A ‘Light’ Guide to Energy Savings in Transport [1 ed.] 8770227209, 9788770227209

Citation preview

A ‘Light’ Guide to Energy Savings in Transport

RIVER PUBLISHERS SERIES IN TRANSPORT TECHNOLOGY Series Editors HAIM ABRAMOVICH THILO BEIN Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Fraunhofer LBF, Israel Germany Indexing: all books published in this series are submitted to the Web of Science Book Citation Index (BkCI), to SCOPUS, to CrossRef and to Google Scholar for evaluation and indexing The "River Publishers Series in Transport Technology" is a series of comprehensive academic and professional books which focus on theory and applications in the various disciplines within Transport Technology, namely Automotive and Aerospace. The series will serve as a multi-disciplinary resource linking Transport Technology with society. The book series fulfils the rapidly growing worldwide interest in these areas. Books published in the series include research monographs, edited volumes, handbooks and textbooks. The books provide professionals, researchers, educators, and advanced students in the field with an invaluable insight into the latest research and developments. Topics covered in the series include, but are by no means restricted to the following:

• Automotive • Aerodynamics • Aerospace Engineering • Aeronautics • Multifunctional Materials • Structural Mechanics For a list of other books in this series, visit www.riverpublishers.com

A ‘Light’ Guide to Energy Savings in Transport

Conor Molloy, MSc (energy) CEM CMVP MCILT Member AEE, FTAI, CILT, ZEMO and GLEC Ireland

River Publishers

Published 2023 by River Publishers River Publishers Alsbjergvej 10, 9260 Gistrup, Denmark www.riverpublishers.com Distributed exclusively by Routledge

605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN

A ‘Light’ Guide to Energy Savings in Transport / Conor Molloy. ©2023 River Publishers. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval systems, or transmitted in any form or by any means, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publishers. Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business ISBN 978-87-7022-720-9 (print) ISBN 978-10-0088-139-4 (online) ISBN 978-1-003-39417-4 (ebook master) While every effort is made to provide dependable information, the publisher, authors, and editors cannot be held responsible for any errors or omissions. Figure 10.3 IKEA flat pack egg - Intensive attempts have been made to find all copyright owners, please contact us if you are a copyright owner who has not been approached.

Contents

Acknowledgementsix List of Figures

xi

List of Tables

xv

List of Abbreviations

xvii

1 Introduction 1 1.1 The Business Case. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.2 Co-benefits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Context 5 2.1 Global Emissions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 Transport Emissions Around the World. . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3 What Is the Transport and Emissions Mix in Your Region?. . 7 2.4 Transport as a System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.4.1 Where will Jevons Park his paradox?. . . . . . . . . 10 2.5 Personal and Business Choices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.6 Ecodriving. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.6.1 The five golden rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 2.7 ICE vs. BEV Game Over – Already? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3 Where to Start? 17 3.1 Targets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.2 SBTi Calculator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 3.2.1 Net zero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 3.3 Business Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 3.4 Carbon Offsets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

v

vi  Contents 4 General Approach – ASIf 25 4.1 Avoid: Travel for Business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 4.1.1 Calculating business travel impacts. . . . . . . . . . 27 4.1.2 Grey fleet: in or out of scope?. . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 4.1.3 Will grey fleet fit in de minimis? . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 4.1.4 Mileage reduction opportunities: include? . . . . . . . 30 4.2 Shift: Congestion and Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.2.1 Travel decision tree principles – the five R’s. . . . . . 31 4.3 Improve: Energy Use in Cars and Light Duty Vehicles. . . . 32 4.4 What You Cannot Control. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 4.5 Helpful Pointers on Cars and Vans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4.6 Weight. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 5 Policy, Laws, and Audit Standards 37 5.1 Energy Audit Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 5.1.1 EED 2012 article 8: Energy Audit Annex VI Quality . . . 40 5.2 Audit Standards from Around the World (Our Recipe Books). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 5.2.1 Australia and New Zealand AS/NZS 3598.3. . . . . . 42 5.2.2 EU EN16247:2014 Parts 1–4 – in revision (2021). . . 42 5.2.3 ISO 50002 energy audits – requirements with guidance for use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5.2.4 Comparing standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 5.3 Definition of “Transport” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 6 Energy Efficiency Objective 45 6.1 Significance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 7 Energy Measurement 49 7.1 Accuracy vs. Available Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 7.1.1 How to deal with this level of accuracy or completeness?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 7.1.2 Yes, but how do I calculate the fuel performance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 7.1.3 What units should we use? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 7.1.4 Handy conversions to use in your presentation sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 7.2 Conversions and Bio Fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 7.2.1 Horses and liquids to energy terms . . . . . . . . . . 59 7.2.2 Energy and the cup of tea (or coffee) . . . . . . . . . 59

Contents  vii

7.3 7.4

Fuel Stock Reconciliation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 A Fuel Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

8 Activity Data 63 8.1 Passive to Active Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 8.2 Where Are They? GPS = Positioning Only. . . . . . . . . 64 8.2.1 CAN = Controller area network . . . . . . . . . . 65 8.3 OBD = On-Board Diagnostics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 8.4 Telematics Systems: A Generic Guide. . . . . . . . . . . . 67 8.5 Sample Telematics Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 8.6 Telematics is Only as Good as the Reports Managers Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 8.7 Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs) . . . . . . . . . . . 69 8.8 Tonne–Km and Passenger–Km. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 8.9 Testing Your EnPI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 8.9.1 How to do regression analysis in excel . . . . . . . 74 8.10 Energy Mass Balance – Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 8.10.1 Where does my money go? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 9 Site Visit and Communications 77 9.1 Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 9.2 Agenda for Your Site Visit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 9.3 Planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 9.4 Example Findings from “Chat”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 10 Identifying Opportunities 81 10.1 Avoid: Tackling Transport Demand. . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 10.2 Shifting Transport Mode. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 10.2.1 Cargo bikes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 10.2.2 Drone delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 10.2.3 The physical internet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 10.3 Improving Vehicle Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 10.3.1 Engine losses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 10.3.2 Auxiliaries also known as power take off or PTO. 94 10.3.3 Driveline losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 10.3.4 Traction work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 10.3.5 Hysteresis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 10.3.6 Rolling resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 10.3.7 Air drag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 10.4 Passenger Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 10.5 Identifying Opportunities Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

viii  Contents 11 Sections on Air, Sea, Rail, and NRMM (Plant) 107 11.1 Air. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 11.2 Sea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 11.3 Rail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 11.4 Plant and Non-Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM). . . . . 114 11.5 Plant Fuel and Activity Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114 11.6 Alternative Fuels for Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 11.7 Hydrogen Powered Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 12 New Vehicles Design and Specification 119 12.1 Life Cycle Costing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119 12.1.1 LCC calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 12.2 EU GPP Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 12.3 Sample New Vehicle Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 13 Alternative Fuels (Electric, Hydrogen, and Biofuels) 125 13.1 Fuel Life Cycle Impacts and Where to Find Them. . . . . 126 13.2 Hydrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 13.2.1 Sources of hydrogen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 13.2.2 Uses for hydrogen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130 13.3 Alternative Fuels Infrastructure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 13.4 HVO – A No New Infrastructure, Drop in Fuel?. . . . . . 133 13.5 Sum-up of Alternative Fuels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 14 Review/Presentation of Findings 137 14.1 EN16247 Content of Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 14.1.1 Listing your opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 14.2 Sustaining the Changes and Savings . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 14.3 ISO50001 to Sustain Savings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 14.4 Do You Have a Plan? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 15 Conclusion 143 15.1 Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 References and Further Reading 145 Further reading, good websites, programmes, etc.. . . . . . . . . 146 Index149 About the Author

151

Acknowledgements

Every author is indebted to those who came before them and I am no exception. Many customers and experts have helped me along the way – too many to name here. But I would like to list those organisations and experts you may find helpful in your work, helping transport operators to become the leaders in climate action around the world. In alphabetical order: •

AEE: The association of energy engineers and, in particular, Ian Boylan for opening my eyes to the AEE organisation and its many expert members and training courses around the world.

•

CEN CENELEC and ISO for the collegiality and contacts around Europe and the world, without which we would likely never have met others interested in transport energy efficiency.

•

EU Commission for their ongoing efforts to build capacity and knowledge share across member states via the Concerted Action and Joint Research, we met many like-minded people from diverse ministries and sectors as a result.

•

Ireland’s FTAI, CTTC, and IRHA member companies who operate the HDVs and enthusiastically adopted our recommendations and implemented them with measurable benefits to their bottom line and Ireland’s freight emissions.

•

REIL and Enprova for funding the ECOfleet programme and its development, lessons from which underpin the audit experience in this book.

•

Raoul Empey of Sustineo for his insights and discipline with regard to carbon reporting and climate action to help us improve sustainability in the sector.

•

SEAI, the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, and especially Alan Ryan for championing the energy and CO2 savings potential in transport ix

x  Acknowledgements when others did not (a shout-out to Brian Motherway, now at IEA, for backing Alan in the early days). •

SFC (Smart Freight Centre) for bringing the transport energy and emissions community worldwide together, especially Sophie Punte for her energy and enthusiasm but also Eszter Toth-Weedon, Alan Lewis, and Bonne Goedhart.

•

UK DfT and Energy Savings Trust and especially Colin Smith for their consistent support for decarbonising transport through many changes in policy.

•

ZEMO (formerly the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership or LowCVP) for their library of vehicle knowledge and experts especially Jonathan Murray and Brian Robinson.

Last but not least, my wife and family who keep me grounded in the real world and put up with my obsessive work ethic for the last several decades.

List of Figures

Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 2.4 Figure 2.5 Figure 2.6 Figure 2.7 Figure 2.8 Figure 2.9 Figure 2.10 Figure 2.11 Figure 2.12 Figure 3.1 Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3 Figure 4.4 Figure 4.5 Figure 4.6 Figure 4.7 Figure 4.8

Where do transport GHG emissions come from (mainly road) – WRI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 My personal Keeling Curve – what’s yours?. . . . . 6 UCC’s Brian Ó Gallachóir Ireland’s GHG progress to 2005–2020.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Cars vs. SUVs, IEA 2021. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 One tonne of carbon dioxide gas – a balloon 10 m or 33 ft across. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Structural waste in the transport system – Ellen MacArthur Foundation.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Payload as proportion of empty weight. . . . . . . . 10 Space is the final frontier. © 2021 https:// fabiantodorovic.com/.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Tweet from Brent Toderian.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ICCT car manufacturer announcements of EVs, December 2021.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Two- and three-wheeler electric vs. cars, buses, and truck – IEA 2021.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 eBike sales projection Europe to 2030 – Conebi, ECF, and CIE.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Smart Freight Centre freight growth graphic 2021.. . 19 Change in road passenger transport in early 2020, IEA, Paris.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Adapted ASIf framework.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Workplace travel plan made simple.. . . . . . . . . . 27 Business travel choice – decision tree. . . . . . . . . 28 How traffic shortens the life of Europeans, WHO 2003.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 The five R’s of sustainable business travel.. . . . . . 32 EU EEA – where does energy go in your car? . . . . 33 Simple EMB energy mass balance for transport.. . . 34

xi

xii  List of Figures Figure 6.1 Figure 6.2 Figure 7.1 Figure 7.2 Figure 7.3 Figure 7.4 Figure 7.5 Figure 8.1 Figure 8.2 Figure 8.3 Figure 8.4 Figure 8.5 Figure 8.6 Figure 8.7 Figure 8.8 Figure 8.9

Figure 9.1 Figure 9.2 Figure 10.1 Figure 10.2 Figure 10.3 Figure 10.4 Figure 10.5 Figure 10.6 Figure 10.7 Figure 10.8 Figure 10.9

T&E opportunities for up to 24% energy savings in HDVs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 T&E opportunities for up to 35% savings by 2030.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Fuel pump calibration equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Round-down function in Excel.. . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Double entry for fuel.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 IEA (2012), Energy Technology Perspectives 2012, IEA, Paris.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Declining calorific value of road diesel. . . . . . . . . 58 HDV dashboard trip showing fuel used at idle.. . . . 67 Fleet summary report.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Use telematics weekly to save fuel.. . . . . . . . . . 69 Example metrics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Regression analysis of distance vs. fuel. . . . . . . . 73 Regression analysis of jobs vs. fuel.. . . . . . . . . . 74 Screenshot from Excel showing how to Add Trendline after right click on scatter gram.. . . . . . 74 Author’s graphic depicting Australian Government EMB.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 A study in options to improve aerodynamic profile of heavy-duty vehicles in Europe – by Adithya Hariram, Thorsten Koch, Björn Mårdberg, and Jan Kyncl – 2019.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Stock image showing disappearing in a cloud of dust. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 Before and after fridge in van.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 Avoid shift improve, IPCC AR6. . . . . . . . . . . . 82 A chocolate Easter egg – an extreme example of shipping air.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 IKEA flat pack egg.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Ikea VVÅRKÄNSLA Milk chocolate bunny.. . . . . 85 Inland freight by mode EU Eurostat.. . . . . . . . . 86 Modes compared in grams of CO2 per tonne km – Maersk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Maersk rail freight China – Dusiburg. . . . . . . . . . 87 112 tonne GM locomotive transported by air to Dublin in 1994. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Comments from a DHL delivery driver. . . . . . . . . 88

List of Figures  xiii

Figure 10.10 Electric Donkey – BBC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Figure 10.11 Quck wins Prof. Alan McKinnon – LEARN Project Feb-2019.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Figure 10.12 Sum of quick wins – Prof. Alan McKinnon. . . . . . 91 Figure 10.13 Power use in kW for HDV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Figure 10.14 Fan belt ad.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Figure 10.15 Graph showing HDV rolling resistance vs. wind resistance.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Figure 10.16 Sample of new EU tyre label with wet and winter grip ratings.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Figure 10.17 Table from 21st century truck report on power use.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Figure 10.18 Checklist of aspects to look for air drag opportunities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Figure 10.19 Box trailer losses. Courtesy: Don-Bur Trailer. . . . . 101 Figure 10.20 Illustration of changes coming in EU truck design. . . 102 Figure 10.21 Table of fuel saving aerodynamic features – authors update DfT table c.2005.. . . . . . . . . . . 103 Figure 10.22 Aerodynamic checklist with picture. . . . . . . . . . 104 Figure 10.23 Trip computer test showing excess fuel use with air-con.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Figure 10.24 Sample audit plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 Figure 11.1 SEEMP elements – IMO.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 Figure 11.2 Tres Hombres sail freight vessel.. . . . . . . . . . . 112 Figure 11.3 NRMM/plant telematics example.. . . . . . . . . . . 114 Figure 11.4 Example mobile plant and trip computers... . . . . . 115 Figure 11.5 Example generator part load – Strathclyde University.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 Figure 11.6 World’s largest (land) EV? – Green Car reports.. . . 117 Figure 13.1 T&E graphic showing overall system efficiencies of LDV power trains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126 Figure 13.2 Global comparison of life cycle impacts: ICE vs. battery electric vehicles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Figure 13.3 ICCT summary of drivetrains in Europe 2021.. . . . 127 Figure 13.4 EU JEC heavy duty vehicle fuel comparison (life cycle).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128 Figure 13.5 Example fuel comparison table – simplified.. . . . . 128 Figure 13.6 T&E hydrogen vs. battery electric truck long distance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

xiv  List of Figures Figure 13.7 Figure 13.8 Figure 13.9 Figure 13.10

NACFE considerations for hydrogen trucks.. . . . . 131 NACFE factors for hydrogen success.. . . . . . . . . 131 NACFE colours of hydrogen.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 Hydrogen ladder or “merit order” – Micheal Liebrich and associates.. . . . . . . . . . . 132 Figure 13.11 Summary of infrastructure maturity.. . . . . . . . . . 134 Figure 13.12 How much lithium can we extract from sea water.. . 136 Figure 14.1 Template energy action plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Table 3.1 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 7.1 Table 8.1 Table 10.1 Table 10.2 Table 10.3 Table 12.1

Authors’ business case for energy performance. . . . 3 ITF transport outlook 2021 – © OECD 2021.. . . . . 19 Table of common losses for cars and vans.. . . . . . 35 The cost of weight – NRCAN 2014. . . . . . . . . . 36 Accuracy, calibration, and uncertainty.. . . . . . . . 51 SFC GLEC conversion table synopsis.. . . . . . . . 72 Simplified diesel van vs. electric van vs. cargo eBike.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Drone delivery comparison in tonne–km.. . . . . . . 90 Losses by mode originally author, also features in EN16247-4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 Green vehicle checklist – example.. . . . . . . . . . 123

xv

List of Abbreviations

AFIR ASI BET BEV CAN CARB CEV CIE CONEBI CV DACS ECF ECU EEA EED EEDI EEOS EnPIs ESOS EV FCEV GHG GLEC GPS HDV HVO IATA ICE IEnvA ISO JIT KPL

Alternative fuels infrastructure regulation Avoid shift improve Battery electric truck Battery electric vehicle Controller area network California air resource board Catenary electric vehicle Cycling industries Europe Confederation of European bicycling industry Commercial vehicle Direct air capture and storage European cycling federation Electronic control unit European environment agency Energy efficiency directive Energy efficiency design index Energy efficiency obligation scheme Energy performance indicators Energy saving opportunity scheme Electric vehicle Fuel cell electric vehicle Greenhouse gas Global logistics emissions council Global positioning system Heavy duty vehicle Hydrotreated vegetable oil International Air Transport Association Internal combustion engine IATA environmental assessment International Standards Organisation Just in time Kilometres per litre xvii

xviii  List of Abbreviations LCCA LDV LUC MAD Mpg NET NPV NRMM OBD PTO SAF SBTi SEAI SEEMP SFBA SME SPB SPP SRF TCO TTW UCO VECTO WTP WTW

Life-cycle cost analysis Light duty vehicle Land use change Mutually assured destruction Miles per gallon Negative emissions technologies Net present value Non-road mobile machinery On-board diagnostics Power take off Sustainable aviation fuel Science based targets initiative Sustainable energy authority of Ireland Ship energy efficiency management plan Sustainable freight buyers alliance Small & medium sized enterprises (usually less than 250 full time employees) Simple pay back Simple payback period Sustainable road freight Total cost of ownership Tank to wheel Used cooking oil Vehicle energy consumption calculation tool Workplace travel planning Well to wheel

1 Introduction

Where to begin? We could start with the wheel, but that would omit boats and planes – never mind pipelines. People have been optimising transport since the dawn of time. Watch the movie “Ben Hur” to see the Ferrari or Corvette of its day – the chariot. We still use chariot sizing today; take a look at your local “standard gauge” railway track – it is (apparently) the width of two horses’ asses1. For clarity, we will use definitions and terms from international standards (not twitter). Unlike energy management in general, transport is only really standardising its units and terminology with the advent of the Smart Freight Centre’s Global Logistics Emissions Council framework (the “GLEC” from now on). EN16247-4 the European standard for energy audits was written to an EU Commission Mandate (M479), i.e., it carries more weight in law than our normal standards. However, it took us so long (I was there as a convener) that the Australians and New Zealanders beat us to it with a somewhat easier to read standard called AS/NZS 3598.3 (EN16247 is being rewritten now and the 2022 version should be out soon). What do we mean by “transport”? Following are the standards’ definitions: ●●

Aus/NZ; 5.26: Transport activity that implies the movement of people or goods from one place to another.

●●

EN16247 Part 4 (2014 and 2021 versions): Activity that implies the movement of people, livestock, or goods from one place to another.

1  You may think I am joking but this twitter thread takes you through the links https:// twitter.com/BillHolohanSolr/status/1177631604186996737?s=20 from roman chariots to the space shuttle’s boosters. And just for balance a 50:50 fact check https://ww‑w.snopes.com/ fact-check/railroad-gauge-chariots/

1

2  Introduction ●●

ISO50002 does not define transport specifically; although both the above standards cite 50001 and 50002.

COVID-19 has shown us the importance of resilient supply chains with many now looking to move on from Just In Time (JIT) to Just Be Sure2. This has important implications for the greenhouse gas emissions footprint in freight, in that slower freight allows for higher load factors, of which more later. For now, we just need to understand that moving goods, aka “freight”, is what our life depends on – not just our lifestyles but our lives. Few of us could survive long without food and all developed countries depend on food imports either at the raw material (animal feed or ingredient) level or finished product level. Drugs, energy, and other key supplies are all moved by ship, rail, and road to keep us alive. ●●

Transport as a whole contributes about 14% of total GHG emissions and around 25% of emissions from burning fossil fuels3.

●●

Freight today accounts for 40% of global transport greenhouse gas emissions, but, given a choice between driving our cars or eating and health, I like to think we would choose food and medicines.

Some of you reading this book will be drivers; all of you, I hope, will be able to lead and influence others to action, to help save us humans (the planet will be fine) by reducing emissions and saving our collective asses with reduced energy use and costs (hence, my mention of chariots above). So let us get down to business. Fuel accounts for 20%–40% of the operating costs of motorised vehicles, be they cars, trucks, buses, railway locomotives, planes, or ships. Improving the performance of these vehicles (and they are all vehicles) by even 1% can make a significant contribution to the operators’ bottom line profit.

1.1  The Business Case We will repeat this example regularly, as businesses exist to make a profit. If fuel or energy comprises 30% of your operational costs and you improve the performance by 10%, you have reduced your costs by 3% and increased your profit by 1% (based on the assumption of EU SME margin of 3% net profit). JBS – Just Be Sure – Daniel Yergin The New Map 2020 https://www.wri.org/insights/everything-you-need-know-about-fastest-growing-sourceglobal-emissions-transport 2  3 

1.2 Co-benefits  3 Table 1.1  Authors’ business case for energy performance.

Business case (1L = €1 for this example) Energy/fuel spend (approx.) Typical/projected savings (over 3 years) Potential saving over 3 years Potential saving over 1 year Profit (or non-pay budget) last year? Say 3% of €3m t/o Savings as % of profit or budget per year Sales or work needed to make same profit

Example € 1,000,000 10% € 100,000 € 33,000 € 90,000 37% € 1,100,000

1.2 Co-benefits Now let us look at the wider benefits: ●●

Reducing energy use means less stress on the vehicle, leading to longer life with lower servicing costs.

●●

Carbon taxes are here to stay. Reducing fuel use reduces the amount of carbon tax you pay.

●●

Young people – those under 30 – no longer want to work for companies that are not “sustainable”4, i.e., attracting talent to your business means you must be able to show that you are taking action on the environment. What this means will vary by company, country, and culture, but the point remains that businesses cannot operate without young energetic staff.

●●

Air quality is one of the number one killers around the world, often from domestic burning to cook or heat, for example, but also from road transport.

●●

Reverse logistics and the circular economy; in meeting our climate goals and improving business efficiency in the pursuit of profit, the words “circular economy” are increasingly heard. As a separate topic, the key thing to remember in transport is that the circular economy will increase the demand for goods to be returned (see online sales) for reuse and to be recycled. This is a completely different challenge to on-time delivery but one which can nonetheless reduce a company’s raw material costs and improve profitability.

https://www.worldbenchmarkingalliance.org/news/young-people-and-the-sustainabilityagenda-three-avenues-for-impact/ 4 

4  Introduction ●●

Communication – since the advent of the Boeing 747 air travel has become cheaper5 reducing in price and we have been increasing our air miles and emissions. But, in this context, an energy audit can contribute to a reappraisal of what justifies business travel and improve communications with more frequent – hopefully shorter – online meetings over face to face.

5 

https://simpleflying.com/50-years-airfares/

2 Context

The world is warming. In my lifetime, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has increased exponentially. I grew up with mutually assured destruction (MAD) which was supposed to mean the annihilation of the whole human race in 30 minutes or less. I walked to work in the rain from Chernobyl and worked for whole industries that have since disappeared due to technological change, and seen the ozone hole appear and now shrink due to decisive human action. I believe human ingenuity and capacity for change will win out in the battle against climate change; but as one of my transport customers said to me, ideas and beliefs “do not butter any parsnips” or, in other words, put food on the table, or profit on a company bottom line. To survive and thrive, we must improve our transport energy performance (profit) and reduce our emissions (climate) to “net zero” by 2050 with many steps along the way.

2.1  Global Emissions Transport contribution to climate change are significant making up 20%–25% of human (anthropogenic) emissions mainly from fossil fuels, of which road transport comprises 70+% split 45:55 freight and passenger. Figure 2.1 image on the right is from https:// www.wri.org/insights/everything-you-needknow-about-fastest-growing-source-globalemissions-transport. This book focuses on road transport with short detours into rail, maritime, and Figure 2.1  Where do transport aviation to give you a start on these modes, GHG emissions come from (mainly should the opportunity arise. road) – WRI 5

6  Context

Figure 2.2  My personal Keeling Curve – what’s yours?

Figure 2.3  UCC’s Brian Ó Gallachóir Ireland’s GHG progress to 2005–2020.

2.2  Transport Emissions Around the World You can look up your country’s GHG breakdown via the UN https://di.­ unfccc.int/. At the time of writing, my country is still a “climate laggard” (An Taoiseach Leo Varadkar in 2018) due to our success in food production: Figure 2.3 graphic from Dr. Brian Ó Gallachóir at UCC hints at the complex issues underlying climate and carbon reporting. Within the transport sector, ongoing energy efficiency gains are also being swamped by consumer preferences for taller, larger, and heavier

2.3  What Is the Transport and Emissions Mix in Your Region?  7

Figure 2.4  Cars vs. SUVs, IEA 2021.

vehicles (SUVs) to replace more efficient sedan/saloons and hatchbacks, born during the oil crisis of the 1970s (Figure 2.4 IEA). The irony is many of these “jumped up” hatchbacks are physically smaller (usually one size down) than their old cars – leading to increased manufacturers’ profits (much needed to fund the transition to electric). The number of SUVs on the world’s roads increased by more than 35 million over the past 12 months, driving up annual CO2 emissions by 120 million tonnes – IEA 21st December 20211. Amidst all this gloom and complexity, it is important to remember we can fix the climate. We have already achieved great progress through global agreement and action; an example is the ozone hole which has been shrinking each year since 2014 due to the global actions taken under The Montreal Protocol 1988. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2019/2019-ozone-hole-is-thesmallest-on-record-since-its-discovery

2.3 What Is the Transport and Emissions Mix in Your Region? Your government will publish data on this and it is important to understand the scale so that you can put your customer’s impacts in context. Often,

https://www.iea.org/commentaries/global-suv-sales-set-another-record-in-2021-settingback-efforts-to-reduce-emissions?utm_content=bufferaf6cb&utm_medium=social&utm_ source=twitter-ieabirol&utm_campaign=buffer 1 

8  Context

Figure 2.5  One tonne of carbon dioxide gas – a balloon 10 m or 33 ft across. Sourced from http://www.carbonvisuals.com/blog/a-one-ton-time-bomb

relatively few commercial and road freight vehicles will emit many times as much per vehicle but be dwarfed by car emissions overall. What does 1 tonne of CO2 look like?2 see Figure 2.5 More importantly, how many litres of road diesel do we need to burn to emit 1 tonne of CO2 equivalent? In my country, the government says the standard is 2.68 kg CO2e per litre of fossil diesel or 373 L to emit 1 tonne (1000 kg ÷ 2.68 = 373 L). We can argue over the choice of factor later (see Section 7.2, Conversions), but, for now, 1 kWh of energy input emits 263 gCO2e (2.68 kg ÷ 10.169 kWh/L).

2.4  Transport as a System Transport is complex, with many moving parts interacting with one another in myriad ways. Again, to help you put the energy footprint and findings of your audit in its context, you need to provide an overview as a primer. This one from the Ellen MacArthur Foundation highlights the waste (or opportunities) neatly into one graphic. 2  Actual volume of 1 metric ton of carbon dioxide gas; at standard pressure and 15 °C (59 °F), the density of carbon dioxide gas is 1.87 kG/m3 (0.1167 lb/ft3). One metric ton (2205 lb) of carbon dioxide gas occupies 534.8 m3 (18,885 ft3, 117,631 US gallons). It would fill a cube 8.12 m high (26' 8") or a sphere 10.07 m across (33'). Source: http://www.carbonvisuals.com/ blog/a-one-ton-time-bomb

2.4  Transport as a System  9

Figure 2.6  Structural waste in the transport system – Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

For more on this topic, https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/ explore/cities-and-the-circular-economy provides a good synopsis and links to the circular economy – the core of Ellen’s work. What does Figure 2.6 show? The orange/red coloured pieces are the productive work; see if you can spot them. ●●

Cars are parked up for 92% of their day (2 hours use ÷ 24 = 8%).

●●

Of the 8% of time, they do what they are designed to do – moving: ○○ 1% of that 8% is spent sitting in congestion; ○○ 1.6% looking for parking, i.e., 20% of its driving time; ○○ 86% of its fuel never reaches the wheels; ○○ a road at peak throughput is only 10% covered with cars.

The one aspect we can really influence is unladen weight vs. payload (or passenger load), i.e., inertia. Figure 2.7 is a comparison I made between different vehicle types and their average payload or passenger count. Reflect on your own car use (if you drive or use a car) to see how these examples match your own experience of vehicle use and unladen weight versus payload or passengers.

10  Context

Figure 2.7  Payload as proportion of empty weight (source: author).

In comparison to private cars, commercial vehicles (CV) should only move when they are working, and, ideally, this is at least a full working day, but are they? How much of their movement is empty? 2.4.1  Where will Jevons Park his paradox? To visualise how much space cars take up in cities, see this Saturn Ion commercial from 2003 https://youtu.be/e_oWmY_mkCA. The tweet in Figure 2.9 is a tongue-in-cheek one from Brent Toderian, a well-known city transport planner based in Vancouver, Canada; He is making the point that electric cars will not solve our transportation challenges as the world urbanises3. What is Jevons’ paradox4? Simply put, it is that as our https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization This is from Wikipedia; in economics, the Jevons paradox (/ˈdʒɛvənz/; sometimes Jevons’ effect) occurs when technological progress or government policy increases the efficiency with which a resource is used (reducing the amount necessary for any one use), but the rate of consumption of that resource rises due to increasing demand.[1] The Jevons paradox is perhaps the most widely known paradox in environmental economics.[2] However, governments and environmentalists generally assume that efficiency gains will lower resource consumption, ignoring the possibility of the paradox arising.[3] In 1865, the English economist William Stanley Jevons observed that technological improvements that increased the efficiency of coal-use led to the increased consumption of coal in a wide range of industries. He argued that, contrary to common intuition, technological progress could not be relied upon to reduce fuel consumption.[4][5] 3  4 

2.5  Personal and Business Choices  11

Figure 2.8  Space is the final frontier. © 2021 https://fabiantodorovic.com/.

energy performance improves, we will use more of a particular energy service, e.g., transport. Lastly, Figure 2.8 shows this well-known cartoon from cartoonist © 2021 © 2021 https:// fabiantodorovic.com/ shows the problem is space – we devote too much to cars and cars are mostly air.

2.5  Personal and Business Choices With all this “waste” in the transport system, you would imagine (and you would be right) that there must be many opportunities for Figure 2.9  Tweet from Brent improvement. However business in particular Toderian. would not be in business for long if they did not already manage fuel well. Personal choices are often driven by emotion rather than need. Why do we drive a large 1.5 tonne (or larger) 4–5 seat car to just move around on our own, and why do we choose one brand of vehicle over another? The issue has been re-examined by modern economists studying consumption rebound effects from improved energy efficiency. In addition to reducing the amount needed for a given use, improved efficiency also lowers the relative cost of using a resource, which increases the quantity demanded. This counteracts (to some extent) the reduction in use from improved efficiency. Additionally, improved efficiency increases real incomes and accelerates economic growth, further increasing the demand for resources. The Jevons paradox occurs when the effect from increased demand predominates, and improved efficiency increases the speed at which resources are used.[5]

12  Context Tackling the “we’ve done all we can to save fuel” (business) and “I’ll always drive an xxxx brand vehicle” (personal) requires good communication skills in the auditor to establish credibility and even stronger powers of persuasion to prompt action.

2.6 Ecodriving If you are thinking “OK, but I am stuck with the car / van / vehicles I have now, how will I save fuel quickly?”, these are the five golden rules from the EU-funded Ecodriven project 2005–2012. NB: ECOdriving is a new driving style suited to modern vehicle & engine technology, it is safety first. “Hypermiling” is an extreme sport and not the same as ecodriving 2.6.1  The five golden rules ●●

Anticipate traffic flow: ○○ Look as far ahead as possible and anticipate surrounding traffic

●●

Maintain a steady speed at low rpm: ○○ Drive smoothly, using the highest possible gear at low rpm

●●

Shift up early: ○○ Shift up between 1200 (diesel) and 1800 (petrol/gas) revolutions

●●

Check tyre pressures frequently: ○○ At least once a month and before driving at high speed

●●

Consider any extra energy: ○○ Take off roof racks/boxes, turn off air conditioning, and empty loads

There is no copyright or exclusivity to this list. Your own local government and/or driving instructors association may have a similar list and include some tips tailored to local conditions such as winter driving. Include these local versions of ecodriving in your reports and keep them up to date. In the meantime, try the above the next time you are driving if you have the time and if it is safe to do so.

2.7  ICE vs. BEV Game Over – Already? Inevitably, we and our auditees will see electric vehicles as the panacea to wastage in transport. Please revisit Sections 2.4 and 2.5 if you think electric

2.7  ICE vs. BEV Game Over – Already?  13

cars will solve our transport emissions problem. Our transport challenges (and opportunities) go way beyond the drivetrain. The future of cars: “People are still physically going to need to move from Point A to Point B”, Mary Barra of GM said. “But they’re going to have multiple ways that they can do that”. Her ultimate goal, she said, is “a world with zero crashes, zero emissions, and zero congestion”. And that means largely a world, in her view, of autonomous electric vehicles. – Yergin, Daniel. The New Map (p. 370). Penguin Books Ltd. Kindle Edition. In the meantime, is the game over already for the battery electric vehicles (BEV) vs. internal combustion engine (ICE)? I believe it is, on 7 September 2021, the last major manufacturing holdout – Toyota – announced it will invest over US$13Bn in battery electric vehicles with over US$3Bn going into battery manufacture in the US alone. The reason is economies of scale. In 2018, McKinsey found in a teardown exercise that BEVs contained significantly less parts and less moving parts than an ICE; less parts means – in time – lower costs through higher volumes, i.e., we can expect to see BEVs selling far cheaper than ICE as the decade wears on. You can read the full McKinsey study at https://www.mckinsey.com/ industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/what-a-teardown-of-thelatest-electric-vehicles-reveals-about-the-future-of-mass-market-evs. My own summaries of the changes that we will see are as follows: ●●

ICE vs. BEV? In my view, battery electric has already won.

●●

Owning your car vs. renting it: whether via a lease or pay by the hour car club membership.

●●

Automation: Will we drive or be driven?

For updates on EV market share and sales globally, look at the IEA (2021), Global EV Outlook 2021, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2021. This also covers commercial vehicles. Figure 2.10 is a graphic from Peter Mock at ICCT as of December 2021. Having said all that, in the 1910s, it looked like battery electric cars, buses, and trucks were going to be the dominant replacement for the horse beating steam and Gotlieb Daimler’s ICE. By the 1920s, gasoline had taken

14  Context

Figure 2.10  ICCT car manufacturer announcements of EVs, December 2021.

over (there were even gasoline powered scooters5). We will debate the battery vs. hydrogen and other alternatives in the final chapters of this book. Until then, energy efficiency first. Less wheels less energy? But as Figure 2.11 shows, the fastest selling EVs are now two and three wheelers; IEA (2021), Global EV Outlook 2021, IEA, Paris https://www.iea. org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2021. The trend away from car ownership to using two and three wheelers looks set to continue; Europeans are expected to buy an extra 10 million bikes per year by 2030, 47% more than the annual number in 2019, said a joint statement from the three industry representative groups (CIE, CONEBI, and ECF).

Electric scooters were called “autopeds” in 1915; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Autoped for more on their brief contribution to personal mobility. 5 

2.7  ICE vs. BEV Game Over – Already?  15

Figure 2.11  Two- and three-wheeler electric vs. cars, buses, and truck – IEA 2021.

Figure 2.12  eBike sales projection Europe to 2030 – Conebi, ECF, and CIE.

Figure 2.12 shows the 30 million per year total will take bike sales to more than twice the number of passenger cars currently registered per year in the EU. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2020/12/02/e-bike-sales-togrow-from-37-million-to-17-million-per-year-by-2030-forecast-industry-­ experts/?sh=2046a3f72876

3 Where to Start?

With such a complex and varied topic as transport, we need a generic highlevel approach to allow us assess the opportunities and challenge the status quo. Be prepared for the “we have always done it that way” and “what do you know about transport” comments. After all, none of us like “feedback” on our driving. Having done this for 17 years, I feel somewhat confident challenging transport managers and their bosses whilst being clear that they are the experts in their business and areas I am not an expert in. How will you do it? The avoid shift improve model (next chapter) has helped me structure my approach in recent years. It aligns well with how transport managers work even if they do not use the same words or terms (IPCC AR6 also cites the ASI model in Chapter 5). In energy management, we typically follow the money and look for opportunities within significant energy users. The same approach can help you and transport managers focus your time and effort on the areas most likely to produce the desired results. By way of example, my personal hobby horse is aerodynamics, but I have learnt to check average speeds across the fleet before diving deep into this topic with a fleet. As aerodynamics only becomes a significant opportunity above 60 kph. To justify investment in aerodynamics retrofits, I would be looking for a fleet or vehicle average speeds in excess of 40 kph. Key steps: ●●

Establish 100% of energy use on an annualised basis and transport’s share of this use in kWh (money and CO2 as well but hold that for now).

●●

What are the plans to grow this activity and/or outsource it in the years to come? 17

18  Where to Start? ●●

What is driving this growth within the business?

Once you have some sense of the strategic direction of the company or fleet, you can plan where to invest your time and effort as well as the clients. There is no sense in investing large amounts of time in areas that may be shrinking or planned to be outsourced. It is obvious but worth restating that a small saving in a large user will often be worth far more than a large change in a small user. Use this to help you and the transport operator avoid distractions from otherwise interesting but not necessarily significant consumers.

3.1 Targets Targets are often arbitrary, but some rules of thumb (and they are strictly rules of thumb) may help to put your own feelings and those of the client in context. ●●

The world’s population continues to grow. How will the goods and services provided in this instance grow in the years to come? ○○ My own country’s population is projected to grow by 20%–40% from 2018 to 2050 and its freight volumes by 91%; this has to be factored into target setting.

●●

Freight volumes are expected to double globally by 2050 (ITF): ○○ https://www.itf-oecd.org/itf-transport-outlook-2021.

●●

The various scenarios for reductions from action that can be taken are in the rows of Table 3.1. The ITF Outlook 2019 estimates show the likely outcome without action to reduce: ○○ Source ITF Transport Outlook 2021 – © OECD 2021 Chapter 5, Figure 5.1. Freight transport demand and emission trends Version 1 – last updated: 05 May 2021.

The Smart Freight Centre has also projected forwards for freight emissions to 2050 from September 2021 see Figure 3.1. The challenge is huge, but the solutions are known.

3.2  SBTi Calculator So how do we project forwards to see what an emissions and energy saving target might be? For many transport operators, a simple back of the envelope

3.2  SBTi Calculator  19 Table 3.1  ITF transport outlook 2021 – © OECD 2021.

Tonnes–kilometres, 2015 = 100   2015 Recover 100 Reshape 100 Reshape+ 100 Outlook 2019 estimates 100 CO2 emission tonnes, 2015 = 100   2015 Recover 100 Reshape 100 Reshape+ 100 Outlook 2019 estimates 100

2020 103 103 103 116

2030 146 129 127 157

2050 255 221 208 326

2020 106 106 106 112

2030 104 84 66 142

2050 122 36 28 218

Figure 3.1  Smart Freight Centre freight growth graphic 2021.

calculation of the savings needed annually to reach “net zero” by 2030/40/50 will do. Your own country may or may not have passed laws stating what your local emissions reduction target has to be. In my case, the “science based” target is 51% absolute reduction in CO2 emissions to 2030 vs. 2018 or roughly a 7% reduction per annum.

20  Where to Start? But for those of us seeking a more solid foundation, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi; https://sciencebasedtargets.org/) offers a range of tools and Excel calculators to help you. There is one for transport, once you have established the headline numbers. At the time of writing the SBTi, transport calculator was out to consultation and could be downloaded via https://sciencebasedtargets.org/ sectors/transport. 3.2.1  Net zero This book is focused on energy efficiency and energy savings. A discussion around the definition and implementation of net zero or carbon neutrality is beyond our scope. However the following definitions from the Cambridge dictionary (https:// dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/) may help to clarify discussions. ●●

Net zero (of a country, city, etc.): Removing as many emissions (= gases that cause the earth to warm up) as it produces.

●●

Carbon neutral: If an organisation, activity, etc., is carbon neutral, it does not add to the total amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, for example, by doing things such as planting trees in order to remove as much carbon dioxide as it creates.

●●

A further definition of net zero emissions from the IPCC SR15: Residual emissions are balanced by removing an equivalent amount of greenhouse gas emissions from the atmosphere.

●●

Remove CO2 from the atmosphere using “negative emissions technologies” (NETs), for example, by restoring forests or through direct air capture and storage (DACS) technology.

If you would like to follow the debate around net zero, there is a good series of blogs at https://sciencebasedtargets.org/search?q=blog+net+zero.

3.3  Business Case Transport operations are busy places. Their managers will be busy and time with them will be precious; so to use it effectively, you must engage them swiftly. Often viewed as a cost centre and not a source of profit, transport needs time allocated each week to manage its energy and emissions effectively, i.e., downwards.

3.3  Business Case  21

Consider making a business case based on conversational language, i.e., we do not need exact numbers, the nearest ten or even hundred thousand will do. Business case (1 L = €1) Energy/fuel spend (approx.) Typical/projected savings (over three years) Potential saving over three years Potential saving over one year Profit (or non-pay budget) last year? Say 3% of €3m t/o Savings as % of profit or budget per year Sales or work needed to make same profit CO2 offsets (a last resort) as an alternative to saving fuel @ €15/tCO2 (or 634 hectares at 5 t/ha of forest per year, i.e., 634 ha in perpetuity)

●●

Example €1,000,000 10% €100,000 €33,000 €90,000 37% €1,100,000

CO2e 3,170,000 kg 317,000 kg 104,610 kg

(Savings equivalent to €1560)

How much to do you spend on fuel each week? ○○ Transport managers live in the “now”. Weekly figures are more likely to elicit a response than annual figures. You do the math to annualise, and multiply by 50 (weeks) if needed to simplify. ○○ For example, €20,000 per week × 50 weeks = €1 m per year.

●●

How much did the company/site/region make in profit last year? ○○ If the manager does not know or does not want to tell you, ask for turnover last year and assume a 3% net profit. ○○ For example, €3m turnover × 3% = €90,000 in net profit.

●●

If we could improve fuel performance by 10% over the next three years, how much would that contribute to profit? ○○ Note that we did not say savings or reduction. Explain that if you can do the same work with less fuel, the cost saved is profit.

●●

How much work/sales/deliveries would you need to do to make the same amount of profit? ○○ Allocate time each week to fuel management in line with the potential for profit.

22  Where to Start? Many will be sceptical of a 10% improvement even over three years, which we use here for convenience and speed of understanding in conversation. Instead, we can say “let us assume” just a 3% improvement, i.e., €33,000 in this example (above). Doing the same work/distance with €33,000, less fuel would increase profit in this example by 37% – a significant contribution. How much effort would a company put into increasing its profit by 37%? Ask the transport manager or the financial controller the same question and they should be able to give a rough answer in terms of sales or work; allocating even half this amount of time to fuel management each week will pay off in improved performance.

3.4  Carbon Offsets “Offsets” often get a bad press, because they can give the wealthy a right to pollute. In this target setting and time planning context, I have added the cost of offsetting emissions by planting trees to compensate for our annual emissions. At the time of writing, planting trees to last 100 years in my country costs €15/tonne CO2e at 3–4 tonnes per hectare. Thus, for the above example, we have the following: ●●

To buy the equivalent of 33,000 L of diesel in carbon offsets, I would need 104,610 kg in trees costing me €1560 instead of making €33,000 in profit.

●●

To offset the entire 1,000,000 L of diesel emitting 3,170,000 kg CO2e per annum, I would need 634 hectares planted in perpetuity, or for at least 100 years, at a cost or investment of €47,550 per annum.

3.5 Summary ●●

Establish the scale of the transport operation in terms of kWh, money, and carbon emissions.

●●

Assuming that the aim of the audit is to save money and reduce emissions, agree on a rough business case (you can put the accurate figures in your final report).

3.5 Summary  23

●●

Agree on the amount of time or resources to be allocated to fuel management each week. This will influence your recommendations and ensure the recipient can realistically act on your audit report.

With luck by agreeing simple goals, your transport manager will now be interested and supportive of your audit and some of the defensive walls will crumble to speed your work (show them how to save fuel in the time they are available, not the time they are not).

4 General Approach – ASIf

In this section, we introduce a generalised approach to saving energy and emissions in transport; you will need this in conversation and to help structure your own findings. To start with, we discuss personal mobility as a cross-cutting example. COVID has changed how we travel for work; in business, video conferencing has replaced the in-person meeting in many cases, and whilst video brings its own carbon emissions, it is certainly emits much less than driving or flying to meet someone see Figure 4.1. However, trade in goods and services ultimately depends on relationships, and, as humans, we will still need a face-to-face meeting, to build and cement those online relationships “people buy from people” as the old saying goes. So how should a business manage its transport and travel and what should you look for as an auditor? How often people meet and for what reasons will they vary by societal norms, the business sector, and company culture. Some will rely on relationships – others on lawyers. How can we approach this challenge and deliver measurable energy savings? Figure 4.2 ASIf offers a useful three-step approach that we can apply to all transport situations, to help us challenge the need for travel just as we challenge the need for an energy service in a building, factory, or process. ASIf framework devised by Schipper and Marie (1999) and adopted by the IPCC (Kahn Ribeiro et al., 2007; Sims et al., 2014) is a good place to start with all your audits and assessments in transport. It can be applied to all modes, sectors, and vehicle types.

25

26  General Approach – ASIf

Figure 4.1  Change in road passenger transport in early 2020, IEA, Paris.

Figure 4.2  Adapted ASIf framework.

It also supports conversation: “how will you save us fuel? We will apply the avoid shift improve model to your operations and our findings”.

4.1  Avoid: Travel for Business Business travel is, as discussed, an essential part of doing business, but as anyone who has had to do it regularly will attest, any novelty wears off fast. Airports are not the same as home or the office and waiting around is not productive. Increasing congestion and the risks associated with driving make this too an unproductive use of valuable employees’ time. The first question for anyone doing an audit or 50001: “is business travel in or out of scope?”

4.1  Avoid: Travel for Business  27

Figure 4.3  Workplace travel plan made simple.

Countries such as the UK require it to be included in energy audits and many countries and companies count it in their scope 3 emissions and energy audits under ESOS. If it is in scope, how will savings in business travel translate to the bottom line? Often reduced business travel results in a reduction in expenses paid out (HR budget), but no measurable reductions in fuel use or emissions (fuel or carbon budget) as we cannot see the associated fuel use (it was paid for by the employee). Emphasis here is on the word measurable. We have no metres for expensed mileage and we cannot dictate what car an employee uses on any given day so it is an area where savings may be calculated but not measured. 4.1.1  Calculating business travel impacts CILT International does a good programme in workplace travel planning and the UK has PAS 2050 – a standard to follow for workplace travel planning (WTP). However, for the auditor, it may just be a case of highlighting the amounts of money involved and explaining how to apply the ASI model to workplace travel planning. Figure 4.3 above is one we use in our audits, when business travel is in scope. Overleaf in Figure 4.4, we illustrate a more nuanced business travel planner. Following are some questions to ask around this topic to assure yourself of completeness. Company owned and fuelled cars: ●●

Are they part of an overall mobility plan?

28  General Approach – ASIf

Figure 4.4  Business travel choice – decision tree.

●●

Part of company car/remuneration plan?

Questions from you (the auditor) to the company: ●●

Who is responsible for transport/mobility planning?

●●

Is there a sustainable company car policy or a travel reduction policy? ○○ (working at home, teleconferences, private use, planning, etc.).

●●

Is car sharing/pooling encouraged or even mentioned?

●●

Alternative transport facilitated (walking, cycling, public transport, …)

4.1  Avoid: Travel for Business  29

●●

Are more energy-efficient cars (smaller cars in each category, overall max CO2 objective, etc.) incentivised or disincentivised?

Vehicle maintenance, is it checked e.g. by walkaround, are ecodriving (monitoring, promotion, information, incentives, training alternative energy carriers (electric cars, etc.) encouraged? The questions you ask are up to you and the circumstances you find yourself in, but they should aim to ensure no additional fuel is being supplied outside of the agreed audit scope. 4.1.2  Grey fleet: in or out of scope? How to calculate the fuel use for a vehicle where the company does not own, operate, or pay for the fuel (in part or otherwise)? Multiply the km expensed/reported (or miles) × a kWh or CO2e factor. Yes, that is it; unless you GPS track the (privately owned) vehicle, there is not much more you can do. This often leads to frustration but keep in mind that there are privacy laws in many countries and “expenses” are often agreed upon as part of an employee’s remuneration package, completely separate to any energy audit or carbon reporting requirement. “Grey Fleet” – a UK definition: “Any vehicles that do not belong to the company, but which are used for business travel. This might include a vehicle purchased via an employee ownership scheme, a privately rented vehicle or a vehicle privately owned by an employee. When they are driven on company business, often in return for a cash allowance or fuel expense, these vehicles then become considered part of the ‘grey fleet’ – and as such fall under the responsibility of the employer”. Source: https://www.bvrla.co.uk/industry-campaigns/air-quality/grey-fleet.html Calculations – from UK DEFRA and ESOS programmes Where a privately owned vehicle is used for company business: ●●

Usually paid as “pence (or cent) per mile”.

●●

The rate varies by company: company must confirm rate(s) to you.

30  General Approach – ASIf Company may supply you with km or monetary value: ●●

If supplied as distance in km or miles (preferred), you do not need rates and rate changes do not matter.

●●

If €/$ value: You need the rate (how else can you calculate the miles?).

How many miles expensed? ●●

Do you have miles vs. $?

What is the rate paid in $0.00/km? Are there different rates? ●●

km = Total $/$ 0.xx rate (s);

●●

km × ??? = L.

4.1.3  Will grey fleet fit in de minimis? At this stage, you may not be happy including any figures from “grey fleet”, expensed mileage, or staff travel in general; can you exclude it from the audit? In most audit standards, there is a percentage of the total that can be excluded from the audit – in the UK, it is 10%, in Ireland 15%, and so on. In EU law, it is called the “de minimis” rule as it relates to state aids; looking up a legal definition online1 produces a similar view. De minimis: An abbreviated form of the Latin maxim de minimis non curat lex, “the law cares not for small things”. A legal doctrine by which a court refuses to consider trifling matters. Remember the business case, no energy savings here; focus on areas where you can make a measurable difference in kWh and CO2e. 4.1.4  Mileage reduction opportunities: include? Our role as energy auditors is to identify energy saving opportunities; finding ways to reduce expensed mileage and similar costs is going to be a very sensitive topic. Having said that, following are some of the ways you can reduce kilometres travelled: 1 

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/de+minimus

4.2  Shift: Congestion and Traffic  31

●●

Lower the rate paid to that of an EV or similar clean car (this may lead to big trouble with a capital T which you may not be paid for).

●●

Incentivise public transport use by paying the same rate as if driving (may increase costs depending on how expensive or available public transport is in your region).

●●

Use the business travel planner to change usage and miles travelled voluntarily – COVID has shown us that we can change how we do business.

4.2  Shift: Congestion and Traffic “When stuck in traffic, you are the traffic” – we all contribute to congestion. There is a rich vein of cartoons and commentary on this topic online, but for our purposes, the key point is that we have a finite amount of road space and infinite demand for it. This graphic in Figure 4.5 from GIZ in Germany shows us the health impacts. 4.2.1  Travel decision tree principles – the five R’s According to CILT International, the 2012 London Olympics was a model example of travel planning and demand management. A congested city

Figure 4.5  How traffic shortens the life of Europeans, WHO 2003. Courtesy: GIZ.

32  General Approach – ASIf Rethink

Your journey, is it really necessary?

Rethink

Can you consolidate your trips?

Re-mode

Can you choose an active travel mode or public transport?

Reroute

Can you choose a different route that is less congested?

Retime

Can you go at different time to avoid congestion? Figure 4.6  The five R’s of sustainable business travel.

flowed more freely with the addition of millions of visitors – how did they do it? They implemented the UK’s PAS 500:2008 national specifications for business travel. This is available from www.eltis.org/sites/eltis/files/tool/­ sustainable-business-travel.pdf. A full explanation is outside of our scope, but the five R’s may help Figure 4.6:

4.3  Improve: Energy Use in Cars and Light Duty Vehicles This handy graphic Figure 4.7 from the European Environment Agency neatly illustrates the losses in our current internal combustion engine vehicles. It is based on US data, but the principles hold true worldwide. Source https://www.eea.europa.eu/media/infographics/vehicle-­emissionsand-efficiency-1 shows for every 100 units of fuel (or money) we put into the tank: ●●

70 units are consumed (lost) within the engine itself due to combustion losses (this is being generous many engines would operate on very light load and would be lucky to see 20% efficiency, diesels are higher up to 40% efficient).

●●

Five units lost to parasitic losses such as water pumps, oil pumps, etc.

●●

Five units lost to drivetrain, e.g., the clutch, gearbox, CV joints, etc.

●●

Only 20 units (out of the 100 we paid for) actually move us around: ○○ Rolling resistance consumes

5 units

○○ Wind resistance

10 units

○○ Braking

5 units

4.4  What You Cannot Control  33

Figure 4.7  EU EEA – where does energy go in your car?

So if we were to summarise the opportunities for improvement, it would be to seek an alternative to the internal combustion engine (another chapter) and to optimise rolling, wind resistance, and driving style (braking). The topic of alternative fuels (the f in ASIF) is for another chapter (13); for now, the key is to take on board and apply the ASI model to your thinking and approach to transport and its wider operations. ●●

Try to challenge the need for transport (avoid), the choice of mode (shift), and the performance (improve); only look at alternative fuels once you have exhausted the first three steps.

4.4  What You Cannot Control We generated this graphic (Figure 4.8) illustrating the energy mass balance for transport from the Australian Department of Resources, Energy & Tourism Energy Mass Balance: Transport Version 1.0 2011. You can generate something similar for any transport operation. Some of the key questions to ask (feel free to add your own) are as follows: ●●

How many of these aspects are within your control?

●●

How many can you change?

●●

How would you measure change?

34  General Approach – ASIf

Figure 4.8  Simple EMB energy mass balance for transport.

●●

What aspects are missing?

For simplicity, some that we have covered above are omitted, e.g., combustion losses because they are common to all vehicles. Others are speed (limited), air, or wind resistance (dictated by payload), rolling resistance, weight or volume of load, etc. Transport managers may ask whether they can take wind resistance, for example, into account, especially on particular routes. Without much specialised equipment2, this simply is not possible, hence the measurement questions above. In simpler terms, if the wind is predominantly from the West say, there should be a noticeable increase in fuel consumption heading into the West; however, before you and the manager disappear down that particular rabbit hole, ask yourself how the vehicle will get back to base, i.e., whether the effect will be evened out over time or even on a single return journey. Do not waste time on aspects you cannot control or measure.

At time of writing, Mercedes announced that they would include wind measurement equipment in their latest show car, the EQXX; time will tell if they apply this technology to their trucks, buses, and production cars. 2 

4.6 Weight  35 Table 4.1  Table of common losses for cars and vans.

Factor Out-of-tune engine Tires with 25% higher rolling resistance Tires under inflated by 5 psi Improper engine oil Route selection: road type Route selection: grade profile Route selection: congestion Carrying extra 60 kg Idling Driving at very high speeds Not using cruise control Using air conditioner Aggressive driving

Effect 4%–40% (1) 3%–5% 1.50% 1%–2% Variable 15%–20% 2%–40% ≤ 2% Variable 30% 7% (at highway speeds) 5%–25% 20%–30%

Sivak, Michael, Schoettle, Brandon, ITRIS-2011 University of Michigan: (1) 40% = loss of lambda sensor – a rare event

4.5  Helpful Pointers on Cars and Vans This Table 4.1 provides some handy rules of thumb for potential savings in light duty vehicles (light duty vehicles or LDVs usually less than 3.5t maximum gross vehicle weight). Summary of effects of factors influencing (light) vehicle fuel economy (exc. vehicle selection and configuration). NB: Rules of thumb are just that rough numbers use the numbers above to maintain momentum in discussions but base your findings on actual data from trip computers, telematics, etc. – more about this in Chapter 7.0.

4.6 Weight Now having an understanding of the opportunities for energy efficiency gains in road transport, let us return to the challenge of weight. To me, it is obvious that a heavier vehicle costs more to make, buy, and operate. You only have to go back to when you started cycling – older heavier bikes were harder to cycle. Today, the share of taller heavier vehicles is increasing year by year; in 2021, more than 50% of new car sales in my country were “SUVs”; it is

36  General Approach – ASIf Table 4.2  The cost of weight – NRCAN 2014.

Weight reduction Estimated fuel cost savings over 200,000 km kg 100 200 400 1000

Car $1040 $2080 $4160 $10,400

Truck (SUV) $1300 $2600 $5200 $13,000

L 800 1600 3200 8000

1000 2000 4000 10,000

At current Irish prices diesel 1.90/L (AA Ireland February 22) Car €1520 €3040 €6080 €15,200

Truck/SUV €1900 €3800 €7600 €19,000

important to be clear we are talking about a car style, not its capability. Taller boxier shapes are needed for more seats and load carrying; we also need actual 4 × 4 vehicles for off-road work and towing. So what is the problem with weight? Every extra kilogram you carry in unladen weight is an extra kilo you have to pay for in fuel – that is you, the owner, not someone else. This Table 4.2 based on data from MIT and North American fuel performance shows how much you can save by choosing a lighter vehicle. The full explainer was published by Natural Resources Canada in 2014 and can be downloaded from https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/sites/www.nrcan.gc.ca/files/oee/ pdf/transportation/fuel-efficient-technologies/autosmart_factsheet_16_e.pdf (checked 12th April 2022). For auditors, the key is to highlight to owners and operators how much extra fuel an added 100 kg in unladen (empty) weight will cost over the lifetime of the vehicle. Every extra litre of fuel we burn emits 3.17 kg CO2 WTW and we have to stop burning fossil fuels. The same issue applies to electric vehicles; bigger heavier EVs consume more kWh and emit more than needed at the power station (on average, only 40% of Irish electricity is zero emission, but this will vary by country). So that is the overview on weight. For more on all aspects of light duty vehicle design out to 2050, see the MIT paper On the Road Towards 2050 published in 2015 at 1062 MITE-Transportation_2050_Front-ns r14.indd.

5 Policy, Laws, and Audit Standards

Energy audits have been carried out for many decades, certainly since the 1973 energy crisis. I have looked for evidence from the age of steam, but it is a bit before my time1; I am sure they did their utmost to use as little coal as possible. So we live and work in an ever-evolving space with knowledge and experience constantly being updated. This section is about what I call the recipe books – our best practice international standards. My experience is in Europe, so I will work from there back to ISO – the International Standards Organisation. Way back in 2012 (hard to believe it is a decade now), the European Parliament voted to update (“recast”) the European Energy Efficiency Directive – what we now call the “EED” for short.

5.1  Energy Audit Standards When reading the following, please remember the EED is currently being recast again and is expected to be updated – after due process in the EU parliament – in 2024 and transposed to local member states statute books in 2025. Certain aspects of a directive will be member state competencies, e.g., professional qualifications; others will be transposed directly to local laws. Later in this chapter, we will discuss other standards, and these will be standards reached by industry consensus (eventually).

1  A shout-out to the Irish engineer Captain Matthew Sankey CB CBE FIMechE (9 November 1853 – 3 October 1926), who created the “sankey” diagram in 1898 to show the energy efficiency of a steam engine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Henry_Phineas_Riall_Sankey

37

38  Policy, Laws, and Audit Standards Mandate M/4792 was issued by the European Commission (the EU’s civil service) to CEN CENELEC on 13 December 2010. A mandate carries a higher weight in the EU law than a standard, with the result that several member states have specified in law that the resulting standards (EN16247 series) must be used. In all other jurisdictions, the standards are almost always recipe books of instructions for carrying out an energy audit to regional or global best practice. If you are expecting your energy audit to be read and acted upon in an EU jurisdiction, please give due weight to the EN16247-Parts 1–4 in your work. EED 2012 Article 8 (4): Member States shall ensure that enterprises that are not SMEs are subject to an energy audit carried out in an independent and cost-effective manner by qualified and/or accredited experts or implemented and supervised by independent authorities under national legislation by 5 December 2015 and at least every four years from the date of the previous energy audit. What does this mean? All organisations employing more than 250 employees are required to identify their energy saving opportunities since 15 December 2015 and every four years thereafter. Whilst countries such as Portugal (since 1999) and Sweden (chemical industry) had similar laws, others led in implementing the EED (UK), most were slower off the mark and the deadlines are now repeating across each of the four years since the original 2015 deadline depending on when companies or countries started. At the time of writing, the EED 2024 moves audits to Article 11, shifting the criterion for energy audits and energy management systems from the type of enterprises to the levels of energy consumption and requires a sign off of the audit recommendations by the management of the company. It also requires energy management systems for the largest energy using companies, which are likely to be more effective at ensuring that more cost saving energy saving investments will be made while probably having a lower overall cost burden on the company. Explanatory text also known as “staff guidance” elaborates on the changes: Energy audits should take into account relevant European or International Standards, such as EN ISO 50001 (Energy Management 2 

https://law.resource.org/pub/eu/mandates/m479.pdf

5.1  Energy Audit Standards  39

Systems), or EN 16247-1 (Energy Audits), or, if including an energy audit, EN ISO 14001 (Environmental Management Systems) [or EMAS]. Energy audits may be carried out by in-house experts provided the (to be determined) criteria for independence are met. The definition is being updated to: ‘energy audit’ means a systematic procedure with the purpose of obtaining adequate knowledge of the energy consumption profile of a building or group of buildings, an industrial or commercial operation or installation or a private or public service, identifying and quantifying opportunities for cost-effective energy savings, identifying the potential for cost-effective use or production of renewable energy and reporting the findings. In the meantime, we can see that the revised energy thresholds proposed are: Annual average consumption over Tera Joule the previous three years Implement an EnMS (50001) >100Tj

GWh

Litres of diesel3

27.8

>2,611,618

Subject to energy audit

2.8

>261,161

>10Tj

Furthermore: The results of the energy audits including the recommendations from these audits must be transmitted to the management of the enterprise. Member States shall ensure that the results and the implemented recommendations are published in the enterprise’s annual report, where applicable. These changes have significant implications for the qualifying enterprises as many in the transport sector would burn enough fuel to qualify for an energy audit without necessarily having the management time to implement any of the recommendations. For example, a typical heavy-duty vehicle in Europe burns around 35,000 L per year (in my experience) meaning that fleets as small as 7–8 trucks will qualify for an “energy audit”. Across Europe, we have 540,000 licenced truck operators with an average fleet size of less than five trucks; this change can be seen as a “business opportunity” or a bureaucratic cost and additional burden on already hard pressed SMEs. 3 

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/units-and-calculators/energy-conversion-calculators.php

40  Policy, Laws, and Audit Standards Personally, I believe energy audits, when tailored to the capabilities of the recipient, can be very effective tools to spur action, fuel, and emissions savings, but the potential for conflict and ineffective “compliance led” reports is obvious. Back to what you may have to deal with in your jurisdiction now. 5.1.1  EED 2012 article 8: Energy Audit Annex VI Quality You can read the full detail of the European Commission’s expectations of the recast directive at https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/ PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013SC0447. Legal requirements will vary by state as they are transposed, and also energy auditors are registered and qualified at member state level not at an EU level. High level principles of what is expected in a high quality energy audit: ●●

shall be based on up-to-date, measured, and traceable operational data on energy consumption and (for electricity) load profiles;

●●

shall comprise a detailed review of the energy consumption profile of buildings or groups of buildings, industrial operations, or installations, including transportation;

●●

shall build, whenever possible, on life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) instead of simple payback periods (SPP) in order to take account of long-term savings, residual values of long-term investments, and discount rates;

●●

shall be proportionate and sufficiently representative to permit the drawing of a reliable picture of overall energy performance and the reliable identification of the most significant opportunities for improvement;

●●

shall allow detailed and validated calculations for the proposed measures so as to provide clear information on potential savings;

●●

The data used in energy audits shall be storable for historical analysis and tracking performance (i.e., excel not PDF).

Other legal criteria may apply which you should consider, transport related examples from my country: ●●

S.I. No. 339/2011 – European communities (clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles) aka the “CVD” updated in August 2021 to be much more specific and with mandatory reporting.

5.2  Audit Standards from Around the World (Our Recipe Books)   41

○○ Are outsourced transport services included? Yes, in the case of the procurement directive (CVD), e.g., for bus services. But “no” for an energy audit as the scope will be limited to the organisation being audited/qualifying for the audit. ●●

S.I.151:2011 – electric vehicles (EV) must be considered when procuring new vehicles.

We also have a whole series of policies and directives that are not in law, and I am sure your country will too. To help you and your auditee understand the implications and applicability, ask yourself what are the: ●●

policy drivers;

●●

audit requirements;

●●

legal requirements/initiatives for new vehicles;

●●

in your state/region/country? NB: There are often many separate targets in policy, e.g., ●●

EU To 2030 “fit for 55” (was the Green Deal) 55% reduction in GHG vs. 1990.

●●

USA to 2030 (White House 22 April 2021): ○○ 50%–52% reduction in GHGs vs. 2005: ■■ carbon-free power by 2035. ○○ Transportation: ■■ reduce tail pipe emissions. ○○ Renewable fuels. ○○ Invest in transit, rail, and biking.

5.2 Audit Standards from Around the World (Our Recipe Books) As discussed, the above standards are usually a result of sectoral demand and consensus; this section is a list of the standards this author is aware of, with the author’s bias towards the EU experience.

42  Policy, Laws, and Audit Standards By all means, re-use and adapt your existing audit templates and plans, but, remember, transport assets move! All standards are available to buy from your friendly local standards body shop. 5.2.1  Australia and New Zealand AS/NZS 3598.3 Published in 2014 just ahead of the EU standards, the approach is pragmatic and practical with links to tips on how to do a detailed analysis, e.g., in energy mass balance and tests such as run down testing on closed roads where test cells are not available. See https://www.energy.gov.au/business/energy-management-­business/1understand-your-energy-use for an introduction. 5.2.2  EU EN16247:2014 Parts 1–4 – in revision (2021) As discussed above, these standards are mandated in EU law and transposed into some member state laws for mandatory energy audits. They provide a highly detailed step-by-step approach to each type of audit and are interlinked to provide a comprehensive solution for enterprise-wide audits. https://www.cencenelec.eu/ (note the updated versions due at the time of writing). 5.2.3 ISO 50002 energy audits – requirements with guidance for use As a supporting guidance to ISO50001, i.e., this is not an auditable/certifiable standard. 50002 specifies the process requirements for carrying out an energy audit in relation to energy performance. “It is applicable to all forms of establishments and organizations and all forms of energy and energy use”. The keyword here, in my opinion, is the word organisation, i.e., if you wish to audit the energy performance of an organisation, 50002 is the one to use. If you are auditing a transport operation specifically, use EN16247 Part 1+4 and/or AS/NZS 3598.3. Each of the standards discusses and, in some cases, defines the requirements for the auditor, which is outside the scope of this book and is

5.3  Definition of “Transport”  43

usually subject to local regulation. Consult local regulators to understand auditor requirements in your region and country. 5.2.4  Comparing standards These definitions are from the standards themselves. 16247-1  3.1 Energy audit defined Systematic inspection and analysis of energy use and energy consumption of a site, building, system or organisation with the objective of identifying energy flows and the potential for energy efficiency improvements and reporting them. AS/NZS 3598.3  5.7 Energy audit Systematic analysis of energy use and energy consumption of audited objects, in order to assess current energy use and identify, quantify and report on the opportunities for improved energy performance. ISO50002  3.3 Energy audit Systematic analysis of energy use (3.12) and energy consumption (3.7) within a defined energy audit scope (3.4), in order to identify, quantify and report on the opportunities for improved energy performance (3.10) Note 1 to entry: “Energy audit” is the normal expression in English. There are other expressions for the same concept, e.g. “diagnosi” in Italian and “diagnostic” in French. I have put the key and common words in bold: “performance” and “opportunities” feature and we will use those terms throughout the book. In discussion with hard-bitten transport managers, these definitions and words are worth repeating and, where necessary, showing on screen, the word “performance” is far more likely to appeal to a busy transport manager than “audit”.

5.3  Definition of “Transport” What do we mean by “transport”. Following are the standards’ definitions: ●●

Aus/NZ; 5.26 Transport: ○○ activity that implies the movement of people or goods from one place to another.

44  Policy, Laws, and Audit Standards ●●

EN16247 Part 4 (2014 and 2021 versions): ○○ activity that implies the movement of people, livestock, or goods from one place to another.

●●

ISO50002 does not define transport specifically: ○○ although both the above standards cite 50001 and 50002.

6 Energy Efficiency Objective

●●

How do we define our objectives for the audit?

●●

What have you agreed with the client?

The international standards are quite clear, i.e., each has a definition. 50002  3.1  Audit objective Purpose of an energy audit (3.3) agreed between the organization (3.13) and the energy auditor (3.5).

16247 – 1   5.1  Preliminary contact a) The energy auditor shall agree with the organization on:

1) aims, needs, and expectations concerning the energy audit;



2) scope and boundary(ies).

Personally, I go with the second, i.e., agree the objectives with the organisation you are working for. The standards and laws discussed earlier set the quality we are expected to meet, and the actual work should be defined by the circumstances on the ground.

6.1 Significance ‘Significance’ has an equivalent in environmental and carbon reporting i.e. materiality. In my experience, you will get most of your savings’ opportunities from approximately 20% of the work. You still have to do the other 80%

45

46  Energy Efficiency Objective to see this, but the sooner we can identify the significant or material aspects of the transport operation, the better. ●●

80% of your savings will come from 20% of your work/effort! ○○ follow the Pareto rule: do not chase the last 20%.

●●

Manage your time and your focus on the significant aspects.

Completeness matters: As discussed above, you need to know 100% of energy use to define what is significant and material; however, you do not have to analyse everything or chase every vehicle. Where might savings come from? Many small actions in combination are the answer. There are no magic wands in transport. Not to keep you in suspense and to help you with your discussions with sceptical fleet managers, here are some simple graphics from T&E – a Brussels-based NGO – that summarise where the EU expects truck manufacturers to find the fuel savings mandated by law in new vehicles from 2020 to 2030.

Figure 6.1  T&E opportunities for up to 24% energy savings in HDVs.

6.1 Significance  47

Figure 6.2  T&E opportunities for up to 35% savings by 2030.

You can read more about these targets, actions, and how easily manufacturers will be able to achieve them at T&E – source: https://www.­ transportenvironment.org/ Apr’18. Latest – Transport & Environment.https://www.transportenvironment. org/discover/. Targets of 15% and 25% since enacted into law across the EU.

7 Energy Measurement

How to measure energy use in transport? At the pump! Or, nowadays, the charger, i.e., the point of dispensing the energy to the vehicle – as that is what you pay for. The equivalent of the electricity metre number is the vehicle registration number. Typically, this follows the vehicle, although not always; so you may need to uniquely identify the vehicle. Attaching a fuel or charge card to the keys is one way to help automate the identification of kWh and litres dispensed to each vehicle. Fuel cards: very useful but imperfect: When reading fuel card reports, it is normal to see 40+% of odometer readings missing; 5% missing is the best you will get with humans involved in my experience. No mileage data? Visit and look at dashboard? Vehicles are often owned as new. Use today’s odometer reading to estimate annual mileage based on (say) 250 working days per year. Other sources are: ●●

vehicle maintenance records;

●●

sales data;

●●

units shipped;

●●

PAX carried.

No litres/gallons/volume data? Most unlikely to be missing, as volumes need to be tracked to prevent fraud, as fuel is a valuable fungible (untraceable) commodity, all transport operations will have controls in place to ensure against fuel theft. However, if all you are given initially is monetary values, you can calculate volumes by using the monthly fuel price/unit in the region or country you 49

50  Energy Measurement are working in; these are often available from government statistics offices. As you will have guessed monetary value ÷ unit price = volume by month or worst case year, e.g., $1,000,000 ÷ $2.50/gallons = 400,000 gallons. Your first recommendation/opportunity for improvement can be to record litres/gallons with every purchase! So having got our head around the basics, let us dive into the detail: ●●

fuel measurement;

●●

accuracy and calibrations;

●●

conversions;

●●

fuel purchasing;

●●

fuel stock reconciliation;

●●

vehicle stock reconciliation.

7.1  Accuracy vs. Available Data Many of us are used to having ¼ hour or ½ hourly data from electric and gas metres. Transport often offers sub-one-minute levels of detail from on-board systems via dedicated laptops and telematics systems (or even sub-second-interval data, but let us not go there). This can be fascinating, but realistically from a time management point of view, we need something more workable if we are to see trends and patterns quickly. Vehicles are fuelled at multiple locations which can be in different states, countries, and formats, i.e., the vehicle moves, and the data formats can vary. You will have 12+ months of low-resolution data via the fuel bills, invoices, or, hopefully, a fuel card system, i.e., a dedicated payment card with an online account that will summarise the number of litres dispensed at the pump to each vehicle. ●●

fuel in litres (or gallons in the USA) from the pump;

●●

kilometres or miles from the odometer on the dashboard of the vehicle;

●●

for plant and equipment, you may have operating hours instead;

●●

for very old or simple equipment, there may be no reading whatsoever.

You may or may not have the distance travelled since the last fill, as this is often keyed in by hand by the person behind the cash till. You and the client are

7.1  Accuracy vs. Available Data  51

dependent on the driver to take the right reading from the odometer and then the (often busy) human behind the till to key it in correctly at the point of sale. Simply put, we need a litre and distance reading we can have confidence in before, during, and after our work to make meaningful calculations. You will often be asked why this is important! I would direct you back to the business case section and to have a ready explanation, backed by your sponsor or senior contact to explain why kilometres and litres are needed. Many will feel litres or gallons alone are good enough as that is where the money is. In an ideal world, the correct odometer reading will be keyed at precisely the same time as the fuel is dispensed; however, in reality, there will be a gap. Following are some examples: ●●

Driver writes down the odometer reading on a small form and hands it to the till operator – potential for mis-keying.

●●

Driver keys a misread odometer reading from the dashboard into the pump before it dispenses/operates.

●●

Driver speaks the odometer number to the operator, and it is keyed in incorrectly by the till operator.

As can be seen, there is potential here for the incorrect number to be keyed in. What happens when you are faced with a sea of data where the litres are there from the pump, but you only have occasionally correct odometer readings? How will you know what is correct or even usable? Before we despair of getting complete data, it is worth pausing to consider how accurate our measuring instruments actually are in the real world (Table 7.1). Table 7.1  Accuracy, calibration, and uncertainty.

Aspect/input Fuel pump (forecourt) Fuel pump (on-site) Odometer Speed

Can it be Accuracy calibrated? Uncertainty Comment/action 99% Yes +/–1% Accept as 100% (revenue metre) 99% Yes +/–1% Seek calibration certificates 100% No –5% Ignore tyre wear 95% Yes +5% Ignore – GPS gives accurate speed down to 5 knots/9 kph/6 mph

52  Energy Measurement If our fuel pump that dispenses the fuel – our most accurate instrument – can only be calibrated to ±1%, what does that do to our need for completeness? ●●

Fuel pump ± 1% (99% accurate)

●●

1,000,000 L × 1% = ±10,000 L

●●

100,000 L per month ± 1000 L

●●

10,000 L per month ± 100 L

As you can see, chasing the last few litres (or in turn km) is not really worth it in terms of time. You will have your own views on this and need to form a judgement as to what is acceptable to you, the client, and any regulatory authority. We can assume that in most countries, the public forecourt fuel pumps are calibrated at least once per year under weight and measures or metrology rules and laws. The key questions you need to ask yourself and the client if pumps are on-site are: ●●

When was the on-site pump last calibrated? ○○ Can you see the certificate?

●●

How long was the fuel pump calibration run for? ○○ Its needs to be at least one full minute. ○○ Note that fast fill pumps can run at up to 200 L/minute and specialised equipment is needed by the person carrying it out (Figure 7.1 shows the type of equipment needed, and it’s not a bucket).

Figure 7.1  Fuel pump calibration equipment. Courtesy: Pumpwatch.ie.

7.1  Accuracy vs. Available Data  53

Figure 7.2  Round-down function in Excel.

7.1.1  How to deal with this level of accuracy or completeness? Do we present 123,456 or 123,000? ●●

Which is correct?

●●

Which is more likely to result in action to save fuel?

Some organisations will insist on the rounded number presentation, and others on the exact number to the last digit. Your text should include the decisions and assumptions you have made. Thankfully, we can use Microsoft Excel’s round-down or round-up feature (Figure 7.2) to keep our spreadsheet simple and produce a separate column with numbers for presentation. 7.1.2  Yes, but how do I calculate the fuel performance? At this stage, you may be getting a little tired of the ifs, buts, and maybes associated with transport data, but it is important to go in prepared to put up with the uncertainties associated and to make recommendations to the client

54  Energy Measurement in the audit to improve matters (before you are invited back to do the audit again). ●●

Example 74,417 L used for 161,648 km

●●

Litres per 100 km = 161,648 ÷ 100 = 1616.48

●●

74,417 L ÷ 1616.48 = 46.04 L/100 km

What if you have large numbers of fills/refuelling’s with no odometer data? Sum the litres and work from the first and last good readings with dates, to normalise your data for longer or more appropriate periods, e.g., 365 days or per month, etc. Later, we will discuss systems to automate this process, but, for now, let us assume that we have a spreadsheet downloaded or emailed to us from the fuel card systems. Install or upgrade telematics to improve quality of data (remotely accessible): ●●

aim for weekly interval data;

●●

use trip computers (dashboard).

So, by this stage, we should have some idea of the information we can glean from the available data. For those of us used to downloading detailed energy data from online electric and gas utility metres, transport can seem dauntingly complex; every vehicle is the equivalent of a metre point (the odometer) and its metre changes with every refuelling when out on the road (or rail, airport, or sea port). But, in reality, transport is almost always just distance and litres dispensed or consumed. Just be careful not to mix litres from fuel pumps (dispensed) with litres from the vehicle CANbus or OBD (fuel burnt) as the two are entirely separate and should not be mixed (Figure 7.3). If you see a trend in one, it should be similarly reflected in the other, offering at least the semblance of a double entry check, but as opening and closing stock of fuel in the on-board tank is not available, the two will never match; so do not waste time trying to match the two data sources. Table 7.2 is an example sheet that we use in training with tips to help you along: Key points to remember: ●●

You cannot go back in time; if the data is missing, it is gone. Move on likely to a smaller sample set.

Table 7.2

7.1  Accuracy vs. Available Data  55

56  Energy Measurement

Figure 7.3  Double entry for fuel.

●●

Where an odometer read is missing skip it, use the one before or after.

●●

For the avoidance of doubt, ignore the fuel just put in to the vehicle; you only count the fuel for the distance travelled.

●●

Fuel may be put into another vehicle on the one card; this may be to keep the business moving or simply laziness.

●●

You may see exceptional fuel use; ask whether this is unusual. Is there a pattern or a reason for this exceptional fuel use before jumping to any conclusion that fuel has been stolen, sold, or siphoned?

7.1.3  What units should we use? In my experience, metric units are best as the vast majority of the planet dispenses fuel in litres and records distance in kilometres (Figure 7.3). The USA is the only exception to this. Even in the UK, fuel is priced and dispensed in litres and many vehicles can report distance and performance in kilometres at the flick of a switch on the dashboard. This graphic from IEA ETP 2012 handily tells us what the dominant unit of measure for energy intensity or performance around the world is (Figure 7.4). https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-technology-perspectives-2012 However as someone who went to school with imperial units and now works in metric L/100 km, I do understand the need to present performance in miles per gallon (MPG) or even kilometres per litre (KPL). How on earth can we do this simply, quickly, and reliably?

7.1  Accuracy vs. Available Data  57

Figure 7.4  IEA (2012), Energy Technology Perspectives 2012, IEA, Paris.

In my view, we need to keep things as simple as we possibly can for ourselves and the busy transport manager. ●●

keep to original units as far as possible, e.g., litres dispensed;

●●

convert as needed for presentation only at the last moment (or far right column of spreadsheets).

I am open to argument about this, but we have come across so many errors where busy transport managers have converted litres to gallons and kilometres to miles, and then copied and pasted those down their analysis. I recommend keeping your sheets in the original units which, for most of us, is litres and kilometres. 7.1.4  Handy conversions to use in your presentation sections The UK Department for Transport published a whole series of simple conversion factors back in the noughties which we can use today in our presentation of figures.

58  Energy Measurement Although litres/100 km should be used, because it goes downwards with improved efficiency, many of us are still thinking in miles per gallon – MPG. The following conversions may be useful: To convert from MPG to litres per 100 km and vice versa, use the following calculators: US MPG = 235.215 divided by litres per 100 km OR Litres per 100 km = 235.215 divided by MPG UK MPG = 282.5 divided by litres per 100 km OR Litres per 100 km = 282.5 divided by MPG (282.4859 for excel)

7.2  Conversions and Bio Fuels Consult local sources for latest conversion factors and biofuel mixes in road fuels. NB: These vary by country and by year! When working at scale, beware of the falling energy content of fuels as their biofuel content increases; this example (Figure 7.5) is from Ireland, but similar would apply around the world. You will need to make these calorific calculations locally, but there are global conversion factors available from Smart Freight Centre and the Global Logistics Emissions Council. What is the GLEC Framework? – How to implement items | Smart Freight Centre. https://www.smartfreightcentre.org/en/how-to-implement-items/ what-is-glec-framework/58/

Figure 7.5  Declining calorific value of road diesel.

7.2  Conversions and Bio Fuels  59

Using the widely cited UK BEIS is useful; however, be aware that it is based on UK national fuels and use patterns where 1 L of diesel = 10.62 kWh (UK). Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2016#history To kWh Primary Fuel Unit (GCV) energy Diesel for road vehicles L 10.626 1.0 (EN590) Petrol L 9.567 1.0 Bio-diesel L 10.035 1.0 MGO marked gas oil L 10.550 1.0 LPG L 7.030 1.0 Natural gas kWh 1.0 1.0 CNG kWh 1.0 1.0 LNG kWh 1.0 1.0 Electricity kWh 1.0 2.5

kg CO2e per kWh 0.25146 0.24049 0.00000 0.27995 1.50807 0.18416 0.18416 0.18416 0.48100

7.2.1  Horses and liquids to energy terms You will often hear transport managers and drivers talk about horsepower and torque; a nice turn of phrase to help you explain the difference is: “Horsepower (HP) regulates how fast a car can travel; torque (NM) determines how quickly that speed can be achieved” – anon As we know, energy is power over time; however, we need to explain this to transport operators and managers as they transition from ICE to EV: ●●

1 HP = 745.7 watts (W) or if you are German, 1 “PS” = 735.5W.

●●

1000 W × 1 hour = 1 kWh.

●●

1 HP × 1 hour is = 0.745 kWh.

●●

1 BTU

= 0.000293071 kWh (for US readers).

7.2.2  Energy and the cup of tea (or coffee) Once you have explained this, you may ask the drivers how many horsepower is the kettle making their cup of tea/coffee/hot beverage.

60  Energy Measurement 3000 W (from label on base) 6 minutes to boil? 6 ÷ 60 = 0.1 of an hour 3000 W × 0.1 = 300 Wh 300 Wh ÷ 1000 = 0.3 kWh 20c/kWh × 0.3 = 6 c/cup of tea How could you reduce cost now? Fill the cup not the kettle. What horsepower (HP) is your kettle? 3000 W ÷ 745.7 = 4 HP ( ). Other terms that can confuse and delay your audit with discussion: Fuel = energy (we can convert all forms of fuel to energy). Fuel economy = energy efficiency in litres/100 km [ℓ or L/100 km]. For example, 37.7 L/100 km or 400 kWh/100 km at 10.62 kWh/L. As discussed above, KPL and MPG go up with improved efficiency which will make their graphs stand out (in a bad way) against others such as kWh/m2, etc. NB: In real life, the kettle/coffee maker will be 2.3 kW or roughly 3 HP, 3 × 0.745 = 2.235 kW, may be more. Check the label on the base before asking if needed; either way, it is a useful topic to introduce the power of electricity – imagine 3–4 horses galloping around your tea/coffee room, etc. Have fun with this, but do not overdo it. As many trainees from developing countries have pointed out to me, why would you keep boiling your kettle? Boil it once per day and keep the hot water in flask! Again, these are all good examples to help you engage hard bitten drivers and mechanics in a discussion about energy efficiency vs. fuel and the internal combustion engine or even actual horses if some of them go back that far (or claim to).

7.3  Fuel Stock Reconciliation Why do a fuel stock reconciliation? Avoid losses; following are examples: ●●

Short deliveries – how will it be certain you received the full amount?

●●

Leak prevention – how will you know you have leak?

●●

Theft – has an amount been dispensed/pumped to a jerry can?

●●

Audits the financial kind also known as a stock take or count.

7.4  A Fuel Checklist  61

Actions to ask or check for: You can dip tanks regularly; this can be with a stick or a calibrated stick and a calculation made for volume remaining (easier with a square tank than a cylinder). Dip tanks after each delivery, but wait 30 minutes for diesel fuel to settle (due to foaming); there is no point standing over the driver. Example stock take: ●●

Fuel tank level report (HGV) available via telematics systems and total.

How to monitor or check (on) vehicle stock? ●●

refuel to a consistent level;

●●

brim (can be slow), or second click on pump, or a weld or visible mark;

●●

work for a reasonable period, e.g., 1 week;

●●

refuel to same level (record fill in litres);

●●

limited amounts; max fill will disrupt measures.

NB: Too many limits and rules may interfere with business (and get bypassed). What happens if you find a significant discrepancy, e.g., if less than expected stock? Check whether it is a leak; you may be able to see pools of diesel or smell it if socked in. Or is it theft? Or was it “sold” at the side of the road? To protect tanks on vehicles from physical assault with drills and tools – immobilising the vehicle – a certain amount of theft or “sales” may be tolerated. In Europe, the ultimate solution is secure parking for trucks and coaches to allow drivers rest securely and reduce the potential for theft whilst the driver is asleep. Different countries, regions, and business sectors will have different approaches to this common problem, which tends to peak when fuel prices are high, whether the approach is lax or zero tolerance thread carefully and discuss before publishing or emailing any findings.

7.4  A Fuel Checklist We have distilled our questions into a checklist called ECOfleet™ originally a literal paper checklist which we now automate in our ECOfleet web platform.

62  Energy Measurement This is the checklist from our own audits we use as an aide memoire on the clipboard, or when delegating the fuel data collection task to others: □□

Diesel – purchasing and control ○○ Collate fuel usage by vehicle

□□

Litres and kilometres (no exceptions) ○○ Gallons and miles

□□

Compare L/100 km or gallons per mile weekly

□□

Capture odometer (km) at point of sale/refuelling ○○ No mileage = no fuel

□□

Make your life easier ○○ Attach fuel card to vehicle keys

□□

Duties ○○ Fiduciary – prevent theft ○○ Environmental – avoid leaks and spillages on-site ○○ Reporting – what is minimum requirement in your region?

□□

Simple rules for diesel purchasing ○○ Buy in bulk to maximise volume discounts ○○ Consolidate suppliers to maximize volume ○○ Consider larger storage tanks (on-site) ■■ A full tanker load is c38,000 L; need 50,000 L tank on-site ○○ Buy when prices are low ○○ Fuel card – % of usage?

8 Activity Data

To calculate energy efficiency, we need to divide our energy use by a unit of activity. In almost all road transport, this will be the distance travelled as discussed above in Chapter 7. However, vehicles doing useful work travel from A to B carrying something or someone; how do we factor this into our audit? Assuming we have basic kilometre data from the source cited above, we need to see what a vehicle is doing, i.e., its productive work. Once it has left the depot, how do we do that? What is activity? But where is the “what” vehicles do each day? The answer is usually in the vehicle telematics and/or the planning system for the organisations. Let us start with telematics also known as tracking or GPS. Before looking for or at any telematics data, ask the client what the activity of the fleet is. How do they define it? What does a busy (or quiet) day look like? This answer will equip you to ask the right questions when you do see the online systems. Vehicle telematics: Also known as GPS or tracking, it is worth investing some time in explaining how these systems work so that we can understand their limitations. I have been working with vehicle telematics since 2001, but lacking a definition, I took a look at Wikipedia. “Telematics is an interdisciplinary field that encompasses telecommunications, vehicular technologies (road transport, road safety, etc.), electrical engineering (sensors, instrumentation, wireless communications, etc.), and computer science (multimedia, Internet, etc.). Telematics can involve any of the following: ●●

the technology of sending, receiving and storing information using telecommunication devices to control remote objects 63

64  Activity Data ●●

the integrated use of telecommunications and informatics for application in vehicles and to control vehicles on the move

●●

global navigation satellite system technology integrated with computers and mobile communications technology in automotive navigation systems

●●

(most narrowly) the use of such systems within road vehicles, also called vehicle telematics”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telematics April 2022 I think this is pretty comprehensive, but most fleet managers would not recognise it; so let us discuss the terms they use.

8.1  Passive to Active Safety Older cars used to breakdown and you had to thumb a lift or hope for help at the side of the road. Modern cars now have sufficient electronics to limp home, i.e., modern cars can have as many as 40 electronic control units (ECUs) on board. Vans are similar, and trucks and buses may have many more. Are our cars already tracking us? Yes and No – if you can see up-todate traffic information on the dashboard, then someone somewhere knows where your vehicle is; otherwise, how would they be able to send you that local traffic data? However, generally speaking, no matter how sophisticated the display is, no one is actually watching where you go (would be a pretty boring job for my car at least).

8.2  Where Are They? GPS = Positioning Only The global positioning system or GPS is owned, operated, and maintained by the U.S. Air Force (Galileo by the EU, Beidou by the China government, and Glonass by the Russian government). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System offers good history to the creation and delivery of GPS services since 1978. Your phone/car/watch listens to GPS but does not transmit any data to the satellite. This is pretty obvious as there are no dish antennae on

8.2  Where Are They? GPS = Positioning Only  65

your phone, car, or watch, but it is often surprising how people view the technology. GPS uses at least four satellites and time to calculate your position using math. There are no beams or cameras despite what you may see online. The signals are extremely weak and can easily be blocked (GPS blockers) or interfered with (spoofing). The circle of error is at least 4 m, i.e., either side of a road or the field next door; this matters if you are looking at a map online and it appears the driver is in the field or on the wrong side of the road. Higher errors occur in urban canyons, i.e., where tall buildings hide one or more of the satellites from view. So GPS tells us where we are but not what we are doing, e.g., speed is calculated over several positions; after several position calculations, we can tell which way the vehicle is heading. Understanding these basic points will help you when viewing doubtful or dubious data, e.g., a vehicle may show it is done at 1,000,000 miles or km in a week. Simplest approach to such issues is if in doubt, leave it out and omit that vehicle or time period from your analysis. 8.2.1  CAN = Controller area network The CAN or CANbus controls the vehicle itself; it is the nervous system telling lights to switch on and off, as well as controlling important life saving features such as the brakes or air bags. As such, it is a very important and sensitive system to manufacturers and fleet operators; we really do not want to have anyone interfering, disrupting, spoofing, or controlling the CANbus. Can your car be hacked? Yes. These videos are getting old now, but they serve to illustrate the point about the CANbus and the need to secure it. ●●

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/can-your-car-be-hacked-feature

●●

http://www.forbes.com/video/2616901840001/

Since these videos were made, the CANbus should have become more secure … or at least we would like to think so. Exercise for you: Go out to your car and find your car’s OBD socket; it will usually be somewhere on the driver’s side and accessible by a mechanic when the vehicle is up on a ramp or lift. The OBD socket will look something like the graphic below.

66  Activity Data

8.3  OBD = On-Board Diagnostics “On-board diagnostics (OBD) is an automotive term referring to a vehicle’s self-diagnostic and reporting capability”. https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/On-board_diagnostics Since the 1990s, an on-board diagnostics or OBD socket has been required by law; this was originally to enable emissions testing, e.g., to record car’s rev’s whilst being tested. Since then, its uses have greatly expanded; a quick search online will reveal a wide variety of devices that can be plugged into the OBD. We are only interested in those which can give useful information such as fuel burn, payloads, or driving style. Heavy duty vehicles (HDVs) such as trucks and buses have the same socket as cars and vans but use a protocol called J1939/FMS standard, which generally (these days) works well and gives excellent insight into how a vehicle is being operated. See http://www.fms-standard.com/ Cars’ and vans’ OBD sockets look the same but very much do their own thing, i.e., they do not work well for data such as fuel burn or even the odometer reading. This situation is changing as manufacturers (Tier 1 OEMs) team up with large telematics companies (Tier 2 or lower) to create new value-added services. Telematics – only as good as the data it gets from vehicle (GI = GO): GI-GO means garbage in = garbage out, and this neatly summarises the telematics sector. You may have an excellent piece of hardware delivering detailed and useful data from one vehicle and not from another. You may even see variations from the same make and model but with differing software installed at the factory. As I write, this situation is improving, but be sure to understand where your data is coming from before analysing and/or making recommendations. A simple example is distance; is the distance you are seeing in the reports from the odometer (via CAN/OBD) or derived from the GPS data calculated?

8.5  Sample Telematics Report  67

Figure 8.1  HDV dashboard trip showing fuel used at idle. Source: author.

Older systems might calculate distances as the crow flies, i.e., in straight lines; needless to say, these did not last too long or were quickly updated. Modern systems take the data and match it to the road on a map; so it is pretty good but not the same as the odometer. Either way, so long as you know which you are dealing with, do not waste time matching the figures; use the same source consistently.

8.4  Telematics Systems: A Generic Guide Almost all modern vehicles have a vehicle trip computer (Figure 8.1) – on the dashboard which you can see and photograph or use for analysis. Look for: ●●

distance in mileage or kilometre;

●●

engine hours;

●●

idling hours;

●●

PTO hours;

●●

fuel usage in litres;

●●

litres per 100 km.

TIP: use a camera! And photograph the registration or similar vehicle ID number before you start so that you can match the trip computer to the data. On new vehicles, this same data may be accessible via an app!

8.5  Sample Telematics Report Systems vary enormously in their depth and presentation of data; the following example (Figure 8.2) from Bluetree Systems (now Orbcomm) is a great example of a report that summarises performance across the fleet in one screen:

68  Activity Data

Figure 8.2  Fleet summary report. Courtesy: Orbcomm/Bluetree.

Over a 12-month period, this “Fleet Summary Report” shows reductions in: ●●

L/100 km;

●●

idling;

●●

over revving.

If you are lucky enough to get one of these reports in PDF or Excel format, your audit and subsequent work will be made very easy. However, do not be surprised if the fleet manager is unaware or does not use these extremely useful and timesaving reports weekly.

8.6 Telematics is Only as Good as the Reports Managers Use These two graphs (Figure 8.3) from a project we did in 2012 and subsequent years show how many reports each user ran each week, i.e., not just if they logged in or not but how often they ran a report – any report. What this shows is that user 1 who ran the most reports saved the most fuel in L/100 km. Bear in mind that each user was paying for this telematics system at roughly €20/vehicle per month over many years.

8.7  Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs)  69

Figure 8.3  Use telematics weekly to save fuel. Source: author.

In your audits and reports, be sure to check how the telematics reports are being used and what value they are adding to the business. If the reports are not being used at all (not an unusual occurrence), your first recommendation is to ensure that the relevant reports are used regularly. In my experience, weekly use is necessary to deliver savings; think about the conversation with a driver 3 or 4 weeks after the fact or incident – will he or she be able to remember what happened? Most unlikely, many of us cannot remember what the traffic was like on the way to work. A structured approach is needed to sustain savings; ISO 50001 is a structured approach to sustain savings. In my experience, professional drivers respond well to open, transparent, feedback; this applies across all cultures and languages – in my experience. “When performance is measured, performance improves. When performance is measured and reported back, the rate of improvement accelerates”. – Pearson’s law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Pearson

8.7  Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs) So now having hopefully gathered our activity data (more to follow on this) and understood our sources and their foibles, what is a suitable energy performance indicator for transport? Very often, you will only have litres and kilometres and your recommendation may be to work towards a better metric over time.

70  Activity Data

Figure 8.4  Example metrics.

What is the best practice metric? Usually, some variation on what the work actually is alongside the distance travelled examples are in Figure 8.4. Keep in mind what you are trying to show is savings in terms that are meaningful to the organisation. To repeat what was said at the top of this chapter, ask the client what the activity of the fleet is and how they define it. What does a busy (or quiet) day look like? How will you benchmark this data? Convert to tonne–km for goods and to passenger–km for passenger transport. If you reside in the US or UK, you may wish to present this in miles, but the direction of travel for benchmark data is metric, i.e., you will find a much wider and deeper set of sources if you search in metric. During the pandemic, many operators were paid to fly, drive, or operate at part load or even near empty; indeed, in public transport, services are often run empty to start, on a build it and they will come basis. For these situations, available seat km is a useful metric; however, I would urge your customer to track the aforementioned litres, total km, and actual passenger and tonne km in parallel and to maintain the same into the future.

8.8  Tonne–Km and Passenger–Km Where does this “tonne–km” come in I hear you ask? Well up to this point, we have been looking at getting primary data in the form of litres and kilometres similar to kWh and m2 or opening hours. For carbon reporting and to connect our audit to an operator’s revenue, we need to build a bridge to the actual work done by the vehicles in use.

8.9  Testing Your EnPI  71

Many of us will be familiar with passenger–km as it often appears around airlines and public transport. One tonne–km is: ●●

One tonne carried for 1 km ○○ 1 tonne – km or tKm (Eurostat).

●●

Not total tonnes × km: ○○ as the power law1 takes effect; ○○ planning systems often have good tonne and planned km.

●●

We are looking for tonne and actual km (primary data).

Longer definition of tonne–km from Eurostat: A tonne-kilometre, abbreviated as tkm, is a unit of measure of freight transport which represents the transport of one tonne of goods (including packaging and tare weights of intermodal transport units) by a given transport mode (road, rail, air, sea, inland waterways, pipeline etc.) over a distance of one kilometre. And passenger kilometre: A passenger-kilometre, abbreviated as pkm, is the unit of measurement representing the transport of one passenger by a defined mode of transport (road, rail, air, sea, inland waterways etc.) over one kilometre. You can read the full Eurostat explanations at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ statistics-explained/index.php?title=Category:Transport_glossary and view the rationale behind the forthcoming ISO14083 in Smart Freight Centre’s Global Logistics Emissions Council framework guide at https://www.smartfreightcentre.org/en/how-to-implement-items/what-is-glec-framework/58/. For calculating tonne–km and similar, the following Table 8.1 of conversion factors may be useful – Source GLEC Framework, Page No. 70.

8.9  Testing Your EnPI Many auditors will be familiar with using regression analysis to test the strength of a relationship between any two variables.For those who are not, cast your mind back to your senior or secondary school days and calculating

72  Activity Data Table 8.1  SFC GLEC conversion table synopsis.

To convert from Distance Foot (ft)

To   Meter (m) Yard (yd) m International mile (mi) m Nautical mile (nmi) Kilometer (km) Weights   Short ton (2000 lb) Metric tonne (t) Long or imperial ton (2240 lb) t US pound (lb) t Kilogram (kg) t US gallon Liter (l) Short ton-mile (ton-mi) t-km Conversions specific to container shipping

Multiply By  

0.304 8 0.914 4 1.609 344 1.85  

0.907 184 74 1.016 047 0.000 453 592 0.00 3.785 411 784 1.46

 

These figures are adopted from IMO to represent common TEU weights. Cargo type

Tonnes per TEU

Lightweight cargo Average cargo Heavyweight cargo Empty container Container size 20’ standard and high cube container 40’ standard 40’ high cube

 6.00 10.00

14.50  2.00

TEU conversion factor (TEU equivalents)  1.00  2.00  2.25

the slope of a line, so as to be able to “predict” a particular outcome (that is regression analysis). If your eyes have glazed over at this point, bear with me; this section may save you a lot of work in analysing poor quality data or data that includes irrelevant data. This really matters in transport as you have so many diverse sources. Following is a sample data series from a real-life customer who shall be nameless:

8.9  Testing Your EnPI  73

Figure 8.5  Regression analysis of distance vs. fuel.

When we plot the total litres vs. distance in kilometres as in Figure 8.5, we see an r2 value of 0.1104. So what you may say, but what this says in plain English is that 11.04% of the variation in fuel use can be explained by the variation in distance travelled. As these vehicles only move when loaded, this cannot be right; we would expect to see r2 values in excess of 0.90 or in my temperate country 0.95, i.e., 95% of the variation in fuel use should be explained by the variation in distance travelled.

74  Activity Data

Figure 8.6  Regression analysis of jobs vs. fuel.

Needless to say, the customer insisted the figures were correct. It was only when I met the man responsible for the figures and showed him the above that he explained that the fuel use reported included fuel sales, i.e., fuel sold to subcontractors working for the company (not included in the km data) that we figured out what was wrong. How did I know to push; well, I also did the same exercise for the number of jobs or deliveries the company made per month and could see there was a reasonably strong relationship between work done and fuel use – r2 = 64.29 means 64.29% of the variation can be explained by variation in work done – see Figure 8.6. 8.9.1  How to do regression analysis in excel There is a lot more to regression analysis than we can cover here, there are myriad videos on YouTube to show you how to plot the fuel in litres and distance in kilometres from adjacent columns to a scatter gram, then right click to add trendline and see the r2 value (as in Figure 8.7). When and where to use regression analysis in energy audits is a book in itself, but I think the paper from the Harvard Business Review is a useful short guide: see https://hbr.org/2015/11/a-­refresheron-regression-analysis, or for a more cre- Figure 8.7  Screenshot from Excel ative view, see https://hbr.org/2017/05/ showing how to Add Trendline after linear-thinking-in-a-nonlinear-world. right click on scatter gram.

8.10  Energy Mass Balance – Transport  75

8.10  Energy Mass Balance – Transport Back in Section 4.4, we mentioned the aspects you cannot control. It is being repeated here to remind us that many impacts on energy performance in transport are outside our control. An energy mass balance is not necessary to complete an effective energy audit, but we may want to explain and highlight particular opportunities for energy saving. In my case, it is usually aeroFigure 8.8  Author’s graphic depicting Australian Government EMB. dynamics, where I have learnt to use dirt visible on the vehicle and pictures to illustrate my points. Nonetheless, the Australian Government has done a good job of telling us how to do EMBs in transport; so thanks to the Australian Department of Resources, Energy & Tourism Energy Mass Balance: Transport Version 1.0 2011; https://aems.ie/download/energy-mass-­ balance-transport-department-of-resources-energy-and-tourism-australia/ For any of the many variables (see Figure 8.8) impacting on fuel performance, ask yourself the following: ●●

How many of these aspects are within your control? ○○ The weather is not within your control, nor is traffic congestion.

●●

How many can you change? ○○ You cannot change the weather or traffic; you can change time of travel to avoid the worst impacts.

●●

How would you measure change? ○○ In theory, you could measure the wind speed, but, realistically, you do not; the vehicle has to come back, which evens out the impacts.

●●

What aspects are missing? ○○ If you did not have detailed telematics data, how can you take driver behaviour into account?

In short, transport is complex with many variables which you cannot objectively measure; in an energy audit, we should, in my opinion, deal with those variables we can cost effectively measure.

76  Activity Data

Figure 8.9  A study in options to improve aerodynamic profile of heavy-duty vehicles in Europe – by Adithya Hariram, Thorsten Koch, Björn Mårdberg, and Jan Kyncl – 2019.

8.10.1  Where does my money go? When an HDV operator asks you to explain where they lose the most money or the potential offered by alternatively fuelled power trains (a separate chapter), you will need to be able to show where their money goes. The simplified graphic used in Section 4.3, Improve the energy use in cars and vans, is often more than enough to explain the 60%–80% losses in combustion engine powered cars and trucks. But where a more detailed breakdown is needed, I am indebted to this Open Access Project Report, A Study in Options to Improve Aerodynamic Profile of Heavy-Duty Vehicles in Europe by Adithya Hariram, Thorsten Koch,Björn Mårdberg, and Jan Kyncl – 2019, Figure 8.9. The paper looks at the opportunities for longer, more capable freight vehicles in Europe. However, along the way, it does a good job of explaining the losses in kW (power), in this instance, for a notional 60-tonne double length truck combination.

9 Site Visit and Communications

Site visits are required in EU audits under EED 2012 Article 8. You may be able to do a desk-based audit without a visit where there is detailed telematics data available, but, personally, I find the site visit invaluable as it helps to build the relationship for later when you hope to be invited back. An important note about the word audit: if drivers and others hear there is an auditor coming on a particular day and time, all you may see when you get there is the dust as they disappear into the distance – this is not a joke Figure 9.1. So avoid the word audit if at all possible – be open that you want to talk to drivers and hear their ideas about saving fuel. You will, if allowed by the management and circumstances, learn a huge amount about the “why” vehicles are operated the way they are in any fleet by listening to drivers.

9.1 Safety You are entering a working environment where the major assets will be moving about, often at speed; so safety must come first. Assuming your country has some form of road or transport safety authority, this topic should have been well established before your visit, but following are my key actions prior to every site visit: ●●

Safety and PPE – ask beforehand ○○ Hi-vis and steel boots are usually needed, hard hats occasionally. ○○ Never assume your yellow/red/orange is the correct colour – ask!

●●

Who will act as guide? ○○ Who has access to the vehicle keys and authority to support your walkaround in particular when talking to drivers and other operatives? 77

78  Site Visit and Communications

Figure 9.1  Stock image showing disappearing in a cloud of dust.

○○ You may, on occasion, be offered free access to the keys and an unaccompanied walk-around. Please do an appropriate health and safety course and possibly even some HDV driving lessons before you commit yourself to this. There is nothing worse than wasting a visit because you could not adjust a steering wheel to see a dashboard trip, or even open the doors to a bus. I have made sure my company branded hi-vis vest has an appropriate message to invite curiosity (“energy”) whilst avoiding the word audit; think about yours and/or ask to borrow a client hi-vis when on-site.

9.2  Agenda for Your Site Visit Any site visit should have a plan, and this should be agreed and sent beforehand. This is professional courtesy, but it is also to ensure the vehicles you are looking for will actually be there. A typical site visit agenda might look like the following (tailor to your needs): ●●

Introductions to agreed contacts: ○○ Reprise business case, reasons for being here, and the words to be used when talking to drivers and operatives (script if necessary).

9.4  Example Findings from “Chat”  79

●●

Energy/fuel management or these days “CO2” may be the key topic: ○○ Again, agree the terms to avoid time wasting explanations later.

●●

Plan walk around: ○○ Are the requested vehicles present? ○○ Meet the drivers.

●●

Wash-up visit with first contacts and review your findings (there should be no surprises later for recipients even if analysis is to follow).

9.3 Planning As the auditor, you need a plan. Key questions to ask yourself (you may or may not share this with the client) are as follows: ●●

Which vehicles do I want to see, e.g., those with largest fuel use in litres or those with best and worst performance in L/100 km? ○○ Where are they located? ○○ When are they present (this may be at odd hours of day or night)?

●●

Who has the keys? ○○ Where is the driver?

●●

Map it! How many hectares is the site, and will you be allowed drive around? If not, who will drive you, etc.?

9.4  Example Findings from “Chat” Drivers and operatives such as mechanics will give you key insights into how a fleet actually operates as opposed to how managers think it operates; always make the time for this chat as you walk around. Some operatives will take more time than others, e.g., in my experience, tyre suppliers always have a lot to say; so build in the extra time into your audit, if you finish early, that is a bonus. Just looking back at some audits, following are example comments from drivers who prompted me to look again at a company’s fuel data (no telematics in this instance): 1.

Long delivery routes – puts time pressure on drivers: ●● This was not obvious from fuel data as these vehicles showed good L/100 km compared to others on multi-drop work.

80  Site Visit and Communications The old van had the fridge on top leading to cross wind challenges

The replacement fridge was built into the roof reducing the buffeting

Figure 9.2  Before and after fridge in van.

2.

Fuel management feedback to drivers is weak: ●● Almost no feedback to driver on performance. ●● Drivers not ecodrive trained (vs. what we were told by owner).

3.

Vans sized for largest potential load, not fuel/route efficiency. ●● No/little thought given to aerodynamics despite high speeds. This came out when drivers asked whether they could get help with cross winds; the vehicles were so high that the drivers were being blown about a lot. Figure 9.2 shows the before and after impact of this straightforward conversation with drivers.

The key point here is that all the data in the world will only tell us what happened not why; to understand the “why”, you need to get your boots muddy.

10 Identifying Opportunities

As the core reason for doing an energy audit is identifying energy saving opportunities, this is where the rubber hits the road – often literally. Back to our ASIf and avoid shift improve, the following quotes from the IPCC AR6 report published on 3 April 2022 may help to structure your approach and the audit outcomes (see Figure 10.1): ●●

“Rapid and deep changes in demand make it easier for every sector to reduce GHG emissions in the short and medium term,” the report declares in its chapter on demand, services, and social aspects of mitigation. Those changes begin with understanding that “new ways of providing services can help avoid, shift, and improve final service demand”.

●●

“The greatest Avoid potential comes from reducing long-haul aviation and providing short-distance low-carbon urban infrastructures,” the report says. “The greatest Shift potential would come from switching to plant-based diets. The greatest Improve potential comes from within the building sector, and in particular increased use of energy-efficient end-use technologies and passive housing”.

RETHINKING DEMAND: “Tackling Consumption Can Deliver 40-70% Cut in End Use Emissions” https://theenergymix.com/2022/04/04/rethinking-­ demand-tackling-consumption-can-deliver-40-70-cut-in-end-use-emissions/. And in original Chapter 1 Transport https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg3/pdf/ IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FinalDraft_Chapter01.pdf As road transport of goods and freight are likely to be the predominant area of work, the examples below focus on this aspect. For plant and service vehicles, the same principles and approach will apply.

81

82  Identifying Opportunities

Figure 10.1  Avoid shift improve, IPCC AR6.

●●

For passenger services where carrying more passengers means less cars on the road and higher fuel costs for the operator, the opposite is often the case: ○○ NB: Business travel was addressed in Chapters 1–5. ○○ Other modes are dealt with in Chapter 11.

Just a quick reprise of where we are now:

In my experience, 80% of your savings will come from 20% of your work/ effort! Unfortunately, we will not know which work and effort until we have applied the findings and measured the results.

10.1  Avoid: Tackling Transport Demand  83

Please remember the Pareto rule: do not chase the last 20% unless you have already implemented the big stuff: Manage your time and your focus.

10.1  Avoid: Tackling Transport Demand In goods and services we – the transport operators – are often at the end of the supply chain, i.e., goods will have moved by rail or by boat in bulk before being broken up into customer deliveries. We cannot assume the customer has optimised their supply chain already before it gets to our operator. So the first thing to estabFigure 10.2  A chocolate Easter egg – an lish is what do we ship most of? extreme example of shipping air. In many cases, the thing we ship most often is air; what we mean is the empty space (if any) around the products in the vehicle Figure 10.2. How can we avoid shipping air? A simple example often practiced in the online delivery world is to replace boxes with bags to allow more deliveries on each vehicle. Holding a container back until it is full, instead of shipping it partly full is an example of reducing the amount of air we ship. As holding stock costs money, this may conflict with longstanding “Just in Time” policies; however, post-COVID companies and their suppliers are moving to “Just Be Sure” models and are prepared to hold more stock (warehouse space allowing). Concentrating a liquid to remove excess water is another example long practiced by the soft drinks industry where concentrates are shipped to bottling plants close to customers. Removing moisture takes energy as well; so there will be a trade-off between using electricity at the plant vs. diesel on the road; too detailed a topic to go into here. It is one to keep in mind if you are the auditor for the entire plant as well as the transport fleet. Until recently, it would be rare for a transport operator to be allowed to question a customer or company business model; however, with the increasing

84  Identifying Opportunities

Figure 10.3  IKEA flat pack egg.

focus on reducing CO2 emissions, customers have become much more open to collaborating with operators to fill their vehicles optimally or completely before each journey. If you can reduce volume by 10%, this is, in theory, 1 less journey in 10 – an oversimplification but you get the idea. If you are having trouble explaining this concept, ask yourself and the customer what they think of Ikea as – the world’s biggest furniture supplier? No! It is one of the world’s greatest logistics success stories – flat pack furniture anyone? Every year at Easter, Ikea make this point with a flat pack special Easter egg (a chocolate bar) or a flat pack Easter bunny Figures 10.3 and 10.4. At the time of writing, search “VÅRKÄNSLA” at your local Ikea store to see this policy in action and hopefully engage your customer in the process of avoiding freight by reducing volumes.

10.2  Shifting Transport Mode Continuing our theme of optimising our logistics and assuming we have reduced volumes as much as we can, can we change our mode of transport to a more energy-efficient or less carbon-intensive mode? We dealt with employee travel earlier; this section focuses on goods transport. You can view a global summary via https://climate.mit.edu/explainers/ freight-transportation whilst roughly 75% of global freight is by ship, 62%

10.2  Shifting Transport Mode  85

Figure 10.4  Ikea VVÅRKÄNSLA Milk chocolate bunny – used with permission from IKEA.

of freight’s emissions are from road transport, and these are, by far, the most numerous operators. Figure 10.5 is a summary graphic of inland freight by mode for the EU 2010–2020. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index. php?title=Freight_transport_statistics_-_modal_split Inland waterway or sea borne transport is generally considered to be the most energy efficient and if there was a navigable river outside every delivery destination, we would probably still be using it (see Venice in Italy and Kerala in India). Next up is rail; the golden age of rail is long over but rail still carries over 16% of EU freight as of 2020. Furthermore, companies like Maersk who traditionally operate the world’s largest container ships now also operate transcontinental freight trains.

86  Identifying Opportunities

Figure 10.5  Inland freight by mode EU Eurostat.

Figure 10.6  Modes compared in grams of CO2 per tonne km – Maersk.

Figure 10.6 shows the least efficient mode is air followed by road. The costs of air freight mean that, in general, customers will choose the most cost-effective mode for time available, i.e., a mix. Figure 10.7 shows an example of a train from Spain to China of 37 × 40ft containers. You may think air freight only applies to small and light shipments; however, trains are also transported by air; see Figure 10.8 from SimpleFlying https://simpleflying.com/antonov-an-124-flying-trains/. So which mode is optimal for your customer or operator? In many cases, we will be dealing with road transport and there is not a lot we can do about modal shift as the mode is often dictated by customer location.

10.2  Shifting Transport Mode  87

Figure 10.7  Maersk rail freight China – Dusiburg.

Figure 10.8  112 tonne GM locomotive transported by air to Dublin in 1994.

88  Identifying Opportunities 10.2.1  Cargo bikes However, even in road freight, there are opportunities to shift mode from, for example, a van to a cargo bike. A cargo bike offers many cost advantages over a van; examples are as follows: ●●

A van may get stuck in traffic.

●●

Too many parking tickets, whereas a bike can park anywhere.

●●

Tax, insurance, and maintenance? May be zero for CE marked vehicles in Europe.

●●

Finally, professional delivery drivers are in short supply all over the world, whereas a bike can be operated by anyone with or without a driving licence.

Figure 10.9  Comments from a DHL delivery driver.

Please see the comment (Figure 10.9) from https://twitter.com/Velovebikes/ status/1184717117775667200?s=20&t=7OGl5GifnkUrf7w7aGhsKQ. Table 10.1 is an example of the cost savings; a similar comparison may work for you in your region: There are obvious limits to a bike’s carrying capacity particularly in volume, but a quick internet search will bring up a range of options in your area. Table 10.1  Simplified diesel van vs. electric van vs. cargo eBike.

Aspect at 25,000 km/year Litres/kWh Fuel cost € Emissions kg CO2e Parking Insurance Driving licence Purchase price (roughly) Assumptions

Diesel van 1750 L €2100 4690 €3.80/hour ? Required €20,000

Cost of diesel Cost of electricity - night rate 25,000 km = 1250 hrs at 20 kph 1000 Wh battery × 90% × 250 nights charging 295g CO2/kWh (2020)

Electric van 8,750 kWh €875 2,577 €3.80/hour ? Required €30,000

Cargo eBike 225 kWh €23 66 €0 0.00 Not needed €10,000

€1.20 €0.10

7 L/100 km 35 kWh/100 km

10.2  Shifting Transport Mode  89

10.2.2  Drone delivery Drones are also beginning to make an appearance whether on road or by air. I hope, for obvious reasons, air delivery will use more energy than road (or any other mode), but that does not mean airborne drones do not have a role.I like this Figure 10.10  Electric Donkey – BBC. example from Rwanda as it illustrates where drones can add real value. The drones (Figure 10.10) are nicknamed the “electric donkey” because that is the mode they replaced. Vaccines and blood cannot easily be stored in the bush or local clinics; so the clinic places its order with the pharmacy and time critical supplies are parachuted in by a drone (no landing zone required) with an operational range of 150 km. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37646474 Closer to home I am seeing urban drone deliveries by air, Manna.aero are a start-up licensed by our Irish Aviation Authority to conduct drone deliveries near Dublin Airport. This tweet gives enough data to make some rough calculations https://twitter.com/realBobbyHealy/ status/1507109721412673538?s=20&t= kMUwwJRWhc9KnCh0dfw see Table 10.2.

10.2.3  The physical internet When I first saw this (Figure 10.11) mentioned by Prof Alan McKinnon in Brussels c.2016, I thought it was far-fetched – the idea that we could transport electrons, i.e., plans to a 3D printer, instead of the actual physical item – the molecules. The physical internet sounds like science fiction, but 3D printing came into its own during the first extreme COVID lockdowns and is increasingly

90  Identifying Opportunities Table 10.2  Drone delivery comparison in tonne–km.

Drone delivery Balbriggan Co. Dublin Payload Distance Tonne–km Energy Grid CO2 factor

3.50 500.00   200.00

kg m   Wh

CO2 per delivery         kg CO2e/t-km GLEC 3.5t diesel van (TTW pg 103)

0.00 0.50 0.00175 0.20 305.00

tonne km t-Km kWh g CO2e/kWh (2021)

61 34,857 550.00

g CO2e g CO2e/t-km g CO2e/t-km

Figure 10.11  Quck wins Prof. Alan McKinnon – LEARN Project Feb-2019.

used across many industries to produce short run parts or components too complex for normal production processes. So to summarise our known options for reducing energy use and emissions in freight globally, here is a graph from Prof. Alan McKinnon and the LEARN project with the time dimension to decarbonisation on the bottom axis.

10.3  Improving Vehicle Performance  91

Figure 10.12  Sum of quick wins – Prof. Alan McKinnon.

In Figure 10.12, Prof. McKinnon went a stage further and looked at how each of the above might contribute to the 80+% reduction in carbon emissions then needed to 2050 (now we need net zero). As can be seen, even if everything we know now was implemented, we will still need an absolute reduction in volumes to achieve net-zero by 2050 amidst a growing population becoming ever more affluent. If this is a topic you would like to learn more about, the bible is Green Logistics by Professor Alan McKinnon; you can read many of his papers and presentations free via https://www.alanmckinnon.co.uk/. Green Logistics 2011-2016 3rd edition is the latest version. 2018 onwards, Decarbonizing Logistics: Distributing Goods in a Low Carbon World 1st Edition.

10.3  Improving Vehicle Performance Every mode has some losses and opportunities; this Table 10.3 attempts to summarise the losses by mode.

92  Identifying Opportunities Table 10.3  Losses by mode originally author, also features in EN16247-4.

Combustion losses Drive train losses Rolling resistance Parasitic drag Pay load Weather impacts Terrain losses Operational losses Life cycle in years

Road ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ 3-10

Rail ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ 40

Air ¸ ¸ Drag ¸ ¸ ¸ ¸ 40

Sea ¸ ¸ Hull Wind Wave height Current ¸ 40

Similar losses are common across many modes, making the role of auditor somewhat easier. But as we are focused on road freight, it might be good to breakdown the losses across the vehicle much as we do in buildings in factories. This graphic (Figure 10.13) is for a hypothetical 60-tonne tractor and trailer; so it is not real world but as every vehicle will be different and its circumstances unique, it can serve our purpose here. It is also backed by a highly detailed paper; so you can read more about it at https://www.mdpi. com/2071-1050/11/19/5519 – Open Access Project Report. A Study in Options to Improve Aerodynamic Profile of HeavyDuty Vehicles in Europe by Adithya Hariram, Thorsten Koch, Björn Mårdberg, and Jan Kyncl. This gives us a hierarchy we can use in our approach: 1.

Engine losses

2.

Auxiliaries also known as power take off or PTO

3.

Driveline losses

4.

Traction work

5.

Hysteresis

6.

Rolling resistances

7.

Air drag

It also puts my favourite topic aerodynamic drag to the end, keeping me in check.

10.3  Improving Vehicle Performance  93

Figure 10.13  Power use in kW for HDV.

10.3.1  Engine losses The internal combustion engine and, specifically, the diesel engine is what we typically see in use across the truck and plant sector. It can come as a shock to understand that much of the money and fuel we put into these engines is emitted as heat but the clue is in the name – combustion. As shown earlier in cars, modern light duty engines are only 30% efficient, heavy duty engines are much more efficient roughly 40% but that is still €60 out of every €100 that does not get past the flywheel to the transmission. The example above is 35% efficient; key questions for the operator are as follows: ●●

How often do they service their vehicles’ engines? ○○ Is it on kilometres travelled? ○○ Time elapsed, e.g., 12-week checks. ○○ Or is it when the trip computer says so? ○○ Or is it when they break down?

94  Identifying Opportunities ●●

How do they service the engines? ○○ At manufacturer main dealer. ○○ At local mate’s (friend’s) garage. ○○ Or in-house – how are in-house mechanics trained and equipped?

Most fleets will service engines as best as they can afford, where you will see savings is in the age of the engine and its emissions controls. Modern Euro VI (6) engines are generally seen to be 5% more fuel efficient than their predecessors. Now there is a lot going into the mix for that 5% – the transmission, the cab aerodynamics, etc., will all have contributed, but the key lesson is that the younger the engine, the more fuel efficient it should be. Size – yes, size matters. Modern smaller engines may be able to do the work of older larger engines particularly when mated with a lighter more aerodynamic body and chassis. But you will find larger V8 engines outperforming smaller straight sixes (i.e., cylinders by the way) in L/100 km; this happens where power or torque is needed in different proportions across the rev range for different work. It should not need to be said, but an electric motor will outperform any internal combustion engine on energy use due to its inherent efficiency. A petrol engine will underperform in almost all situations; hence, the discussion centres around diesel. The alternative fuels – Chapter 13 discusses alternatives to diesel engines. 10.3.2  Auxiliaries also known as power take off or PTO Many years ago, engines had fan belts to drive the cooling fan behind the radiator; after the 1970s oil crisis, these fans were electrified, and the fan belt pictured in Figure 10.14 is now a distant memory. The fan is an example of energy consuming accessory or ancillary that is no longer connected directly to the engine. On your audit, what accessories are there which are drawing power from the engine whenever it is running? ●●

Oil and water pumps are obvious necessities.

●●

Heaters and refrigerators can both be seen to draw power whilst engine is on.

Can any of these accessories be disconnected or only turned on when needed?

10.3  Improving Vehicle Performance  95

Figure 10.14  Fan belt ad.

You may also hear the phrase “donkey” engine. This is (usually) an extra engine that can power ancillaries such as cranes or pumps when the vehicle is stopped. If you come across this type of engine, how is it fuelled? Road fuel is generally the most expensive option. Is there a cheaper diesel alternative such as heating or gas oil (names will vary by region) that you can burn instead? As the price of lithium-ion batteries drops and/or the availability of second-hand traction batteries increases (taken from written-off electric cars), we are seeing increasing options for electric powered ancillaries coming to market, i.e., on-board electrification whilst the main motive power still comes from diesel. Utility companies are leading here with battery power tools, hoists, and even compressors now appearing in the back of diesel powered vans and trucks – do keep an eye on the additional dead weight though – there is no free lunch. Over-specifying battery power for extreme use cases will cause the vehicle to carry around a lot of extra weight using extra fuel – see the table in Section 4.6. 10.3.3  Driveline losses Largely unavoidable at the audit stage, i.e., we are usually on-site long after the vehicle was designed, specified, and delivered. It is still good to check what final drive ration and gearbox was specified and why. You may come across vehicles set up for flat open spaces working mountainous regions and vice versa. We can say that modern automatic (dual clutch) gearboxes will beat a human driver in performance (it is why they are used in Formula 1); so make sure all concerned know how to use these gearboxes properly by reading the manual and/or receiving training from the supplier (should be free at point of delivery).

96  Identifying Opportunities A key question is how often the drivers use manual override. It should really be only very occasionally – a particular ramp or surface. Ideally, the vehicle is left in fully automatic mode all the time, but old habits die hard; so do ask and discuss with drivers. 10.3.4  Traction work Just an explainer that this is the work resulting from the payload + unladen weight as opposed to the rolling resistance; so it increases substantially when fully loaded. This is the useful work we are doing. 10.3.5 Hysteresis As explained above, hysteresis accounts for topography, terrain, or the “irreversible losses in uphill and downhill driving”. There are situations where you can recover losses (see Section 11.6), but, generally speaking, what goes up must come down again. NB: You may also hear the word “hysteresis” in relation to tyre rolling resistance and this is also true. The losses in the materials used in the tyre are often called hysteresis and what we might call the rebound effect in rubber (you can see it when cycling or kicking a ball, the tyre or ball compresses and expands). 10.3.6  Rolling resistance Rolling resistance increases linearly with speed, i.e., every reduction that can be made in rolling resistance saves fuel from start to finish of every journey. Figure 10.15 from https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13288/review-of-the21st-century-truck-partnership-second-report shows how rolling resistance increases linearly. Assuming you have already covered the above topics (engine and transmission), the key aspects to review are as follows. ●●

Lubrication oil – A low viscosity or often called fully synthetic engine oil can reduce fuel use by up to 1%–1.5% and is generally specified by the manufacturer. The question for the fleet is what lubricating oil do you use? If manufacturer specification, then that should be enough, but if in doubt, ask to see a sample invoice and look for the W or winter numbers (not weight). ○○ A good explainer here from Total who also do good videos on the topic W10-30 means 10 (thinner) in winter and 30 when hot, i.e., heated in engine use.

10.3  Improving Vehicle Performance  97

Figure 10.15  Graph showing HDV rolling resistance vs. wind resistance.

○○ https://lubricants.totalenergies.com/what-are-oil-grades ○○ As the numbers are originally US SAE, winter is defined as 0ºF or –17.8ºC – your seasonal winter temperature may vary, but the ideal is “lightest” or lowest W number as that is less viscosity or resistance when cold. ○○ A final point relating to lubrication may be perceived that the engine must be idled to warm the oil before driving; this is a myth. The oil pump is mechanically driven by the engine; so “idling” when cold is actually worse for the engine wear and tear. The rule is to drive gently for the first 8 km or so (drivers can see how long it takes to warm via the dashboard temperature display). ●●

Tyre choice – since November 2012, all tyres sold in the EU are labelled for fuel performance, noise, and wet grip. ○○ These labels (Figure 10.16) were updated in May 2021; see https:// ec.europa.eu/info/energy-climate-change-environment/standardstools-and-labels/products-labelling-rules-and-requirements/­energylabel-and-ecodesign/energy-efficient-products/tyres_en for latest. ○○ The label for light duty vehicles (cars and vans) looks like one of the examples pictured below. ○○ The label for trucks and buses is on the invoice (not on the tyre); so ask for copies of the invoices and read the ratings similar to the label in the tyre description.

98  Identifying Opportunities

Figure 10.16  Sample of new EU tyre label with wet and winter grip ratings.

●●

Check the regulations in your region; the EU has copied from the US and vice versa and similarly for China and Australia.

Excerpt from EU tyre labelling website downloaded in June 2022 – https://ec.europa.eu/info/energy-climate-change-environment/standards-tools-and-labels/products-labelling-rules-and-requirements/energy-label-and-ecodesign/ energy-efficient-products/tyres_en. Low rolling resistance tyres that are properly inflated can have as much as a 10% savings impact. This provides financial savings in terms of running costs or, for electric vehicles for example, enables the driver to cover a further distance before refuelling or recharging. The rolling resistance class ranges from A (most efficient) to E (least efficient). The higher the energy class, the lower the rolling resistance (the previous label had a range from A to F). The wet grip class is a critical safety feature, relating to how a tyre can brake on wet roads. Tyres are rated A (the shortest braking distance) to E (the longest braking distance). The difference in each category can mean an extra 3–6 m on the stopping distance. The external noise relates to the noise produced by the tyre when a car passes by and is measured in dB (decibels). Noise classes range from A (less noise outside the vehicle) to B (more noise). Energy label tyres: Under the new regulation, in addition to information on rolling resistance, breaking on wet surface and external noise, and the classes, the tyre label may display two additional parameters:

10.3  Improving Vehicle Performance  99

Winter tyres approved for use in severe snow conditions carry a specific pictogram, called the “Alpine symbol” or 3PMSF (three peaks mountain with snow flake). To have the pictogram, the tyre has to pass a specific test for braking on a road with snow. The same pictogram appears on the tyre sidewall. Nordic winter tyres approved for use in extremely cold conditions also carry a specific pictogram, representing an ice stalagmite. To bear the pictogram, the tyre has to pass a specific test for braking on extreme ice. Standardised tests are used to assess the performance of tyres in all the five parameters indicated on the label. Only tyres reaching a predetermined minimal performance level can carry the snow or ice symbol. National authorities perform random controls to check the accuracy of the performance levels. Vehicle manufacturers also have to provide information on the tyres for that vehicle to customers. ●●

Tyre pressure maintenance is critical to road safety and maximising tyre life. This should be obvious, but it is often missed and may account for shorter than expected tyre life. ○○ A good question to ask is how long do tyres last on your vehicles (typically). Anything less than 100,000 km should be cause for concern. ○○ What pressure do you inflate your tyres to? Operators should be able to give a ready answer to this question. You may hear figures like 120/90PSI steering vs. drive axles, etc. ○○ The correct tyre pressure for heavy commercial vehicles is the one specified by the tyre supplier. This may come as surprise to some operators (likely the same ones as have shorter tyre lives) but make a point of calling into or meeting the tyre supplier if you can. ○○ If this sounds like a lot of work, be aware that tyre suppliers can be on-site daily at busy depots; so just watch out for the van and make time to meet the supplier. Tyre suppliers often love talking about tyres and pressures when asked; so the “make time” advice is important.

●●

Trailer/load rolling resistance, i.e., the tyre choice, pressures, and lubrication choices in the trailer load being pulled; all of the above points apply to the load or trailer being pulled by the tractor unit or truck, i.e., you can ask the same questions again.

100  Identifying Opportunities

Figure 10.17  Table from 21st century truck report on power use.

10.3.7  Air drag Now my favourite topic is wind resistance, air drag, or parasitic drag! I can and do bore people to distraction over it, but there is good reason; Figure 10.17 here is a breakdown from the same 21st Century Truck partnership report as above. We can clearly see the majority of power at speed is consumer by wind resistance. I live in the windiest place in Europe (Ireland) and yet it is amazing how little we pay attention to this fuel saving opportunity. Your country or region may be different, and your government may even have funded aerodynamic retrofits for older lorries to help reduce emissions and fuel costs. But, for now, let us just see what we need to look for when walking around the year or depot in Figure 10.18. https://www.mdpi.com/ under sustainability – good compilations and explainers: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/19/5519 We cannot “see” air; so it can be hard to persuade operators of the costs of air drag. There are many studies and pictures online, but this example from Don-Bur Trailers (used with permission) is a good illustration. This next image in Figure 10.19 shows the reduction in (red) losses from a hump backed box trailer – the hump is used to hold the fridge as well; so there are capacity benefits from increased height as well as reduced fuel use (full case story at https://donbur.co.uk/news/marks-spencer-teardrop-trailer-case-study). All operators will tell their us requirements will be bespoke/custom, etc., but the laws of physics apply to us all equally.

10.3  Improving Vehicle Performance  101

Figure 10.18  Checklist of aspects to look for air drag opportunities.

Figure 10.19  Box trailer losses. Courtesy: Don-Bur Trailer.

102  Identifying Opportunities

Figure 10.20  Illustration of changes coming in EU truck design.

It is not particularly scientific, but one way you can “see” air is to look for dirty areas on the trucks before they go in into the truck wash. The more dirt deposited, the more turbulence around that area. The USA has much more relaxed length restrictions than Europe with the result that longer more aerodynamic shapes are possible; in recent years, the EU has legislated for enhanced vision and more round shapes shapes – see Figure 10.20 andhttps://www.transportenvironment.org/press/eu-end-brickshaped-truck-cabs-%E2%80%93-saving-lives-and-carbon-emissions. Many years ago, the UK Government published a table (Figure 10.21) of savings from fitting drag reduction equipment; although circumstances and vehicles will vary, this is a good starting point for calculating savings from drag reduction (the Energy Savings Trust has since provided a Freight Portal; see https://thefreightportal.org/). This is by no means a comprehensive list and the technology will keep changing and improving, but I hope it offers a good start. Finally, the Centre for Sustainable Road Freight (SRF) at Cambridge University was founded to help industry and Government minimise carbon emissions from the road freight sector. They provide some online tools (in UK units) which may help you compile your opportunities register; see https://www.csrf.ac.uk/outputs-home/software/.

10.4  Passenger Services  103

Figure 10.21  Table of fuel saving aerodynamic features – authors update DfT table c.2005.

Air drag checklist: This list (Figure 10.22 below) is one we compiled for an unpublished guide for SEAI.

10.4  Passenger Services Whilst many of the opportunities outlined above also apply to buses and coaches, many do not. Engine losses do apply in full as above. Power take off generally does not, but air conditioning units may offer savings in set-points and timing.

104  Identifying Opportunities

Figure 10.22  Aerodynamic checklist with picture. Source: author.

●●

Air conditioning should be off when not needed. This is obvious, but it may be permanently on and is worth checking for.

●●

What is the set-point? As with buildings, ensure set-points are reasonable for the climate and cannot be overridden by the driver.

●●

The approach to this will vary by operator, but a quick test using the trip computer can help underpin the decision with actual fuel use data as in Figure 10.23.

10.5  Identifying Opportunities Summary  105

At cold the engine consumes 2 L/hour

At 18ºC, the L/hour at idle rises to 4L/ hour

Sample air conditioning controls from a service bus (coach) in 2010s

Figure 10.23  Trip computer test showing excess fuel use with air-con.

Rolling resistance losses are similar, albeit operators will be more concerned about passenger comfort (coaches) or long life (buses). Air drag losses may be very obvious, but, generally speaking, there is nothing that can be done until the next vehicle purchase as the body work will have been optimised to save weight and reduce air drag to some extent already. Carbon fibre is making its way into coach body work as it is strong and light weight. It is also expensive to repair and replace – if tips and bumps are costing the operator money, this may make an additional reason to proceed with driving, training, or ecodriving which will help to save fuel.

10.5  Identifying Opportunities Summary At this stage, you may be wondering how on earth to survey a yard full of trucks, but you will be lucky if the yard is full. If they are making money, they will be out on the road, i.e., you will only ever be surveying a sample (in Ireland, the square root of total is considered a valid sample, e.g., 100 vans – survey 10, etc.).

106  Identifying Opportunities

Figure 10.24  Sample audit plan. Source: author.

Compile your own checklist when making your audit plan, here is one I use to demo this in training as an example.

11 Sections on Air, Sea, Rail, and NRMM (Plant)

As discussed at the outset, road transport is the single biggest transport emitter globally. It is also operated by many companies and generally small- to medium-sized companies. So the bulk of this book is focused on road transport. In this chapter, we hope to give you some pointers on other modes of transport where specialist expertise and licensing may be required.

11.1 Air The International Air Transport Association (IATA) are the governing body for aviation internationally and they have an environmental assessment form you can ask operators for; the IATA Environmental Assessment (IEnvA) – https://www.iata.org/en/programs/environment/environmental-assessment/ “The IATA Environmental Assessment (IEnvA) program is an evaluation system designed to independently assess and improve the environmental management of an airline. IEnvA is a voluntary program based on principles in compliance with environmental obligations and a commitment to continually improve environmental management. IEnvA provides airlines, aircraft maintenance services, on-board catering services and ground handlers definitive guidance, aligned with internationally accepted management standards to effectively address the most significant environmental sustainability matters that face the aviation industry today.” Paraphrasing the EN16247 guidance (Annex A) states: As you would expect, fuel load and use is critical to the safe operation of an aircraft and flight data should be readily available. a) Where possible in addition, analysis should include ground energy use at terminal and differentiate between ground tug, taxiing, and flight. 107

108  Sections on Air, Sea, Rail, and NRMM (Plant) b) The auditor shall collect and analyse the information about freight and passengers transported, distances travelled, and fuel consumed. TIP: Aim for Pax.Km data and Tonne.Km data if at all possible so that you can benchmark against GLEC and industry publications. c) The data will be gathered on a flight or leg basis. As for freight above, follow the best practice of data per leg, having said that you may only be able to get totals first time around – recommendation is to move the data collection to per leg of each journey before the next audit.

11.2 Sea As with aviation, maritime shipping has its own culture, organisations, and approach, start by asking the master or owner of all IMO registered vessels for a copy of their Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP). All ships from 2011 must have one, i.e., SEEMP is already written – your role may be to highlight the lack of implementation. Energy efficiency design index (EEDI) 2014 adds to the SEEMP; for new ships, it is the most important technical measure and aims at promoting the use of more energy efficient (less polluting) equipment and engines. More details at https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/ Technical-and-Operational-Measures.aspx and Figure 11.1.

Figure 11.1  SEEMP elements – IMO.

11.2 Sea  109

As you may have guessed, auditing ships may be a desk job, but seek local guidance to see whether site visits are still required. Just keep in mind when planning that vessels dock for short periods and spend most of their time at sea, i.e., read the SEEMP and as much drawings and detail as you can beforehand to be able to work quickly. I recall one vessel whose in-port turnaround time was 30 minutes so that you would have to accompany it on voyage. Others dock overnight or for several days, making the survey somewhat easier. Section A.5 of Annex A in EN16247 gives some additional checks: Marine vessels include ocean going vessels, coastal craft, inland waterways barges, water taxis, and water buses. a) The auditor shall inspect every single vessel of the client; where applicable, fleets of vessels are uniform – a sample can be inspected. b) The auditor shall assess the status of the ship and its major machinery, as well as the ship’s utilization and operational management processes. The technical assessments will, at least, include:

1) ship performance (hull);



2) main and auxiliary engine performance;



3) auxiliary loads balance;



4) differentiate between shore power, energy use in port, and under way;



5) fuel quality and supply systems;



6) lighting;



7) rotating machinery;



8) boiler and steam system.

The same aspects apply to inland waterways vessels, but specific aspects outside the control of the operator may be taken into account, e.g., access to or congestion of waterways impacting on performance. Commonality with other vehicles is also there. I recall a ship master telling me he had no equivalent to truck or car trip computer on his ship, whilst he was demo’ing the vessel capabilities from his captain’s chair; I noticed the inevitable LCD panel under his elbow which was literally showing live fuel use. More usefully, ship engines are monitored remotely by suppliers for maintenance and warranty; uploads can be hit and miss due to coverage

110  Sections on Air, Sea, Rail, and NRMM (Plant) issues whilst at sea. Nonetheless, do ask for access to the engine monitoring (usually a website, user name, and password) as with vehicle telematics and with similar reports on idling, under way and docked etc. in hours and litres (or tonne) per hour. Bigger is better Unlike my points on cargo bikes vs. vans, bigger is almost always better when it comes to sea going vessels; the article below from SFGATE in 2012 explains the rationale; however, even smaller sized vessels benefit from being longer as they can go faster for the same power and energy input (hull speed). “A.P. Maersk-Møller A/S’s planned fleet of the world’s largest container vessels will be as ground-breaking for their shape as their size. The 20 ships will be the first cargo-box carriers with rounded hulls rather than streamlined V-shaped ones, according to Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co., which is developing the 18,000-container vessels. The change reflects a shift by operators away from designing ships to go as fast as possible to instead emphasizing fuel economy. “These vessels will be the Prius of the seas,” said Lee Jae Won, an analyst at Tongyang Securities Inc. in Seoul. “They’re fuel efficient and environmentally friendly.” The fatter hulls will let Maersk install a fuel-efficient two-engine setup that’s too wide for current ships. It will also recover cargo capacity that is lost with tapered hulls, letting the ships carry 16 percent more boxes than vessels only slightly smaller. The ships will use about 35 percent less fuel per box than vessels now used on Asia-Europe routes and produce around 50 percent less carbon emissions, according to Maersk. “The focus now is on how to consume less fuel,” said Odin Kwon, vice president of ship design at Daewoo in Seoul. “Ships currently in operation have been built only with speed in mind.” Daewoo has begun the initial work for the first of the ships, which will cost about $183 million each. Deliveries are due to start next year and will run until the first half of 2015. Rounded hulls are common on commodity-carrying ships.

11.2 Sea  111

Maersk, the world’s largest container-ship operator, is introducing the vessels as the industry contends with tighter emissions standards and fuel prices that have jumped about 40 percent in two years. The higher costs have already prompted shipping lines to slow vessels 18 percent over the past three years to an average speed of about 10.4 knots. That has cut fuel bills and eased global overcapacity that caused industry wide losses last year. Key to the change is the ships’ two propellers and their ultralong stroke engines, a type usually only found in slow-moving commodity ships and tankers. The setup will use 4 percent less fuel than a single engine and propeller, Maersk said. “Building vessels that are fuel efficient at different speeds will be the trend,” said Daewoo’s Kwon. “It will eventually dominate the market.” Shipping lines are working to meet a goal of cutting emissions 30 percent by 2030 under a mandate from the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization. Those that miss this target will face penalties that are still under discussion”. Kyunghee Park is a Bloomberg reporter. E-mail: kpark3@ bloomberg.net Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Maersk-snew-fleet-raises-fuel-efficiency-3777268.php#ixzz23RyfiE00 Summary on ships: ●●

Look for the ship SEEMP in the first instance: ○○ Slow steaming should be in use (a 5%–10% reduction in speed saves 15% in fuel and emissions – Maersk). ○○ Engine efficiency/optimum power use.

●●

Assists like wind power are uncertain in direction and interfere with cargo handling.

●●

Battery and hybrid technologies and operational solutions exist now.

●●

Alternative fuels may be mandated by law – see ReFuelEU (2020).

Finally, alternative cargo shipping services are becoming available; see (Figure 11.2) https://fairtransport.eu/ whose Tres Hombres offers 40t capacity, i.e., 1 container load for specialist cargos such as beer and wine.

112  Sections on Air, Sea, Rail, and NRMM (Plant)

Figure 11.2  Tres Hombres sail freight vessel.

11.3 Rail As with other modes, rail has its own unique way of doing things called UNIFE TecRec 100 http://tecrecrail.org/100_001; so ask for this when planning your audits. Rail has its own culture and ingrained habits. Many railways were built in the 1840s and culture has not changed much since. This is not a criticism as many hard won lessons are embedded in this culture, but it is important as an auditor to know what takes months in other modes such as road may take years to change in rail. Annex A.3 Rail – use railway specific protocols: “Rail vehicles are characterized by strict timetables and safety considerations. Electric train sets or consists may receive power from multiple suppliers as they travel across regions or borders whilst completing a journey”. [i.e., there is no metre; so calculating energy use may be your only option. Generally, train cabs have very limited instrumentation. So start at the maintenance end to see if there are any online services or databases you can log in to]. “a) When assessing the fleet composition, the auditor shall indicate the level of control the audited organization has on each vehicle. For example vehicle ownership, requirements by/agreements with customers or contracting authorities;” [rail is increasingly deregulated with multiple companies running different rolling stock on the same rails for many different passenger services. Do not forget railways maintain their own track; so include that in audit too, e.g., track power and energy consuming equipment used to maintain the rails.]

11.3 Rail  113

“b) Some electric traction units have no metering and consumption is estimated through computer modelling, diesel traction may also need sub-metering. When the energy consumption of tractive units is analysed, the train set or consists shall be recorded (type of vehicles, gross mass, occupancy); c) When analysing or simulating the energy consumption, the recommendations of EN 50591:2019 shall be followed; d) Auditor and client shall agree on the proportion of vehicles subject to inspection. The resulting amount of vehicles should be representative for every segment the audited company owns; e) Tractive and auxiliary energy should be analysed and reported separately where possible; f) Analyse billed energy vs. actual energy use where available and applicable; g) Infrastructure conditions, energy supply system and timetable issues should be analysed”. What can we do with rail? As with previous modes, we can reduce speed, lighten the vehicles, and improve aerodynamics. However, rolling stock can have a 40-year life; so new vehicles and technology will only be introduced very slowly. An immediate (avoid) action is to shorten the consists to match passenger loads, i.e., the number of carriages should only be enough to carry the planned number of passengers. This may or may not be allowed by the regulator and may also result in complaints from passengers who now have to stand when previously they got a seat. Can we increase capacity for freight? Yes, trains can be made very long indeed. You can see many videos online of long freight trains as they do not have to worry about platforms for passengers. You will also see double deck freight trains particularly in North America, but these are usually diesel; 2021 world’s first electric hauled double stack 1.5 km long container train – Indian Railways https://www. railjournal.com/freight/indian-railways-launches-electric-double-stackcontainer-­operation/ and a video on India’s tallest train, 2019 https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=lWelXkX9dY0. Can we improve or retrofit trains? Yes, very much so; this example from Ireland’s railway operator working with Rolls Royce and MTU to replace the diesel engines under the passenger compartments with battery –

114  Sections on Air, Sea, Rail, and NRMM (Plant) electric – diesel hybrid power packs that will allow trains to run at zero emission in urban areas and on diesel for longer journeys (Ireland’s dispersed settlement pattern makes electrifying the whole network very expensive); see https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/press-releases/2020/23-07-2020-rr-­ commences-series-production-of-hybrid-ready-mtu-powerpacks-for-irishrail.aspx. Finally, hydrogen powered (electric) trains are making an appearance; see https://www.alstom.com/press-releases-news/2021/6/coradia-ilint-alstompresents-worlds-first-hydrogen-passenger-train.

11.4  Plant and Non-Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) When we think of a plant, we think of construction sites but many depots also have plant in the form of forklifts, mobile cranes, teleporters, and other non-road mobile machinery. This section focuses on construction plant, but the points apply to all plants including those you will find in transport depots. A typical construction site will have diggers, backhoes, loaders, and transporters as well as generators, cranes, mobile lighting, heating, and drying rooms.

11.5  Plant Fuel and Activity Data At this stage, you will have guessed the first place to look for data is online via the manufacturers or their agent’s maintenance portal and you would be right. Figure 11.3 is an example from a site using Caterpillar equipment.

Figure 11.3  NRMM/plant telematics example.

11.5  Plant Fuel and Activity Data  115

Figure 11.4  Example mobile plant and trip computers. Source: author.

Figure 11.5  Example generator part load – Strathclyde University.

Next up is the dashboard trip computer; modern plants will have the same or similar LCD panels to on-road vehicles pictured in Figure 11.4. Generators are worth special attention as they are often over-specified and running on extreme part-load – see Figure 11.5. Plant and generators should be running on gas-oil or a diesel that is not subject to road fuel taxes! Check this first. Now, let us take a look at the math for losses, which are not dissimilar to the road engines we looked at earlier.

116  Sections on Air, Sea, Rail, and NRMM (Plant) ●●

1 L of diesel

= €0.90

○○ 1 kWh of diesel (÷10.62 kWh/L ) = €0.085

●●

○○ Max diesel efficiency

= 40%–45%

○○ Typical diesel

= 30%–35%

Actual 1 kWh[e]

= €0.28/kWh

○○ [ €0.085 ÷ 0.30 = €0.28] ●●

vs. 1 kWh of grid electricity

= €0.20/kWh

Prices will vary locally and by time of year, but the losses mean that it is much more cost and energy efficient to power your plant off grid electricity than a diesel generator. It is also greener as the grid will include wind and solar power which the diesel cannot.

11.6  Alternative Fuels for Plant Can you power a diesel generator or mobile plant on HVO (see Section 13.4)? Yes, it is a drop in replacement and as it is hydrophobic (repels water), actually easier to store, etc., on site. It also biodegrades on spillage (but that should not be an issue in the first place). However, the 40+cent per litre premium for HVO will put most operators off. Can we power a plant on hydrogen or electricity? Yes, but I am not sure I would want large electrical cables mixing with explosives, etc., in a quarry; so it is important to take on board the circumstances the plant operates in and the fact that sites move location often. Having said that, construction equipment is often already hybridised either hydraulically or electrically; so the idea of alternatives is not a barrier and mechanics and service technicians are often better equipped to deal with these new technologies. The 45t loader example in Figure 11.6 was headlined “World’s largest EV never has to be recharged”. This sounds fanciful until you realise it goes up empty (45t) comes back down with a full 65t load, i.e., downhill (loaded) energy recovery powers the lighter return journey uphill. See https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1124478_world-s-largestev-never-has-to-be-recharged.

11.7  Hydrogen Powered Plant  117

Figure 11.6  World’s largest (land) EV? – Green Car reports.

11.7  Hydrogen Powered Plant We deal with hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) in Chapter 13, but JCB (the backhoe maker) has recently optimised its diesel engine for hydrogen, i.e., compression ignition as a green alternative fuel. I thought this idea was dead in water some time back, but JCB makes a compelling case due to the circumstances in which plant and equipment operate. Following are the URLs and I will let you be your own judge. ●●

JCB own page: https://www.jcb.com/en-gb/campaigns/hydrogen

●●

Fully Charged assessment and video: https://youtu.be/hRXT3832YBI

The video is well worth a watch as Fully Charged have taken a similar approach to mine, i.e., highly sceptical but see it as very positive development; time will tell if this (burning hydrogen in plant diesel engines) works out.

12 New Vehicles Design and Specification

Going back to our theme of avoid shift and improve, the first question is: do we need a new vehicle at all? Assuming we do, the operator will usually have an established process for new vehicle acquisition – our job as auditors is to improve it. Obviously, if they do not have a process, it is a bigger challenge and this chapter may help to formalise.

12.1  Life Cycle Costing To calculate life cycle costs, we need to know at a minimum the expected fuel use in litres per 100 km or kWh/100 km. Does the existing (new or second-hand) vehicle buying process include fuel costs? It should and if it does not, explore why. At a minimum when viewing second-hand HDVs, buyers should review the long-term trip computer data. It will likely show L/100 km, idling, and other data back to manufacture – unless it has been reset which they generally are not in my experience. Test driving is a good way to see what the fuel use is on familiar routes. Be sure to zero the trip computer and/or brim the tank to see actual fuel use in L/100 km. Now this is a little hit-and-miss as a test vehicle may not match final specification, which is where the EU’s VECTO and software providers around the world come in. Vehicle Energy Consumption calculation TOol – VECTO is the EU’s legally mandated tool to calculate the expected fuel use and CO2 emissions from new HDVs for tax purposes.

119

120  New Vehicles Design and Specification VECTO is the new simulation tool that has been developed by the European Commission and shall be used for determining CO2 emissions and fuel consumption from heavy duty vehicles (trucks, buses, and coaches) with a gross vehicle weight above 3500 kg. From 1 January 2019, the tool will be mandatory for new trucks under certain vehicle categories in application to the certification legislation Search for available translations of the preceding linkEN••• under type approval. As of 2019, the CO2 emissions and fuel consumption data are determined with VECTO, together with other related parameters, will be monitored and reported Search for available translations of the preceding linkEN••• to the Commission and made publicly available for each of those new trucks. Five different mission profiles for trucks and five different mission profiles for buses and coaches have been developed and implemented in the tool to better reflect the current European fleet. VECTO is a downloadable executable file Search for available translations of the preceding linkEN••• designed to operate on a single computer. The inputs for VECTO are characteristic parameters to determine the power consumption of every relevant vehicle component. Amongst others, the parameters for rolling resistance, air drag, masses and inertias, gearbox friction, auxiliary power, and engine performance are input values to simulate fuel consumption, and CO2 emissions on standardised driving cycles. You can download the tools from https://ec.europa.eu/clima/eu-action/­ transport-emissions/road-transport-reducing-co2-emissions-vehicles/ vehicle-­ energy-consumption-calculation-tool-vecto_en, but really they should be used by the vehicle supplier and coachbuilder to make the ­calculations, and the buyer just needs to know the answer. 12.1.1  LCC calculations So having got the L/100 km, what else do we need? The operator will usually have their own criteria and by all means include these, but you may also include the following: ●●

Servicing costs – from the supplier or dealer, it should include consumables like filters, lubricating oils, “sundries”, etc.

●●

Tyre costs – ask the customer for how many kilometres they get per tyre now.

12.2  EU GPP Criteria  121

●●

If there are other non-vehicle related costs that arise from time to time, e.g., doors, mirrors, windscreens, etc., make some assumptions and include these too.

●●

Lastly, how long do we expect to have this vehicle to be on the fleet? Let us say 5 years and 100,000 km per year, i.e., all the above can be extrapolated over 500,000 km and 5 years.

Sum the above to arrive at your total life cycle cost. Sense check this against existing vehicle costs and you should see a saving for new vehicle vs. old. Whilst parts, consumable, and energy costs tend to increase year by year, the performance (in L/100 km or kWh/100 km) should improve and the life or gap between services should get wider, i.e., value for money should be improving. A lot of this is common sense, but as operators are so busy, they rarely get the time to do this properly. We (auditors) can help by doing it for them at least once, templating, etc., for the future and clearly stating the differences between diesel, gas, and electric power trains inclusive of necessary losses and conversions. NPV vs. SPB: Your country or region will stipulate how you should present the savings of new vs. old vehicles in your report; many including the EU will want you to use NPV or net present value. I have yet to meet a fleet operator that understands or uses NPV, which is not to say it is not valuable to their finance team or accountants. But we want action, and the fleet manager is a key decision maker as they have to operate and maintain the new vehicle, i.e., simple pay back (SPB) is more likely to be understood and acted upon. The NPV vs. SPB debate will continue as it has for many years, but in my experience, SPB is much more easily understood, accepted (your time is money too), and acted upon than NPV in transport operations. Having said that we are talking about trucks and vans here! For major new projects like tramways, ships, or planes, I would expect a dedicated financial resource and NPV to be used (if not a full spending code guidance).

12.2  EU GPP Criteria What else should we take into account? As we clean up urban air quality by banning open fires, burning of smoky coal, and other fossil fuels to heat our homes, emissions from vehicle exhausts have risen to be the primary cause of urban air pollution in developed countries.

122  New Vehicles Design and Specification This is a complex topic often driven by local conditions – see California Air Resource Board (CARB) vs. US Govt. – so we will skip to the summary of what you should include when specifying new vehicles in Europe – I hope this will help others. You can download the full detail and the technical criteria upon which they are based and other categories from https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ gpp/eu_gpp_criteria_en.htm. Overleaf, I show my summary for a fleet manager. Your region may have more or less stringent criteria from government, but international procurers are increasingly citing similar in their tender specifications; so even if the government has not done so, commercial buyers may already be implementing. There is no international standard for this as far as I am aware (June 2022), but there is a buyers’ alliance in the form of the sustainable freight buyers alliance or SFBA which will result in a standard of some form as the SFC and GLEC are resulting in an ISO standard. More details can be found at https://www.smartfreightcentre.org/en/ sustainable-freight-buyers-alliance-1/.

12.3  Sample New Vehicle Checklist As usual, this is not a definitive list but a template to get you started. Add your own criteria and score appropriately to yours and your fleet operator’s needs, i.e., you can re-order these to prioritise what matters most to the fleet; where for instance urban work will prioritise air quality emissions (go electric) and rural work at higher speeds over longer distances might prioritise energy performance (L/kWh per 100 km).

12.3  Sample New Vehicle Checklist  123 Table 12.1  Green vehicle checklist – example. Source: author.

GPP Green Public Procurement Emissions in gCO2/Km (Rank from highest 1 to lowest 6)

1

Suppliers please note the LCCA is a comparison not a score, only include commercial off the shelf components (not new to market or pilot) For underlying chassis from manufacturer - see http://www.commercialfleet.org/ tools/van/co2-emissions/. For electric vehicles the certificate should read zero. Alternative fuelled vehicles may need a type approval or independent test certificate to satisfy Revenue. No = 0, 1 for dash, 3 for web or mobile phone app, 5 if ecodriving driver training is included in price See above, give driver feedback on fuel consumption =1, no feedback - 0. If automatic gearbox, some form of overreving / green zone indicator for driver counst as 1 Present = 1, not present = 0

4

Give rating as number e.g. G = 1, A = 6

4

Give rating as number e.g. G = 1, A = 6

1

Manufacturer specification lubricating oils comply, please confirm these oils are included in tender. Usually a percentage e.g. aluminium, you may also have bio-plastics etc., key as decimal 50% in this example 1 for yes, 0 for no

example 223 g/km 5

Ecodriving training/ tips on dashboard

1

Live fuel consumption display Gear Shift Indicator

1

TPMS Tyre Pressure Monitoring System Tyre supplied with vehicle - low noise Tyre supplied with vehicle -low rolling resistance Lubricating oils - lo viscosity & biodegradable

1

Proportion of ULW in recyclable materials

0.5

Exhaust pipe opposite passenger door PDI checks show axle alignments checked Sub-Total

1 1 20.5

Include dated axle alignment with before and after values.

13 Alternative Fuels (Electric, Hydrogen, and Biofuels)

As discussed in Chapter 4, under the ASIf model, we should tackle fuel choice last, but as we have seen, we (and the world at large) tend to tackle it first; it is certainly in my 40 years working the aspect most of us like to talk about. Gases vs. liquids, electric (fuel cell or battery) vs. internal combustion, etc. I am sure we will still be talking about these options in 2030 when I expect to see battery electric dominating new vehicle sales as economies of scale in battery electric cars scale up to HDVs and other vehicles. I am being clear about battery electric; so you understand my biases and I suggest you do something similar for yourself to condition your own approach to this very complex topic. My view is based on putting energy efficiency first – see summary graphic in Figure 13.1 from T&E; many readers will strongly feel “green” hydrogen a better bet, particularly as I have called this book the “light” guide and batteries are heavy. Now having nailed my colours to the mast, let us challenge ourselves to look at this topic in detail, always assuming you have assessed the need for the energy service, i.e., moving a person or tonne – safely – from point a to b already with each fleet. Hold on a second, where are liquid biofuels? On the road to nowhere, frankly. Much of the world’s food supply goes to biofuel and this has to stop if we are to feed our growing global population – of the 5940 kcal we grow in edible food per person per day globally 810 kcal goes to biofuel (compared to 1,320 kcal wasted per person per day). Food based Biofuels have made a useful contribution to reducing emissions in the past but as percentages increase, there is a price to be paid in reduced efficiency (see Section 7.2); so, ideally, we only use wastes as feedstock for biofuels, not edible grains or oil seeds. 125

126  Alternative Fuels (Electric, Hydrogen, and Biofuels)

Figure 13.1  T&E graphic showing overall system efficiencies of LDV power trains. Source: T&E.

13.1  Fuel Life Cycle Impacts and Where to Find Them The most comprehensive document I can find on life cycle impacts is from the EU Well-to-Tank report v5 2020, https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ repository/handle/JRC119036. Another good source is the ICCT, https://theicct.org/publications/ global-LCA-passenger-cars-jul2021. Both documents are a compendium of research into alternative fuels and powertrains to inform policy makers; so they take into account availability of raw materials, sources (mines, child labour etc.), costs, and climate impacts. I urge you to download and read one of these publications to aid your understanding and to reference them and their successors as each is updated every few years. Figure 13.2 shows the full life cycle impacts for all fuels, Figure 13.3 shows the impacts in Europe. Note the index colours please and that no one runs a 100% coal fired grid or a 100% zero emission electricity source. Figure 13.4 shows the EU JEC view of life cycle impacts from heavy duty vehicles. Both the above graphs are from the ICCT; for consistency, I reproduce the EU equivalents below. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/ handle/JRC119036 JEC Tank-to-Wheels Report v5: Heavy duty vehicles, https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC117564. “CEV” in case you have not come across it before stands for catenary electric vehicle, i.e., one at least partially powered by overhead wires like trams and trains.

13.1  Fuel Life Cycle Impacts and Where to Find Them  127

Figure 13.2  Global comparison of life cycle impacts: ICE vs. battery electric vehicles.

Figure 13.3  ICCT summary of drivetrains in Europe 2021.

There is a huge amount to cover under this topic, and we are very often asked to summarise the options for busy fleet managers. This can be done, but be warned that it is a snapshot in time as the technology is changing at a very fast pace indeed. Figure 13.5 is an example of a table we update annually to compare fuels here in Ireland. It would not apply anywhere else but the table format and column headings may help you with your own summary comparisons.

128  Alternative Fuels (Electric, Hydrogen, and Biofuels)

Figure 13.4  EU JEC heavy duty vehicle fuel comparison (life cycle).

Figure 13.5  Example fuel comparison table – simplified. Source: author.

Key headings – in my opinion – from this example table above: ●●

Energy efficiency or combustion efficiency – put this first as it is really important that fleets understand the losses for each choice.

●●

Unit price – the price paid at the pump or charger per L, Kg, or kWh.

●●

Comparative price per kWh, i.e., show the cost per unit of energy (kWh).

●●

Cost per kWh, i.e., the price per kWh ÷ the energy or combustion efficiency – an overly simplified comparison of delivered energy or motive power (it omits torque/power, availability, refuelling time, etc.).

13.2 Hydrogen  129

●●

Carbon taxes may not apply in your region, but it is a hot topic here, hence its inclusion, i.e., you can omit this one or add in a similar tax for your region. Taxes get a lot of attention in larger operators, and smaller operators may feel there is nothing they can do about them.

●●

How “green” is the fuel or powertrain choice per kWh? You will need to specify tank to wheel (TTW), well to wheel (WTW), etc. In this example, I show gCO2e/kWh from GLEC 2019 framework, i.e., WTW.

●●

How “clean” is the fuel? That is, does it reduce air quality emissions of NOx and PM in urban areas and perhaps, more important, will it be accepted as “clean” by regional authorities?

If your head is spinning on even this quick reading, you are not alone; the choices for operators and policy makers are complex. The simple answer is to go electric wherever and whenever possible. We are some years away from battery or hydrogen electric light and heavy duty vehicles being affordable on a like for like basis, i.e., at point of purchase, they will be more expensive. As Section 12 highlights, you should present your opportunities inclusive of life cycle costs, i.e., a total cost of ownership (TCO) basis. This will help to highlight the savings from investing in battery electric or gaseous fuels whether fossil gas or green hydrogen.

13.2 Hydrogen To help you explain some of these concepts, I am including the graphics I have found helpful below in Figures 13.6 , i.e., I use these graphics often and they are requested by fleet operators for internal use. Battery electric is often cited as only useful in urban environments, and, undoubtedly, this is where we will first see them (my own weekly refuse collection is now a 26t rigid battery electric truck (BET) – whilst the silence is welcome, there is now no chance of hearing it in enough time when you have forgotten to put the bins out the night before). This graphic from T&E can be found at https://www.transportenvironment.org/discover/why-the-future-of-long-haul-trucking-is-electric/. On the other side of the Atlantic, we have the NACFE: “The North American Council for Freight Efficiency, works to drive the development and adoption of efficiency enhancing, environmentally beneficial, and cost-effective technologies, services and methodologies in the North American freight industry”. – A great source for the industry view on new technology, https://nacfe.org/emerging-technology/

130  Alternative Fuels (Electric, Hydrogen, and Biofuels)

Figure 13.6  T&E hydrogen vs. battery electric truck long distance.

Figure 13.7 is the graphics from their experience on hydrogen to date. Figure 13.8 shows their view on the factors for success in trucking. 13.2.1  Sources of hydrogen I cited “green” hydrogen above without fully explaining it. There are many sources for hydrogen that can be used in transportation. NACFE has a great graphics (see Figures 13.7 to 13.9) explaining the various sources and “colours” of hydrogen (hydrogen is an invisible colourless gas even when alight). I do believe hydrogen will have a role in transport, but it may be in aviation, maritime, or rail where the number of operators, ports, and infrastructure required and other factors such as turnaround time or weight will allow it to compete with batteries. 13.2.2  Uses for hydrogen Transport has no exclusive “right” to use hydrogen; indeed, operators are often at the end of the queue for any new greener fuel – despite pandemics showing us the importance of trucks. So who else will transport be competing with? This topic has been debated in detail by Micheal Liebrich of BNEF and others; you can read the multi-part blog and see the comments at https:// about.bnef.com/blog/liebreich-separating-hype-from-hydrogen-part-onethe-supply-side/. But I do think his “hydrogen ladder” a very useful way to illustrate where we should use hydrogen – see Figure 13.10.

13.2 Hydrogen  131

Figure 13.7  NACFE considerations for hydrogen trucks.

Figure 13.8  NACFE factors for hydrogen success.

132  Alternative Fuels (Electric, Hydrogen, and Biofuels)

Figure 13.9  NACFE colours of hydrogen (sources).

Figure 13.10  Hydrogen ladder or “merit order” – Micheal Liebrich and associates.

13.4  HVO – A No New Infrastructure, Drop in Fuel?  133

As you can see, the globe has and will continue to have more pressing uses for hydrogen than road transport. That is not to say, we will not see hydrogen buses and trucks where turnaround times are critical, but I hope it helps you explain to your audit customers some of the complexities around light weight (but space hungry) hydrogen vs. heavier battery electric powertrains.

13.3  Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Whilst refuelling infrastructure may be out of scope for an audit, we cannot recommend an opportunity for improvement in fuel or powertrain choice without checking if the fuel is available locally and along the routes used by the audited fleet. In Europe, the EU Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation (AFIR for short) aims to ensure adequate hydrogen refuelling, and electric charging infrastructure is installed across the region to ensure Europe meets its targets in “Fit for 55”, i.e., –55% GHG by 2030. You can download the full regulation via https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2021%3A804%3AFIN and as always, look for the “staff guidance” if you want to understand the implications and requirements for member states. Other regions and states will have their own versions of this EU Regulation. However, fleet operators are long familiar with the gap between policy, laws, and actual availability on the ground and on their particular routes. When searching for chargers and gas refuelling along your customers’ routes, be sure to check the “fast” charger you see on the map is physically accessible to the vehicles you are auditing. Much of the charging infrastructure installed to date is aimed at cars, and HDVs simply cannot access or when they can, must block multiple units to get a cable to the heavy duty vehicle charge socket (the world seems to be standardising on CCS2 for HDVs, although new faster sockets are on the way). Over time, we have summarised the infrastructure and its maturity in tables like the one below. You will need to source the inputs locally and keep this up to date regularly.

13.4  HVO – A No New Infrastructure, Drop in Fuel? First generation biofuels for transport were often made from food grade feed stocks, i.e., using them drove up food prices around the world. The Arab spring and other events were attributed to some extent to increasing food prices. Modern second generation bio fuels are made from waste such as used cooking oil (UCO), but many were also made from palm oil plantations that

134  Alternative Fuels (Electric, Hydrogen, and Biofuels)

Figure 13.11  Summary of infrastructure maturity. Source: author.

displaced virgin forest – a land use change (LUC) that decimated forest carbon sinks and subsistence farmers in these areas around the world. Finally, these first biofuels hit a blend wall or a maximum percentage in the fuel mix for use in unmodified diesel engines, typically 5% (B5). Also in colder climates, adding biofuel could result in algae growth in stored fuel and blocked fuel filters – rare events but enough to spook suppliers and operators. As a result, biofuels can have a bad reputation, but that does not mean all biofuels are the same or as problematic as first and second generation fuels. Hydrotreated vegetable oil or HVO is a combination of waste oils such as UCO and hydrogen gas – be sure to say hydrotreated and not hydrogenated (a solid). When made with certified sustainable waste oils and green hydrogen, the HVO can be shown to have a net CO2 reduction of 90% or more (EU says 88+% typical). HVO is a synthetic fuel; this means that all molecules are the same (fossil fuel are a mix of molecules); so it burns cleaner and faster than diesel with a higher cetane number. HVO is hydrophobic rejecting water which makes it suitable for longterm storage and can be splash mixed with normal diesel, i.e., you can fill with diesel one day and HVO the next without any engine modification.

13.5  Sum-up of Alternative Fuels  135

Disadvantages are that some manufacturers will only warranty a maximum of 50% (B50), whereas others are enthusiastically supporting 100% HVO (B100). This leads to confusion and uncertainty delaying adoption. As a cleaner burning more combustible fuel, HVO may increase NOx emissions even as it reduces PM compared to diesel. Lastly and most importantly, HVO is in high demand from data centres, industrial heat which is leading to much (much) higher prices and limited availability. The same HVO process and infrastructure makes a higher grade fuel called sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) which, at least in theory, means investments can be repurposed from road to air as the sectors transition away from fossil fuels.

13.5  Sum-up of Alternative Fuels The scope and topic for this book is energy audits which aim to identify energy saving opportunities, i.e., we put energy efficiency first. In the past, alternative fuels were cheaper due to lower taxes, government incentives, etc., leading to increased use and needless waste of these precious resources. The move to electrify transport and move away from internal combustion engines brings a step change in energy efficiency and at current diesel prices, a lower cost energy source in the form of night rate electricity (often half the price of day rate). If we are to get to “net zero” GHG emissions by 2050 and grow the volume of freight and people moved, nothing less than maximum energy performance is needed regardless of fuel or powertrain choice. I will leave you to frame this into your own words with auditee, but I ask you to ask yourself and your clients why they would waste an expensive resource like energy? If they do, their competitors will not and they will be out of business soon enough; such is the cost of energy in any form to transport operations across all modes. A final word on the availability of lithium – will we run out of lithium NO? As commodity prices increase, harder to reach sources become financially viable alongside improvements in extraction and purification reducing costs. But I do like to point out to sceptics that even if

136  Alternative Fuels (Electric, Hydrogen, and Biofuels) some countries horde their resources, we can always extract lithium (along with other elements such as rare earths) from sea water. See this graphic (Figure 13.12) in an article from 2018 on the topic http://www. greencarcongress.com/2018/07/201080728-nanjing.html.

Figure 13.12  How much lithium can we extract from sea water.

Prices for lithium will peak and trough just like oil has for the last 100 years; smaller batteries and improved power electronics will result, not a reversal to ICE or in my opinion hydrogen.

14 Review/Presentation of Findings

So as we said at the outset, an effective energy audit is one that results in action to save energy and reduce emissions. From an auditor’s perspective, it is equally important to be invited back – ideally, to help implement the actions. As our attention spans shorten globally, consider the format of your report. Does it have to be a 40+ page Microsoft Word document that will gather dust or can it be an engaging PowerPoint accompanied by a working Excel file to help the fleet get going immediately. Rules and quality assurance will vary around the world and you may find yourself doing all three formats: 1.

PowerPoint style presentation as a draft to gain input and backing;

2.

Excel spreadsheet with your workings and an active list of energy saving opportunities;

3.

Word file to bring it all together.

My interpretation of EN16247 is as follows (full table of contents overleaf): ●●

executive summary;

●●

background;

●●

energy audit findings;

●●

energy conservation/savings opportunities;

●●

transport specific: ○○ planning, routing, and timetables – comment on the system; ○○ vehicle configuration, operation, and specification;

137

138  Review/Presentation of Findings ○○ human resources, operators, and management; ●●

conclusions/next steps.

In my experience, the executive summary is the most important section and it should support the fleet operator, i.e., help them make the case for change and investment higher up in the business or supply chain. To gain the fleet operators input to the summary, I use the PowerPoint as a draft to: 1.

Summarise why we are doing the audit – the imperatives of climate action, cost saving, business case, etc.

2.

Findings – including calculations of savings from past actions, i.e., show the transport team can deliver and give them positive feedback.

3.

Next steps – will vary greatly from “get organised” to detail actions based measured losses from trip computers and telematics.

14.1  EN16247 Content of Report Within the recommendations offered to increase energy performance, the following points specific to transport shall be covered (with my comments): a) Planning, routes/timetables:

1) points to be considered within the operations department when organizing and planning the transport (do not forget the basics, e.g., fuel in litres, kilometres travelled, tonne, or passengers per leg);



2) trip optimization (cite-specific examples from your surveys);



3) claims for other parties (for example, governmental infrastructure issues) that may also affect the energy efficiency, e.g., road tolling impact on route choice, or regulations not allowing pick-up (e.g., taxis). (You will often come across barriers and opportunities that are out of scope. Do not shy away from including them even as comments, e.g., road junction layouts, customer demands/SOPs, and departure times are out of scope examples that I have had to cite in my reports over the years.)

b) Vehicles:

1) optimal configuration of the current fleet so as to increase the energy performance (e.g., aerodynamics, fill/capacity, timing, etc.);

14.1  EN16247 Content of Report  139



2) improvements on the maintenance programme definition (checks to be made and their intervals) and tasks execution (methods to execute the checks and quality of their completion from the maintenance personnel; tyre pressures have become a big opportunity here);



3) specifications to be applied on future purchase decisions. This point may imply the use of different energy sources or fleet concepts (outsourcing some dead-head routes is a widespread example; working with your competitors is becoming a hot topic as collaboration becomes paramount across supply chains);



4) criteria, i.e., emission savings in CO2 equivalent, for fleet renewal (you may have to recommend hanging on to vehicles for longer to make capital available for more expensive battery or hydrogen electric zero emission alternatives).

c) Human resources and operators:

1) training programme to be carried out, e.g., courses in efficient driving techniques (ecodriving) (do not forget the transport managers and office staff; if they are not adequately resourced and trained first, there is no point in training the drivers);



2) criteria for personnel recruitment (as above, employ those who have already been trained or experienced in delivering fuel management programmes when hiring – plenty of good work being done around the industry use it).

For each of the three points mentioned above (routes, vehicles, and human resources), some indicators will be presented, so as to evaluate the performance of every element of each group (for example, to be able to compare each operator). (How many drivers have been ecodrive trained or similar? That is, with measured results in L/100 km before and after training + driver feedback. Even if starting from zero, you can revisit this topic as hiring and training improve over time.) In cases where some estimation for energy consumption has been used, the method for the estimation shall be clearly indicated. The document will present an estimate of the optimal energy required to do the transport duties, compared with the actual current use, to enable the client to address the shortcomings. (You can get good benchmark figures from the GLEC to start and work towards local, regional, or sectoral specific over time as you do more audits.)

140  Review/Presentation of Findings 14.1.1  Listing your opportunities ASIf – a reminder to structure your findings in an actionable manner. As stated, avoid/shift/improve is very often the way operators work day to day; they just do not call it ASI. You can just as easily order the opportunities into low/no cost, medium cost, significant cost, or immediate/next 90 days/next 12 months, etc. Whatever prioritisation will result in action is the one to use – in my view.

14.2  Sustaining the Changes and Savings Ideally, we as auditors would like to be invited back at a minimum for the next audit but more positively to help implement the audit report and its opportunities for improvement to deliver reduced costs and emissions – c­ limate action.

14.3  ISO50001 to Sustain Savings In the view of UNIDO, the EU, the US Department of Energy, and others, the ISO50001 Energy [performance] Management System is the way to go to identify, implement, and sustain energy efficiency or energy performance savings. Unfortunately, the word “ISO” may barely be out of your mouth before operators stop listening; they have seen too many ineffective paper tigers (usually). So focus on performance. Borrow and apply as much of ISO50001 as you need to, to get the operator organised to deliver energy savings in a sustained manner – just do not mention “ISO”. There is no need for certification until or unless it is needed to reduce the costs of future audits or secure and win business from customers. There may be local incentives available to get operators trained in “energy management” or “climate action” – cite and/or use them in your report. Equally, if you have a local equivalent to Europe’s Energy Efficiency Obligation Scheme (EEOS – Article 7 of EED2012 – being recast/updated now of 2024), use the cash bonuses on offer to reward operators – always be sure they recognise the value of the fuel savings first (back to business case).

14.4  Do You Have a Plan?  141

Figure 14.1  Template energy action plan. Courtesy: SEAI 2012.

14.4  Do You Have a Plan? Fail to plan, plan to fail, and many other memorable quotes around “plans”. They may not be required in your audit, but an action plan with the top 5 actions agreed with the operator for the first 90 days or 12 months is an effective tool in kickstarting action to save fuel and reduce CO2. Figure 14.1 is an example energy action plan is from SEAI (if you want to copy it, it is free, but please acknowledge SEAI, as others such as Smart Freight Centre, Danish Govt. etc., have done).

15 Conclusion

Transport is complex and diverse, but it also offers some of the quickest wins in energy efficiency and measurable reductions in CO2, i.e., climate action. Your country or regional experience of the pandemic lockdowns will differ from mine, but I am certain significant changes will have been seen in your transport patterns. These changes prove we can change our transportation choices and systems to reduce emissions. Since starting writing this book, the first European land war in generations has driven up the price of road fuels and biofuel feedstocks, accelerating electrification and making for shorter returns on the extra investment required in vehicles and chargers. Whilst we may see fossil fuel prices reduce over time, the upwards direction of travel is clear for oil producing countries; to sweat their oil asset, they will need to maintain the highest possible price – this is as true for frackers in North America as it is for Saudi Arabian princes trying to develop their country away from dependency on oil exports. It is our role as auditors to help operators identify their energy saving/conservation/performance opportunities and to communicate them clearly with enough detail and certainty to enable decision making: “Everything should be as simple as it can be, but not simpler” – a scientist’s defense of art and knowledge – of lightness, completeness and accuracy. – Albert Einstein, Sessions and Zukofsky – https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/05/13/einstein-simple/ As energy auditors and energy efficiency experts, we put energy efficiency first and help operators to focus on the opportunities beyond fuel – use the avoid|shift|improve model (in that order) in your thinking, approach, and

143

144  Conclusion communications – even if you choose not to use those exact words, fuel choice is a necessary part of the discussion but should come last. 15.1 Checklist I am a big fan of checklists and recommend reading The Checklist Manifesto by Atul Gawande (http://atulgawande.com/book/the-checklist-manifesto/) if you are wondering why and how they can add to your service delivery. No single checklist on transport can be complete, but I offer the one I use as a starting point (Section 10.5) for you on your audits; as we said at the outset, this is a “light” guide to get you started. I welcome all comments, amendments, suggestions, and corrections via [email protected] or find me on LinkedIn or now mastodon.energy ‘conormolloy’.

References and Further Reading From EN16247 and ISO50001 [1] International Telecommunication Union (ITU), report on Climate Change, Oct. 2008. [2] G. Koutitas, P. Demestichas, ‘A review of energy efficiency in telecommunication networks’, Proc. In Telecomm. Forum (TELFOR), pp. 1-4, Serbia, Nov., 2009. [3] Gartner Report, Financial Times, 2007. [4] I. Cerutti, L. Valcarenghi, P. Castoldi, ‘Designing power-efficient WDM ring networks’, ICST Int. Conf. on Networks for Grid Applic., Athens, 2009. [5] W. Vereecken, et. al., ‘Energy Efficiency in thin client solutions’, ICST Int. Conf. on Networks for Grid Applic., Athens, 2009. [6] J. Haas, T. Pierce, E. Schutter, ‘Datacenter design guide’, whitepaper, the greengrid, 2009. [7] Intel, ‘Turning challenges into opportunities in the data center’, White Paper, Chariots, railroad tracks, and shuttle boosters thread https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1177631604186996737.html and the counterfactual https:// www.snopes.com/fact-check/railroad-gauge-chariots/ “The eventual standardization of railroad gauge in the U.S. was due far less to a slavish devotion to a gauge inherited from England than to the simple fact that the North won the Civil War.” David Mikkelson Published 16 April 2001 EU Copyright notice © European Union, 1995–2022: The Commission’s reuse policy is implemented by the Commission Decision of 12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents. Unless otherwise indicated (e.g., in individual copyright notices), content owned by the EU on this website is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. This means that reuse is allowed, provided appropriate credit is given and changes are indicated.

145

146  References and Further Reading

Further reading, good websites, programmes, etc. ●●

Sustainable Energy – without the hot air https://www.withouthotair. com/ 2009 David MacKay FRS was the Regius Professor of Engineering at the University of Cambridge (RIP 2014).

●●

Doughnut Economics https://www.kateraworth.com/ Kate Raworth (sounds like ‘Ray-worth’) is a renegade economist focused on making economics fit for 21st century realities.

●●

How Bad are Bananas?: The Carbon Footprint of Everything Paperback – by Mike Berners-Lee

●●

There is no Planet B also by Mike Berners-Lee

●●

Green Logistics: Improving the Environmental Sustainability of Logistics, Third Edition by Alan McKinnon (Editor), Michael Browne (Editor), Anthony Whiteing (Editor), Maja Piecyk (Editor).

●●

Atul Gawande, The Checklist Manifesto, How to Get Things Right http://atulgawande.com/book/the-checklist-manifesto/

Programmes worth being on mailing list for – my view – there are many excellent programmes around the world; this list is those available in English language in the first instance (click on links for other languages and partners or sub-programmes): 1.

Smart Freight Centre (SFC)



a. https://www.smartfreightcentre.org/en/



b. Members from around the world, i.e., where you may good local sources https://www.smartfreightcentre.org/en/partners/ (look at the strategic partners, SFC experts, and associations).

2.

Global Logistics Emissions Council – GLEC framework and panels of experts https://www.smartfreightcentre.org/en/glec-members/

3.

The Sustainable Freight Buyers Alliance (SFBA) unites freight buyers and freight decarbonization initiatives to shift to n­ et-zero freight transport https://www.smartfreightcentre.org/en/sustainable-freight-buyersalliance-1/

4.

ALICE – The European Technology Platform ALICE is set-up to develop a comprehensive strategy for research, innovation, and market deployment of logistics and supply chain management innovation

Further reading, good websites, programmes, etc.  147

in Europe. The platform will support, assist, and advise the European Commission into the implementation of the EU Program for research: Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe in the area of Logistics. https:// www.etp-logistics.eu/about-alice/ 5.

Cambridge Sustainable Road Freight SRF, https://www.csrf.ac.uk/

6.

UK National Energy Authority Energy Savings Trust (EST) https:// energysavingtrust.org.uk/business/transport/freight-retrofit/ and freight portal https://thefreightportal.org/

7.

My own country’s national energy authority do some useful online training tools via their Energy Academy (free), https://www.seai.ie/ energyacademy/

8.

Australian government, https://www.energy.gov.au/business

9.

USA has several programmes



a. https://www.epa.gov/smartway (mirrored in Canada as well)



b. https://nacfe.org/ North American Council for Freight Efficiency



c. https://runonless.com/ from NACFE and Rocky Mountain Institute

Index

16247  38, 43, 45

fuel cell  117, 125, 137

A air  3–4, 11–12, 20, 29, 34–35, 64–65, 71, 83, 86–87, 89, 92, 100–105, 107, 120–122, 129, 135 audit  4, 8, 22–23, 26, 29–30, 37–43, 45, 54, 60, 63, 68, 70, 75, 77–79, 81, 94–95, 106, 108, 112, 133, 137–138, 140–141

H hydrogen  14, 114, 117, 125, 129–133, 135–136, 139

B battery electric  13, 125, 127, 129–130, 133 E energy  1–6, 8, 10–12, 14, 17–18, 20–21, 25, 27, 29–30, 32–35, 37–43, 45–46, 49, 54–55, 57–60, 63, 69, 74–79, 81, 83–85, 89–90, 94, 97–98, 102, 107–110, 112–113, 116–117, 119–122, 125, 128, 135–141, 143 F fuel  2–3, 9–12, 21–23, 26–27, 29, 32, 34–36, 39–40, 46, 49–55, 59–62, 66–69, 73–75, 77, 79–80, 82, 88, 93–97, 100, 103–105, 107–111, 114–115, 117, 119–120, 123–126, 128–129, 132–141, 143–144

I internal combustion engine  13, 32–33, 60, 93–94 ISO50001  42, 140 O opportunities  8, 11, 13, 17, 30, 33, 35, 38–40, 43, 45–47, 75–76, 81, 88, 91, 101–103, 105, 129, 135, 137–138, 140, 143 R rail  2, 5, 41, 55, 71, 83, 85, 87, 92, 107, 112–114, 118, 132 reduction  10, 19, 21, 27–28, 30, 36, 41, 91, 96, 100, 102, 111, 135 road  2–3, 5, 8–9, 26, 31, 35–36, 40, 55, 58–59, 61, 63–65, 67, 71, 77, 81–83, 85–86, 88–89, 92, 95, 99, 102, 105, 107, 112, 114–115, 120, 125, 132, 135, 138, 143 S savings  3, 19–21, 25, 27, 30, 35–36, 39–40, 45–47, 69–70, 82, 88, 94, 98, 102–103, 121, 129, 137–140

149

150  Index ship  2, 83, 85, 108–111 T Transport  1–3, 5–13, 17–23, 25–26, 28, 31–35, 37, 39–44, 46–47,

49–50, 53–55, 57, 59, 63, 69–72, 75, 77, 81, 83–86, 89, 107, 114, 120–121, 132, 135–139, 143–144 tyres 97–99

About the Author

Since 2005, Conor has trained companies to maximise their energy performance, minimising emissions on the path to net-zero. He is a member of the Association of Energy Engineers (AEE), Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (CILT), Freight Transport Association Ireland (FTAI), and the Efficiency Valuation Organisation (EVO). He is also a registered energy auditor, qualified trainer and experienced facilitator. In 2018 Conor was invited to join the Global Logistics Emissions Council (GLEC) expert panel based on his work as the designer of the EEOS funded ECOfleet programme, where over 100 Irish freight operators get paid for measured fuel and CO2 savings (2014–2030). He was elected president of the Association of Energy Engineers Ireland Chapter in May 2020, and is an independent energy advisor with an MSc in Energy Management and Renewable energy from University of Ulster. He is also a Certified Energy Manager (CEM), Measurement & Verification professional (CMVP) and qualified trainer (QQI) for Climate Action, Transport, ISO50001 and Transport Manager training. An experienced facilitator, he has trained EU and Member State Officials, over 250 experienced Lead Auditors in Transport Energy Auditing across Europe, and led the publication of EN 16247-4:2014 Europe’s original transport energy audit standard. The greenest, most profitable energy is the energy you do not use – authentic solutions 2006 (now AEMS).

151