ESTIMATE CO2 EMISSION BY

CARS/BIKES BY VISITING LPU

CAMPUS DAILY

LOVELY PROFFESIONAL UNIVERSITY

1
 In response to an inquiry of Minister of the Environment, the
Central Environment Council has been discussing its
recommendation and submitted the 11th Report of the Future
Policy for Motor Vehicle Emission Reduction on 10 August,
2012.
 The 11th Report consists of the following items:
1. The Future Emission Reduction Measures for Motorcycles
2. The Future Emission Reduction Measures for Heavy-Duty
Diesel Motor Vehicles
(1) Measures for the Improvement of Durability and
Reliability of NOx After-Treatment System
(2) Off-Cycle Emission Measures
3. The Future Emission Reduction Measures for Diesel Special
Motor Vehicles
2
 The Future Emission Reduction Measures for Motorcycles
(1) Viewpoints on Reviewing Motorcycle Emission Reduction Measures
Background
• Although the emission regulation of the 2006 Standard is applied, the
amount of HC and CO emissions per distance travelled is still much
higher than those of four-wheeled vehicles.
• Although the tailpipe emission standard has been implemented for the
first time in 1998 and then reinforced in 2006, the relative contribution of
evaporative gas within the emission has been higher.
• It is important to control the amount of emission through monitoring the
in-use malfunction of emission reduction systems.
Total Emission Amounts of Motorcycles and Passenger Vehicles (PVs)
Vehicle Driving Distance Emission Amount (t/year) Average Emission Amount (g/km)
FY (Million km/year)
Types NOx HC CO CO2 NOx HC CO CO2
Motorcycle 15,189 1,790 8,155 62,039 806,796 0.118 0.537 4.084 53.117
Kei-PV 116,086 4,027 3,055 74,610 18,084,031 0.035 0.026 0.643 155.781
FY2010
PV 391,102 12,644 6,280 196,021 67,447,833 0.032 0.016 0.501 172.456
PV total 507,188 16,671 9,335 270,631 85,531,863 0.033 0.018 0.534 168.639
Motorcycle 15,189 1,047 1,394 21,506 844,040 0.069 0.092 1.416 55.569
FY2020 Kei-PV 114,908 835 1,821 51,025 13,771,441 0.007 0.016 0.444 119.847
(Est.) PV 392,463 2,834 2,986 105,909 63,480,689 0.007 0.008 0.270 161.750
PV total 507,371 3,669 4,807 156,934 77,252,131 0.007 0.009 0.309 152.260
Note) For Kei-PV and PV, gasoline vehicle only 3
(2) Tailpipe Emission Reduction Measures
Current Technology and Challenges
• Current measures for tailpipe emission reduction is based on the feedback
control for theoretical air-fuel ratio, using “Electronically Controlled Gasoline
Injection + Three-way Catalyst + O2 Sensor”.
• Compared to four-wheeled vehicles, motorcycle emission reduction
technology is constrained not only by the smaller body size, but also by
consideration of contact with roads surface when inclined, as well as damages
on parts and human body from release of exhaust heat and vibration.
• Each part of emission reduction devices is subject to pursuit of downsizing
and lightening, as well as systemic simplification and part communization for
cost reduction.
O2 Sensors for Motorcycles (with and without heater) and for PVs

Resource： JAMA
4
5
 The Forthcoming Permissible Limits of Motorcycle Tailpipe
Emission
• Considering the new EURO 4 becoming effective from 2016 and allowing
adequate time for due technological development by motorcycle manufacturers,
it is considered appropriate that application of new regulation in Japan occurs
by the end of 2016.
• Emission reduction technologies expected to be developed by 2016:
Optimization of fuel injection control
Introduction of variable valve actuation mechanism
Increase in catalyst volume
Quick activation of catalyst by ascending exhaust gas temperature quickly
High efficiency of catalyst
[Recommendation]
The new permissible emission limits are set based on WMTC classes and will
begin by the end of 2016. Unit [g/km]

Category Class 1 Class 2 Class 3

Pollutants THC CO NOx THC CO NOx THC CO NOx
Next Limit 0.30 1.14 0.07 0.20 1.14 0.07 0.17 1.14 0.09
Current Equivalent Limit 0.45 2.2 0.16 0.27 2.62 0.21 0.27 2.62 0.21
Reduction Rate 33.3％ 48.2％ 56.3％ 25.9％ 56.5％ 66.7％ 37.0％ 56.5％ 57.1％
6
(Ref) EURO 4 0.38 1.14 0.07 0.38 1.14 0.07 0.17 1.14 0.09
 Estimated Amount of Reduction in Tailpipe Emission in 2020
The new regulation is expected to bring additional effect of 20% reduction
of HC in 2020. In the future, further reduction is expected, owing to further
diffusion of new types of motorcycles.
Unit [t/year]
Tailpipe
Pollutants Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Emission
Without New
947 245 202 1,394
Regulation
THC
With New 724 216 170 1,110
Regulation ▲23.5% ▲11.8% ▲15.8% ▲20.4%
Without New
11,561 6,839 3,107 21,506
Regulation
CO
With New 7,245 5,083 2,362 14,690
Regulation ▲37.3% ▲25.7% ▲24.0% ▲31.7%
Without New
606 201 240 1,047
Regulation
NOx
With New 355 142 171 669
Regulation ▲41.4% ▲29.3% ▲28.8% ▲36.1%
7
(3) Measures for Reduction of Fuel Evaporative Emission
Test Method
• California State (CA) Evaporative Emission Test for Motorcycles is used by
several other and will be adopted to EU regulation from EURO 4.
• CA Evaporative Emission Test should be introduced for the following reasons:
 The test is regarded as an alternative of Passenger Vehicles (PVs)
evaporative emission test, which consists of 24 hour Diurnal Breathing Loss
(DBL) and Hot Soak Loss (HSL) tests.
 One-heating DBL test is adequate because 60 to 80% motorcycles are
parked only once during the daytime in Japan.

Driving Pre-Conditioning Soak DBL Driving HSL

SHED
Analyzer

AC unit

CA Evaporative Emission Test Process

8
 Permissible Evaporative Emission Limit for Motorcycles
• In Japan, permissible evaporative emission limit from PVs is 2.0 g/test. Both
the U.S. limit from motorcycles as well as EURO 4 limit are 2.0 g/test.
• Setting 2.0 g/test as the permissible evaporative emission limit will reduce
30% motorcycle evaporative emission in FY2020.
 Estimated Amount of Evaporative Emission from Motorcycles in FY2020 (t/year)
Evaporative Emission Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total
Without Regulation 953 1,476 1,847 4,275
With Regulation 953 946 1,086 2,985
Reduction Rate 0.0％ 35.9％ 41.2％ 30.2％

 Estimated Tailpipe and Evaporative Emissions from Motorcycles in FY2020 (t/year)

Tailpipe and Evaporative
Emissions
Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Total

Without New Regulation 1,900 1,721 2,049 5,670

With New Regulation 1,677 1,162 1,256 4,095
Reduction Rate 11.7％ 32.5％ 38.7％ 27.7％

[Recommendation]
The motorcycle evaporative emission regulation is modeled after the CA
Evaporative Emission Test, with the permissible limit of 2.0 g/test. The
regulation will be implemented by the end of 2016. 9
(4) On-Board Diagnostics (OBD) System
Current Motorcycle OBD System
• A motorcycle OBD system that monitors malfunctions caused by a short-circuit or open
electric circuits and alerts the driver has been established in Japan.
• It takes several years to prepare additional measures, including monitoring system of
fuel injection correction, ISO-conformed connectors for communication off-board, and
modification of the malfunction warning lamp. For allowing due time for
manufacturing and technical development, the application of new OBD equipment
should be at the same as the forthcoming tailpipe emission regulation.
Items
Already Open faults of sensors in malfunction, (incl. air pressure
Developed sensor, intake pressure sensor, intake air temperature
sensor, water temperature sensor, throttle position sensor,
cylinder sensor, crankshaft angle sensor, O2 sensor, O2
sensor heater, primary ignition system, air injection
system, etc.), release of alert after recovery, malfunction
information storage and functional confirmation at the
start
To be Monitors of malfunction by fuel injection correction, ISO
developed connectors for communication off-board, change of the Malfunction Alert
malfunction alert lamp

[Recommendation]
The OBD equipment that monitors malfunctions caused by a short-circuit or
open electric circuits is now mandated. The implementation will occur by the
end of 2016. 10
 The Future Emission Reduction Measures for
Heavy-Duty Diesel Motor Vehicles
(1) Measures for the Improvement of Durability and Reliability of NOx After-
Treatment System
 Urea Selective Catalytic Reaction (SCR) Systems
• In Japan, Urea SCR Systems were first equipped with New Long-Term (NLT, the
2005 Standard) heavy-duty (HD) diesel vehicles and followed by Post New Long-
Term (PNLT, 2009 Standard) HD diesel vehicles.

• The Urea SCR System for NLT consists of a Pre-Diesel Oxidation Catalyst
(Pre-DOC), a SCR catalyst, and a Post-DOC. In the Urea SCR System for
PNLT, a Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) system is installed between a Pre-
DOC and a SCR catalyst. Tailpipe
Emission Gas
Urea Injector Nozzle

Pre-DOC
Post-DOC
SCR
Catalyst
Exhaust Gas
Emitted Directly
from the Engine
SCR Systems for NLT (Image) 11
  Emission Test Results of In-Use NLT HD Diesel Vehicles
With Urea SCR Systems
• The chassis-dynamo emission tests based on the JE05 mode were
conducted on 5 in-use NLT HD Diesel Vehicles with Urea SCR systems.
All NOx emission values greatly exceeded the NLT limit and N2O and NH3
values were much larger than that of NLT HD Diesel Vehicles with new
Urea SCR system installed.
• Increase of NOx emission might be caused by catalyst poisoning with
unburned hydrocarbon, sulfur, phosphorus or metal, as well as deterioration
of catalysts.
0.25 3.0
JE05 Test, In-Use Emission JE05 Test, In-Use Emission

0.20 D 2.5

N2O [g/kWh]
PM [g/kWh]

2.0
0.15 Average
D direct-NH3
1.5 161ppm
0.10 B
1.0
0.05 NLT ave./upper limit B A E C A
0.5
C E
0.00 0.0
0 2 4 6 8 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
NOx [g/kWh] NH3 [g/kWh]
Chassis-Dynamo Emission Test Results (5 NLT HD Diesel Vehicles) 12
 8
N2O

Emissions [g/kWh]
• After recovery operation of 7
NH3
JE05 mode

30 minutes (ARO30) for 6

removing hydrocarbon 5
4
poisoning, additional
3 NOx
emission tests were
2
conducted for one of the
1
vehicles.
0
• As a result, NOx emission In-use In-use In-use New
was reduced but still (real-life) (ARO30) (ARO60)
beyond the NLT limit. Status of urea-SCR system
NH3 emission decreased Chassis-Dynamo Emission Test Results
while N2O increased. Tail-end Tail-end
Tail-end
JE05
These results imply the Urea-SCR system, status
test#
NOx NH3 N2O

deterioration of Pre-DOC. (g/kWh) (mg/kWh) (mg/kWh)

n1 5.72 1345.9 735.7
Real-life n2 5.83 1344.1 707.4
ave 5.78 1345.0 721.5
In-use n1 3.51 245.3 1090.5
After recovery operation (30min) n2 3.65 242.3 997.1
ave 3.58 243.8 1043.8
After recovery operation (60min) n1 3.39 187.6 956.9
n1 2.35 12.5 226.3
n2 2.69 12.9 204.0
New After aging operation
n3 2.41 10.2 186.7
ave 2.48 11.9 205.7
13
  Measures for In-Use NLT HD Diesel Vehicles With Urea SCR Systems

• In case that emission gas temperature is kept relatively low, HC poisoning has
influence on the NOx reduction capacity of the Urea SCR System. For removing
hydrocarbon poisoning, periodic heating of the System is a possible solution.
• After heating the System to reduce HC poisoning, the oxidative capacity of pre-
DOC may not be recovered to the level as brand-new. This is considered due to
deterioration of pre-DOC, owing to other factors than HC poisoning, although the
specific cause is yet to be identified.
• PNLT HD diesel vehicles are equipped with the DPF system as a reinforcement for
the PM regulation. Periodical heating of PM when regenerating the DPF system is
considered effective for improving the condition of each catalyst of the Urea SCR
System such as HC poisoning and other problems. As there seems no immediate
need of further measures for PNLT, we will continue monitoring the performance
of in-use Urea SCR Systems for PNLT.

[Recommendation]
Manufactures should consider the implementation of periodic heating measures of
in-use Urea SCR systems for NLT HD diesel vehicles. The investigation of factors
deteriorating pre-DOC should be kept and measures for the deterioration of pre-
DOC should be considered consequently.
14
Review of Durability Test Procedure
• A Major purpose of durability test within the type approval is to evaluate
heat deterioration by applying the test engine with high speed and heavy
load. To shorten the test time, extrapolation on change in emission is
applied.
• As the emission temperature at high speed and heavy load areas is relatively
high, the catalysts might not be poisoned by hydrocarbon, while actual
vehicles might drive at low speed with light load.

Example of Durability Test Mode for Diesel Heavy Duty Engine

[Recommendation]
The durability test procedure should be reviewed for the stringent condition for
Urea SCR systems.
15
(2) Off-Cycle Emission Measures
 Background
• For further reduction of emissions, a sophisticated electronic control technology
has been introduced to HD diesel engines.
• There is a possibility of vehicles, which emission is regulated under the type
approval test cycle, while fuel consumption is improved but emission of NOx
and other gases are increased in conditions other than the type approval test
cycle (“off-cycle”).
• Based on the 10th Report of Central Environment Council, the new regulation
called Global Technical Regulation (GTR) on measures for Off-Cycle Emissions
(OCE) will be introduced. However, there is a need for an immediate measure
to ban so-called “defeat strategy” , a nullifying function of emission reduction
devices at off-cycle, prior to the GTR implementation by 2016.

Example of “Defeat Strategy”

(After the vehicle has driven at 60km/h of constant speed for 240 seconds, NOx emission jumps up,
while CO2 emission decreases.) 16
Prohibition on Application of “Defeat Strategy”
• Although the application of the engine control regarded as “defeat strategy” should be
prohibited, some engine controls seem necessary to protect engines or vehicles despite
the emission increase.
【Operational Conditions Permitting Precautionary Measures】
Operating at continuously low engine speed, heavy loads and high speed, possible
overheating, driving at high altitude, low temperature, any malfunction indicated
for engine via MIL light
• When starting and warming up the engine, the emission control devices may not
function properly owing to low functional capacity of catalysts under cold condition or
other unintentional reasons.
• Once the operational condition becomes one that does not require engine protection,
the engine control system should be removed immediately. Furthermore, the
conditions for engine protection should be restricted to ones that rarely occur in normal
use, and yet this application should be kept minimal.

[Recommendation]
The government should define “defeat strategy” as the HD diesel engine control
which increases emission and prohibit its application. This definition does not
apply to precautionary measures for engine protection and safety, nor to the
necessary conditions at start-up and warm-up, and the permissible conditions,
need to be clarified in regulations.
17
Determining Whether “Defeat Strategy” or Not
The emission test of HD diesel vehicles is conducted based on the “Vehicle Standard Specification” with
engine dynamometer. The fuel consumption rate is calculated by inserting actual vehicle spec by each
vehicle model on “Engine Fuel Consumption Map” and simulated on the JE05 mode for the indication of
the rate, in addition to evaluation for standard conformity.

JE05 (Vehicle Speed Mode)

Emission Test
Transformed based on Vehicle
Standard Spec (incl. weight,
dimension, and gear number and Simulation of
ratio) Fuel Consumption
Engine Torque Rate (%))

Calculated by using Engine Fuel Consumption Map

based on Vehicle Standard Spec (incl. weight and
dimension) and the actual vehicle spec (gear
number and ratio) and simulated on the JE05 mode
“Engine Fuel Consumption Map”
based on the static fuel consumption rates of engine
Time (s)
speed (6+ points) & torque (5+ points) combination
Engine Speed Rate (%)

Engine Torque (N･m)

Engine Torque (N･m)

Time (s)

Measured emission gas by using engine

dynamometer based on torque and engine Engine Speed (rpm) Engine Speed (rpm)

speed The Actual Static Fuel

Consumption Rate (L/s) 18
• Currently, emission and fuel consumption tests for HD diesel vehicles are
conducted separately. As the users tend to place higher value on fuel
efficiency than reducing NOx emission, there might be a defeat strategy which
does not appear on emission tests but does on fuel consumption tests or during
the actual driving.
• It is difficult to confirm the results by comparing of the actual engine
dynamometer test and the “Engine Emission Map” simulation, as the emission
amount is greatly influenced by the transient cycle.
• The additional test cycle is not a good solution because the engine strategy
might be changed in order to disappear in the certain test cycle.

[Recommendation]
• If the difference between a calculated simulation and the actual measurement
of fuel consumption during the emission test is within 3%, then the emission
test is considered as “Valid” and the test result has to fulfill the emission
standard. Otherwise, we consider that the defeat strategy is applied to the
engine.
• In addition, the government should confirm the defeat strategy application by
the emission amount in the actual driving, rather than allowing to take
additional tests for type approval. 19
 Introduction of Ramped Modal Cycle (RMC)
100 10 15
• RMC has the same steady operational points in its

Engine Torque[%]
75 10 15
emission test with C1 Mode. Although RMC
includes measurement of transition between the 50 10 15
points, both tests have almost the same weighting 25

factors. 10
0 15
• The results of the two emission tests are almost the 0 50 100
-25
same, and thus considered that RMC is equivalent to Engine Speed [%]

C1 Mode. Weighting Factors of C1 Mode

Engine Torque Engine Speed
200 100 100 9 14

Engine Torque[%]
75 9 14
150 50
Engine Torque [%]

50 9 14

Engine Speed [%]

100 0 25
9
0 14
50 -50 0 50 100
-25
Engine Speed [%]
0 -100 Time Ratio of RMC Steady
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Operational Points
RMC
[Recommendation]
RMC is regarded as equivalent to C1 Mode and will be added as an option of
steady-state test cycles to the forthcoming standards.
20
Thank you !

Ministry of the Environment, JAPAN

21