts do they have on air pollution, oil dependence and greenhouse gas emissions? What is the role of the federal government? These questions will be addressed at the brie?ng by experts from across the country. The brie?ng panelists will include: 0 John German, manager, Environmental and Energy Analysis, American Honda Motor Co., Inc.; 0 John DeCicco, senior researcher, American Council for an Energy?Efficient Economy; 0 Nancy Hazard, director, American Tour De Sol, Northeast Sustainable Energy Association and 0 Christopher Borroni?Bird, Advanced Technology Research Development Group, The brie?ng is open to the public and reservations are not required. For more information, contact Beth Bleil at (202) 662?1886 or by email at bbleil@eesi.org. Please check out our website at . This brie?ng is part of series in support of Earth Day 2000! EESI . . . Seeking Innovative Environmental and Energy Solutions AIAM-055621 Current and Future Vehicle Technology John German Manager, Environmental and Energy Analyses American Honda Motor Co., Inc. AIAM-055622 . it: Futur Powerplant Issues I Alternative fuels Global C02 reduction Emission reduction Air CO, HC, SOCIAL PRIORITY poHu?on Honda is the Industry Leader in Clean and Efficient Vehicles Highest CAFE of major OEMs Technically advanced F.E. leading models in the market - Popular mass-market models with continual efficiency improvement 1 AIAM-055623 vironmental Leading Produ ?it 7 V7, 3&4, PRODUCT NOTES EM FE C02 AFV Civic LEV igl?sotine LEV Civic HX Top FE with AT Honda Top CAFE of Major OEMs LEV Expansion Voluntary Expansion Accord ULEV Wasotine ULEV EV PLUS annced Battery Civic GX (NGV) SULEV Cleanest ICE in World ZLEV Announcement Cleanest Gasoline EIM Accord SULEV 1Wsoline SULEV Insight Wybrid Sticking it on a Honda LEV would be redundant. Of course. ?hon J'l comes in a healthv there?s nothing mung with a little repetition. limuiult?l; we're not altim- in this thinking. far; out one million Houdini have been sold with law emissim whining}; and mnli' than 85% of all our new \vliiLlca art: either LliV or bent?: This commitment [0 than air really took off in V373 when our Ciu?c (ZVCC beam: the {Int car without a catalytic l0 ?imply with ottiissiorts standards sci by the Uh (,?Ivnn Air Act. WV haw t?onn?ntk-d our cll'ort: With result). For cniltiplc. in I993. m: voluntarily nxltitccl smog: contributing by 70% and lxrcatrw the first to maxi (hlil'nmizt's strict lmv-Dnission Vehicle 1 .liVl \land?trll. 'l?nday. (.Talilomia Air Board has lust kitted an even stricter cmisximn \lantlard for 2004: Super Ultra LIYW l?misskn \?cltit?lc (SULEV), Naturally. \w'w decided not to wait The Accord SULEV m'll be the (uni [?LJMullk? pm crud Vl?hl?k? in meet this standout is now in Cttlikimid. looks iikt: its timt' :0 tint! ti for the bumper of yutit' l-lonth. HONDA lhinking. 2 AIAM-055624 .. ?CIVIC GX 1l10?h LEV REFUELING sion Advantages (NM ?own; 7 - 06) 2V EVAPORATIVE have virtually no evaporative emissions have minimal marketing/refueling emissions Wellhead .. 1? i-m- f' GREET 14 model developed by Argonne Lab University of Chicago inputs to the model listed below. GHG and Emission Benefit Relative to Conventional Gasoline Fleet, -1 00% 430% 450% 40% 0 Tyniical cue .. . -- - DOE GREET1.4 model used to calculate emission reductions, with assumptions stated below: - Civic GX estimates based on EPA -49? - ?3 6? 2-979; WW combined F.E. discounted 15%. and emissions at 1/10 ULEV (on and off 0 cycle . - CNS and gasoline baselines are GREET near term ?eet assumptions. with F.E. values also discounted Nox 15%. *Greater reductions available Baseline Conventional Gasoline Vehicle depending on local infrastructure (eg. compressor emissions). 3 AIAM-055625 2000 MY ccoasline SULEV n~ ?1 1? Mu; - SULEV Accord introduced in California February 2000 - Needs California fuel for SULEV levels Elements buildinq on ULEV Advanced engine start air/fuel control Stable, lean combustion - Ignition retard during fast idle - Faster catalyst lightoff . ?Predictive? air/fuel control Advanced catalyst formulation 1200 cell/inz 7 VEHICLE FUTURE PROSPECTS (in grams of reactive hydrocarbon emissions per mlle driven) - Oxygen sensors introduced I Advanced 21st Century Technology Vehicle Emissions Levels (FTP) Honda ZLEV L5 Typical Honda Gasoline Honda Honda Cuncnl Honda Honda Honda Civic Prololypc EV PLUS Fuel Cell US Car Accord/Civic Accord Accord CX NGV Vehicle Elccuic Vehicles Ticrl LEV ULEV SULEV (ltrolcvel) (Zero level) Vchiclc Zero level] I 0-41 1 {.ng 0.075 0.04 0.01 <0.004 <0.004 ZERO ZERO 1960 1970 1975 1990 2000 LEV ULEVSULEV Practically Zero?>1 4 AIAM-055626 HOnda?s Fuel Economy Leading Products ?ta?mt . . . xx -x Product Transmission Model City FE Highway Year label FE label CRX HF manual 1985 49 54 CRX HF manual 1988 49 52 Civic HB VX manual 1992 48 55 Civic HX manual 1996 39 45 CVT (auto) 1996 35 39 Insight manual 2000 61 70 1992 ?01995 Civic Il\ '11: Mill (mum! Im a. why h- m-xtk-l s: Alxilnlm - mil .1 ll! low! a manage Illc Ncw( ,chK 5 AIAM-055627 - Efficient power train technology applications - Incremental weight reduction advancements - Advanced incremental technology applications (CVT, lean-burn, VTEC, etc.) . HIGHER EFFICIENCY - LOWER EMISSIONS Es: Application 50? - 6 AIAM-055628 m, Average Smog?Forming and Global Warming Emissions Smog-Forming Emissions CO2 Emissions Automaker HC g/mi) (COZ?equivalent gases) 0' Best Overall Cars Trucks Overall Cars Trucks Worst 0.99 n/ad 0.99 599 n/a 599 0.86 0.61 0.99 570 453 624 Ford 0.82 0.61 1.00 558 465 637 General Motors 0.78 0.63 0.99 521 460 607 BMW 0.62 0.62 n/a 504 504 n/a Mitsubishi 0.70 0.95 456 431 569 Nbsan 066 060 079 473 422 577 Toyota 0.65 0.55 0.83 464 420 545 Vomswagen 066 066 nm 446 446 nm Subaru 0.59 0.59 n/a 464 464 n/a Honda Best 0.45 0.43 409 402 679 l?ion Lineup. 1998 Tested F.E. EPA COMBINED HIGHWAY (label) (label) 75 80 7 AIAM-055629 Main Technical Elements (Engine?and Motor Assist) 9 New 1 elite:- Nioke! Meta: Battery . .nn] - LEE Exit: Q: 9 Lg- - ea 2:32: ;l :9 -?ggt?izzmj Compact Permaner?xfi?i?v?mg?g?i vie-52:35:; he world's lowest fuel consumption with a mass-produced gasoline- powered vehicle (CITY) Uzi-u - Power regeneration - Edie stop ,wwMOtosj-easSESt . {34? Reduced - improved combustion Lean-bum With adSorber - ef?g?oo Weight reduction - AerodyriamiCs Low toning. . resustanca tires Aieumin'um bed)! I Civic~30156~lifef 8 AIAM-055630 It?s an environmental movement all by itself. HOW many can docs ll lo (ha-inc the \wrkl,? lust um: [nlruducing {he Him-1L1 It} Arm-lion first giwliix: ckruru' hybrid aummthilsn Nothing shun of an engineering new lm?lght liz?hicmx' an munnuling 7(1 miles pu? on Ehlf highway; (1i mikrs put guilt?! in the k" g. (011.3 .i plug-nunwml 700111119 Hinge on one rank of fuel? How? Simply combining an c?icxcm {lime-cylinder gasoline engine wuh an electric motor that?s pom-red [23" 111(ka mvlal lx'illcrim ?'hELh need be plugged in. ?it-II mid lghmuighl body. and .1 world- class .?quulvnamic design. and you limi- Ilu- ultra irrnissim? 1mm)?. il's Iln- Irwll of yum ul' rim-2m .ind into lighler. mun: liME-cf?ck-nl. (Deana-rum In other Mmls. echnology with a conscieme 'llien again. what else would you expect from a car [mu-rut by l-londall HONDA kinking: Technology Potential for Improving FE over the Next 5, 10, and 20 Years 9 AIAM-055631 Future Powerplant Issues Technological solutions Fuel Cell/CNG/Hybrid Methanol/Ethanol/H2/Li-ion. . .. Diesel/Energy storage/New Incentive] Friction reduction/VTEC/ Aerodynamics/ Improved transmissions/Low resistance tires [Incremental Improvements] Cost and value issue Engine technology High speci?c output (including 4 valve/cylinder) These technologies are VTEC continuously being incorporated Direct injection m?hepmduas' Precise air/fue metering However, consumers sense of . . . - value usually puts fuel ef?ciency ef?CIenCy near the bottom oftheir iist. 5 speed-AT/G-speed MT Putting in these technologies just CVT to improve fuel economy may 0 Reduced losses not be valued by customers. Lightweight materials Low drag coef?cient LOW resustance ?res Depends on how much is already Lower accessory incorporated into fleet and synergies (or lack of synergy) between technologies Fuel Economy Improvement - 10 AIAM-055632 New Technology Limitations 1? - Lean-burn: catalytic reduction, fuel sulfur, cost - Cylinder cut?off: Cost, vibration - Idle-off: Cost, packaging - Hybrids: Cost, packaging - CNG (20% less C02): Infrastructure, cost - EV: Cost, recharge time, range (still in research stage) - PNGV technologies Future research items - FuelceH CHICKEN 0R EGG 52mm -- (Al ternati_ve fuels/ Investment Decision-s. Marketing Decisions viability _nfrastructu re 33232245. Industw Structure Preferences . . ?Policy Criteria. c?s?m'lar Policy Decision a enges investment Decisions Cost. Manufacturability. Technology Performance Characteristics! Competitiveness. i cl es (range, power. safety. utility) Objectives oSocio/economic 1 1 AIAM-055633 Customers do not recognize any individual needs/responsibility to help reduce GHG emissions - Gasoline is cheap - New vehicle demographics very upscale - Little public understanding that fuel consumption correlates with GHG emissions I I Passenger cars Consumers shift toward SUV, pickup ar er/heavter vehicles Fuel economy Vehicle weight - of SUV models expected to double in four years GM has predicted ?sport wagons? (car/truck hybrids) will reach 1-1.5 million sales/year - LEV-ll/Tier 2 won't affect sales - As long as gasoline remains cheap, customers will value other features higher than fuel economy: Safety Utility Performance 100.00% . 90.00% .. 80.00% 70.00% supcompactl 60.00% . compact! . mid?size car 50.00% 40. 00% 30. 00% 20.00% 10.00% 0 00% 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 1999 Light-Duty (<8500 GVW) Fuel Economy Trends Report 12 AIAM-055634 FuelCeHs: Grail - Very high fuel conversion efficiencies - Greatly reduced heat loss - Virtually zero emissions Quiet - Reliable and long lifetime Low maintainanace - Wide range of applications in addition to vehicles Challenges Packaging, size, weight Cost Waste heat rejection Low temperatures inefficent radiators Air supply Compressor Hydrogen supply Hydrogen Fuel 2 M. Iv a sues On Board Storage Compressed '3 gas - Metal quu?d hydride hydrogen Very low energy Very low OWenergy density temperature densny Parasitic Conversion losses issues Hydrogen infrastructure On Board Reformer ,1 Reduced ef?ciency - Hydrogen dillution larger fuel cell 0 Start-up performance Transitional response CO and sulfur control - Emissions from reformer Size, weight, packaging Cost Methanol reduces problems and has suf?cient range, but adds infrastructure issues 13 AIAM-055635 )5 ., HG Issues Honda?s Position on - Honda is committed to contributing to mitigation of GHG emissions through technology progress. - Honda believes it is our responsibility to develop and offer efficient products in the market. We have been doing this and will continue to do so. - However, the customer needs to become an integral participant in the process of reducing greenhouse gases; market acceptance of these products will be limited until this occurs. I ation is Essential Cooper Push: Performance improvement targets Pull: Manufacturer performance incentives Pull: Incentives (non-monetary, monetary), education (green labels, etc.) Push: Taxation, Restrictions, Limitations Pull: Viable products (FE, price, performance, utility, etc) Note: Push/Pull descriptions are examples of items that could be included in a cooperative program. This should not be interpreted as Honda support for speci?c items, especially individually. 14 AIAM-055636 AIAM-055637 The Road to Clean Cars: Technological Promise and Policy Challenge John M. DeCicco Energy and Environmental Studies Institute Congressional Brie?ng on Advanced Vehicle Technology May 18, 2000 American Council for an Energy-Ef?cient Economy 1001 Connecticut Ave NW, Suite 801 Washington, DC 20036 202-429?8873 fax 202-835?2620 e-mail AIAM-055638 AIAM-055639 Market Realities - Proven Pro?table market interest runs counter to higher ef?ciency and other environmental needs. - New fleet fuel economy has been stagnant or declining U.S. ?eet average ef?ciency has been declining since 1988. European fuel efficiency trends are essentially flat, even at much higher fuel prices. - Larger, more powerful vehicles are popular everywhere. Even the most optimistic "advanced technology vehicle" introduction plans are unlikely to offset the growth in GHG emissions due to mainstream market trends. Fleetwlde Impacts of Hybrids or Other Advanced Technology Vehlcles by Market Share 20% Market Share: .. Prius II Insight I 7, 20% 15% 10% 5% Overall Fleet MPG Increase 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 MPG Multiple tor the Advanced Vehicles Prognosis for Automotive Fuel Cells PEM fuel cell is likely to eventually have low cost. It maybe best joint solution addressing air quality, GHG, oil dependence, and ?lture customer needs. Integrated fuel cell engines and ancillary devices Maturation of electric drivetrain technologies Fuel choice and infrastructure (now quite unclear) 0 True mass market seems unlikely before 2015, so fuel cell vehicles cannot signi?cantly address climate action needs until later dates. Several development and cost paths must converge; Components Common to All Vehicles using Electric Drive Traction motors, controllers, other power electronics. - Batteries for regenerative braking, perhaps peaking. - Electrodrive system (motor+controller) costs: Presently on order of $200 per kW (retail equivalent) In the long run, can fall to $20?$30 per kW (2000$) - Attaining such low costs will be essential for wide- spread deployment of any electric drive vehicle. Societal Concerns that In?uence Vehicle Design Safety - Environment Energy SAFETY Regulation Consumer Interest 0 Federal safety 0 Historically was very standards since 1966 limited 0 Focus: restraints, Stronger concern in crashworthiness, crash recent years avoidance - 0 Some technologies 0 Limitations: rollover, deployed without aggressivity regulation ABS) DeCicco Presentation at EESI Clean Car Brie?ng, May 2000 AIAM-055640 Trends ln U.S. Trattlc Fatalities and Light Duty Vehlcle Fuel Economy 5.0 22 LIGHT DUTY VEHICLE FUEL RATE PER ECONOMY. cit-now MPG MILLION 20 4.1970 1975 19% 1985 1990 1995 2000 Sources: NHTSA Traf?c Safety Facts: ORNL Transponetion Energy Data Book ENVIRONMENT (Criteria Air Pollution) Regulation Consumer Interest California Federal standards since 1960s 0 Traditionally very weak 0 Potentially emerging appeal, with LEVs, HEVS, corporate image ads Focus: reduce tailpipe emissions on lab tests Limitations: in-use performance of engines; lax diesel standards; ZEV mandate faces cost and technology hurdles. 0 N0 sign?cant technology deployment (in terms of net pollution reductions) without regulation, until recent national LEVs AutomobilettoxEmissions-'- . Standards vs. Estimated Lifetime Average 5, ln-Use by Model Year . REAL-WORLD 5 sutsstons - 3 - swmnos glint 5:53, 5? 0' .51 .I 1960 191a --1980 1990- '2000 2010 Energy Regulation Consumer Interest CAFE standards in 1975 Intense during oil shocks - AFV credits set in 1988; Weak since mid-1980s and ?eet requirements in 1992 growing weaker - No market-driven fuel economy increases except during energy Focus: economics and energy security - Limitations: weak legal links to environment, in - Environmental link is spite of strong impact; intuitively understood, but lax light truck standards not well communicated Combined Car and Light Truck Fuel Economy New Fleet and On-Road Stock, 1970-1999 30_ New Fleet, EPA test MPG All Vehicles, . real-world MPG 10- 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 LII (II Fuel Economy MPG DeCicco Presentation at EESI Clean Car Brie?ng, May 2000 Fuel Cost of Driving for US. Light Duty Vehicles average in?ation-adjusted cost, 1998?lmile b?d-t?sv-nr-it?s amen-mace Fuel Cost 1998 cents/mile 4 i J. 1970 1975 1980 1985 I990 1995 2000 2 AIAM-055641 Gasoline Taxes in Perspective There may be good reasons to raise gasoline taxes: - funding intermodal system improvements more equitable transportation cost allocation - incentives pool for low-carbon fuels but motivating car and light truck fuel economy and technology improvements isn't one of them. It is more likely that fuel taxes or other road user fees will need to be raised to maintain transportation funds in the face of rising vehicle e?iciency than it is that higher fuel taxes induce higher fuel ef?ciency. Average Test Weight Average Duty Vehlcle Welght vs. PNGV Benchmark 3900 . ALL LDVs 3800 3700 3600 MIDSIZE CARS 3500 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 PNGV One Step Forward, but Several Steps Back - Landmark articulation of shared objectives 0 Chronic neglect of Goal 2 Credibility undermined by use of PNGV to lobby against other environmental policies. Continuing industry subsidization without accountability is questionable. Bottom line: since PNGV started in 1993, new ?eet fuel economy is down 5% overall auto C02 emissions are up 18%. It's Not (just) Technology, It's the Market (stupid!) Greening the Market Means Closing the Gaps DEMAND SUPPLY Consumer Preferences Product Plans Future Car Market Green Design Environmental Values Market Transformation Strategies for Greening the Motor Vehicle TAX CREDITS. OTHER COMMER- INCENTIVES PUBLIC EDUCATION In INFORMATION PROGRAMS BROAD COVERAGE INCENTIVES: FEEBATES, TRADABLE CREDITS. ETC. REGULATORY FUEL ECONOMY EMISSIONS STANDARDS DeCicco Presentation at EESI Clean Car Brie?ng, May 2000 3 AIAM-055642 If . Automotive . GREEN BOOK Consumer Information Strategy The Environmental Guide to . - . Stand-alone consumer Cars 8: Trucks . MODEL YEAR 2000 guide 0 Resource for automotive media and educators - Stimulate expanded government information and labeling initiatives - Encourage others to use Green Scores Green BookTM is available online at GreenerCars . com by john Decker), [1m Kh?t?srl _v . Suggestions for Congress - Restore funding for CAFE rulemakings. - Enact tax credits for clean, high-ef?ciency advanced technology vehicles. 0 Appropriate (authorize as needed) expanded resources for public information, labeling, and market creation initiatives. Suggestions for Administration - 'Veto the Transportation Appropriations bill if it includes a rider inhibiting CAFE rulemaking. Strengthen informational and marketing efforts - with a "Green Vehicle Marketing Partnership." . Develop agency capacity (EPA, NHTSA) for comprehensive approaches for addressing auto fuel efficiency/CO2 and safety issues. 0 Reform research programs to strengthen deploy- ment efforts and set forward-looking goals for criteria emissions. Suggestions for Public Interest Groups - Pursue ef?ciency, safety, and emissions standards for addressing the entire car and light truck ?eet, avoiding over-emphasis of alternative vehicles. 0 Embrace challenges of bringing customer demand in line with environmental values (it's not just "if you build it, they will buy"). Pursue market incentives to discourage inef?cient vehicles and encourage greener vehicles. Suggestions for Automakers Acknowledge the essential role of regulation in enabling responsible corporate citizenship. - Stop opposing CAFE standards and begin good- faith negotiations on fuel economy improvement. Collaborate in developing incentive structures and marketing approaches that can better align product plans and customer value with sustainability goals. Conclusions - Realizing the Bene?ts of Next-Generation Vehicle Technology . and market forces modi?ed only by incentives will not suf?ce. Stagnation of CAFE standards has vehicle design running counter to sustainability. - Renewed regulatory guidance is essential. - Market-oriented programs can complement regulation to build a complete strategy. DeCicco Presentation at EESI Clean Car Brie?ng, May 2000 4 AIAM-055643