Society of Automotive Analysts Strategic Planning Summit Dave - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

society of automotive analysts strategic planning summit
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Society of Automotive Analysts Strategic Planning Summit Dave - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Society of Automotive Analysts Strategic Planning Summit Dave Andrea Center for Automotive Research dandrea@cargroup.org September 13, 2016 The Center for Automotive Research (CAR) Automotive industry contract research and service


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Society of Automotive Analysts Strategic Planning Summit

Dave Andrea Center for Automotive Research dandrea@cargroup.org September 13, 2016

slide-2
SLIDE 2

The Center for Automotive Research (CAR)

Automotive industry contract research and service organization (non-profit ) with more than 30 years experience forecasting industry trends, advising on public policy, and sponsoring multi-stakeholder communication forums.

  • CAR conducts leading edge Research that impacts

the future of the global automotive industry.

  • CAR hosts Events and Conferences that engage

industry leaders in the discussion of critical topics.

  • CAR’s Affiliates — automotive manufacturers and suppliers

benefit from advance access to research results, exclusive networking, and participation in working groups.

slide-3
SLIDE 3

CAR Research Themes

(current iteration)

  • Mobility Networks- investigating passenger and cargo models for

access, purchase, and operation

  • Public Policy Initiatives – exploring the regulation, legislation, and

economic incentives to deliver societal goals

  • Industry Impact – understanding financial and human capital,

global trade and investment and economic development

  • Human Capital Needs – assessing the industry’s stock and future

need of human talent and skills

  • Product and Manufacturing Technology Requirements –

evaluating future product designs, materials, engineering, procurement, manufacturing, and sales/service ……………………………….

  • Industry 4.0 Futuring – mapping tomorrow’s industry, product,

and manufacturing and business processes transformation

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Industry Meeting Current CAFE Mandate CAGR; It is Keeping up with the Future is the Question

18.0 26.0 27.5 33.3 55.3 19.9 36.5 17.5 20.7 39.3 18.2 26.4

15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0

Miles per Gallon (mpg) Model Year PC Standard PC Performance LT Standard LT Performance

Source: NHTSA 2009, NHTSA 2011, and NHTSA 2014

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Midterm Evaluation (MTE)

Three Step Process

Final Determination due by April 1, 2018 (no joke)

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Gasoline Prices (Real) January ‘03 – June ‘16

$2.19 $2.50 $3.47 $3.49 $3.61 $4.43 $2.91 $3.11 $4.12 $4.04 $3.79 $3.68 $2.92 $2.81 $2.37

$1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 $5.00

Jan-03 Jul-03 Jan-04 Jul-04 Jan-05 Jul-05 Jan-06 Jul-06 Jan-07 Jul-07 Jan-08 Jul-08 Jan-09 Jul-09 Jan-10 Jul-10 Jan-11 Jul-11 Jan-12 Jul-12 Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16

Source: EIA

Dollars per Gallon

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Positive Economic Factors/CAFE Headwinds

Increase/decrease in gasoline prices by $1.00 per gallon results in an increase/decrease in the small car/EV market share 1.1 percent. For every $1,000 increase/decrease in PDI, small car/electric vehicle share will decrease/increase by .50 percent. For every 100 basis point increase/decrease in unemployment rate, small car/electric vehicle share will decrease/increase by .6 percent.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

U.S. Light Vehicle Sales By Cars and Trucks 1976 – July 2016

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1/1/1976 10/1/1977 7/1/1979 4/1/1981 1/1/1983 10/1/1984 7/1/1986 4/1/1988 1/1/1990 10/1/1991 7/1/1993 4/1/1995 1/1/1997 10/1/1998 7/1/2000 4/1/2002 1/1/2004 10/1/2005 7/1/2007 4/1/2009 1/1/2011 10/1/2012 7/1/2014 4/1/2016

Cars Share of Sales Light Trucks Share of Sales

Source: BEA

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Segment Breakdown - U.S. LV Sales Percent Change July YTD 2016 vs July YTD 2015

  • 9.7%
  • 9.4%
  • 6.7%
  • 3.4%
  • 2.5%

4.0% 4.8% 6.1% 22.1% 38.5% 1.1%

  • 20%
  • 10%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Middle Car Luxury Car Small Car Large Car Large CUV Middle CUV SUV Pickup Van Small CUV Total

Source: Ward’s Automotive Reports

slide-10
SLIDE 10

SOLUTIONS ARE APPARENT TO CONSUMERS

Agencies’ Technical Assessment Report Assumptions, 2025 GHG CAFE

Turbocharged and downsized gasoline engines 33% 54% Higher compression ratio, naturally aspirated gasoline engines 44% <1% 8-speed and other advanced transmissions 90% 70% Mass reduction 7% 6% Stop-start 20% 38% Mild hybrid 18% 14% Full hybrid <3% 14% Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles <2% <1% Electric vehicle <3% <2%

Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Technical Assessment Report Table ES-3

2025 Pathways Diverge Between Agencies

slide-11
SLIDE 11

And with Industry – Particularly with Electrification

Industry greatly disagrees,

– expecting 5 to 10 times more electrification. 2025 Light-duty Vehicle Fleet

Advanced Gasoline Vehicle Technologies Electrification

  • Strong hybrids 3%
  • EV/PHEVs 4%

Regulators say few electrics needed…

slide-12
SLIDE 12

2.6% 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 100 200 300 400 500 600

Percent of LV Sales (%) Real Gas Price ($) U.S. Electrified Sales (000’s) Electrified LV Sales % of LV Sales

U.S. Electrified Light Vehicle Sales and Take Rate

1999 – 2016 June YTD

Note: Electrified vehicles consist of BEV, HEV and PHEV

Source: Ward’s Automotive Reports, HybridCars.com and CAR Research; EIA

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Gasoline Saved for Incremental Fuel Economy Improvement And the Customer Demands a Three-Year Payback

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Annual gallons saved per MPG improvement Miles Per Gallon

40 Gallons 600 Gallons 200 Gallons 100 Gallons 60 Gallons 28.5 Gallons

(area under curve represents total fuel saved for that increment per year at 12,000 miles per year)

Source: CAR Research

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Technology Pathway and Relative Cost

Mild Steel BIW Mild Steel Closures HSS BIW Mild Steel Closures AHSS BIW HSS/Al Closures AHSS/UHSS BIW Aluminum Closures Aluminum Body Aluminum Closures Magnesium I.P. beam & seats

The steps get bigger

Carbon Fiber/Al. Body Aluminum/Mag. Closures

  • Mag. I.P. beam & seats

MY 2015 Representative Vehicle

Cost ($/lb.) NET Mass Reduction Percentage

5% 10% 15% 0% $X $3X $6X

Net Mass Reduction = (Mass Reduction) – (Weight add-back)

slide-15
SLIDE 15

The lightweighting cost and vehicle performance varies significantly for each of these vehicles

Which truck is more expensive to lightweight?

Model Year 2011 Curb Weight 4,800 lbs1 Platform Launch 1998 Body Architecture Mild Steel

1 - 4.3L V6 Regular Cab Short Box 2 - 4.3L V6 Regular Cab Short Box 3 - 3.5L V6 Regular Cab Short Box

Model Year 2015 Curb Weight 4,050 lbs3 Platform Launch 2014 Body Architecture Aluminum Model Year 2015 Curb Weight 4,521 lbs2 Platform Launch 2014 Body Architecture High Strength Steel

slide-16
SLIDE 16

0%

Cars – 4.71% Trucks – 4.88%

Safety Performance* Safety Performance AVERAGE % cost reduction per year 2.45% 2.26% 1.85% 3.03%

Agency Recognition

Net Mass Reduction = (Mass Reduction) – (Weight add-back)

Weight Add-Back

*Performance – NVH, torsional rigidity, handling

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Time Period AHSS/UHSS Aluminum Magnesium Composites AVERAGE % cost reduction/year 2012-2021 0.80% 1.30% 1.13% 1.80% 2022-2027 0.56% 1.26% 0.88% 2.36%

3% / year 2% / year

Agency Recognition

Industry does NOT agree with the learning factors applied uniformly for all materials in the agency analysis

Learning Curves

Direct Manufacturing Cost Reduction between 2012-2027 Agencies OEMs 32% 10-17% Metals 26% Composites

slide-18
SLIDE 18

CAR Calculated Mandate Rate = 1.86

  • Retail Price Equivalent = 1.5
  • Corrected for dealership gross margin rate
  • Corrected for vehicle sales tax
  • Corrected for incremental consumer financing
  • Corrected for incremental insurance costs
slide-19
SLIDE 19

There is no average…

Manufacturers are pursuing many technology pathways. No two manufacturers have the same product and technology portfolio, nor fuel economy strategy. Therefore, applying an “industry average” for technology cost or implementation may be

  • misleading. Some manufacturers will bear a much greater

burden than other manufacturers.

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Impact on U.S. Automotive Industry, 2016-2025

Long Run Demand Impact

Baseline

  • 1.30%
  • 4.95%
  • 8.60%
  • 0.76%
  • 4.41%
  • 8.06%

+0.82%

  • 2.83%
  • 6.48%

GAS Price/Cost of FE

  • $2.44/

$2,000 $2.44/ $4,000 $2.44/ $6,000 $3.00/ $2,000 $3.00/ $4,000 $3.00/ $6,000 $4.64/ $2,000 $4.64/ $4,000 $4.64/ $6,000

Total MV Expenditure ($Billion)

$792

$782 $753 $724 $786 $757 $728 798 770 741

Impact of 2025 CAFE ($Billion)

  • 10.0
  • 39.0
  • 68.0
  • 6.0
  • 34.9
  • 63.9

+6.5

  • 22.4
  • 51.4

Vehicle Price (2025$)

$42,491

$43,397 $45,940 $48,483 $43,022 $45,565 $48,108 $41,922 $44,465 $47,008

Light Vehicle Sales (Million Units)

18.64

18.01 16.39 14.93 18.27 16.61 15.14 19.05 17.31 15.76

Light Vehicle Production (Million Units)*

12.93

12.59 11.68 10.86 12.73 11.80 10.98 13.17 12.19 11.32

Automotive Employment

862,000

839,100 778,400 724,100 848,700 787,000 731,700 877,700 812,800 754,900 *Include vehicles for export

20

Sources: CAR Research 2015

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Thoughts and Observations to Align Market and Policy

  • Raise gasoline/fuels taxes to ensure fuel economy technologies are a net benefit to

consumers and to prevent a rebound in VMT . . . All the way to consider replacing the CAFE program entirely with a sufficient carbon tax on motor fuels.

  • Provide strong hybrids (HEVs) and plugin hybrids (PHEVs) sacrifice less in terms of standard

vehicle attributes and may result in a larger number of miles traveled on electricity than BEVs because of their potentially higher sales volumes and travel miles per year.

  • Provide additional off-cycle credits for advanced fuel economy technologies to encourage

commercialization by overcoming price inflation and to support the development of new supply chains for light-weighting materials and advanced ICE and EV components.

  • Provide the industry an additional five years assuming further long-term development for

customer needs to accept such vehicles and the industry to produce these technologies at a more affordable cost and develop an adequate infrastructure.