Energy Use in The Transportation Sector of Malaysia

ENERGY USE IN THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR OF MALAYSIA
FINAL REPORT
FOR
A DANIDA-FUNDED PROJECT ON RENEWABLE ENERGY & ENERGY EFFICIENCY
BY
CONSULTANCY UNIT UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA LEVEL 2, BLOCK D, PERDANASISWA COMPLEX UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA 50603 KUALA LUMPUR
MAY 2005
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Transportation is one of the key factors for the economy and society. Therefore, transport policymakers have to create the policies frameworks that are required transport sector to sustain energy with three-dimensional objective namely ecology, economy and social acceptability. In chapter 2, the report discusses about international experiences on reduction of energy use in transportation sector. There are many methods and policies to reduce energy consumption in transport sector, however only several of them that are suitable to be used in Malaysia are elaborated in this chapter. Those include fuel economy standard for motor vehicle, fuel economy labels, fuel switching, fuel taxation, emission abatement, further improvements to vehicles which are have been implemented in other develop as well as developing countries. The study found that many policies can be implemented directly in Malaysia while some others must be modified to make it suitable for this country. For example fuel economy label guide program can be directly implemented in this country, however for fuel economy standard must me modified to make it suitable because Malaysia has it local vehicle manufacturers that have to be protected. Emissions in the transportation sector produce adverse effects on the environment that influent human health, organism growth, climatic changes and so on. The Kyoto protocol by the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate change (UNFCC) in December 1997, prescribed legally binding greenhouse gas emission target about 5% below their 1990 level. About 160 countries including Malaysia now adopt this protocol. The transportation sector is the main contributors for emission in the country. In order to calculate the potential emission by this activity, the type of fuel use should be identified. The study found that there are no radical changes of fuel used for transportation sector in Malaysia. The data shown that fuel type use are 53% of petrol, 34% of diesel, 13% of ATF 0.06% Natural Gas, and 0.03% of electricity in year 2000 to 46% of petrol, 42% of diesel, 12% of ATF, 0.29% Natural Gas and only 0.07% of electricity in the year of 2020. The calculation is based on emissions for unit fuel used and the type of fuel use and energy demand
ii
in transportation sector. The study found that, the transportation sector has contributed huge emissions from their activities in this country and the change on fuel type is necessary to change the pattern of emission production. These are discuss intensively in chapter 3. The main part of the transport and energy investigations and projections is presented in Chapter 4. The first part of the chapter discusses a review of existing data available from related authorities and transportation studies that were undertaken to date. Consideration of population growth as well as socio-economic data and energy use in transportation sector data has also been considered. Forecasting future transportation growth based on population growth and socioeconomic data and needs up to 20 years is also presented. Consideration of relationship between transportation trips production and energy consumption is elaborated. Formulation of a model for forecasting energy consumption by transportation sector and model validation that takes into consideration the correlation coefficient is discussed in detail. Furthermore, the uses of the model to analyze energy consumption based on the modal split scenarios are also presented. This topic is discussed completely in Chapter 5. Due to rapid economic growth, the usage of fuel especially petrol and diesel for transportation sector has increased tremendously. This has caused Malaysian oil reserve to decrease rapidly over the past decade. As a result, the government is encouraging the use of alternative fuel in the transportation sector. One of the proposals is the encouragement to use natural gas (NG) as an alternative fuel and proposing a suitable policy for it. Study on natural gas vehicle (NGV) has been undertaken to identify the deficiency and to improve the previous policies. This study involved respondents (consumers) from public transports (taxi driver, taxi and bus companies) and owners of pump station to identify their opinion about the policy. Data collection to identify an overview of the current status of NGV development including market activities and the future prospects of NGV in Malaysia are conducted by interviewing respondents. Malaysia has been experiencing a dramatic increase in the number of vehicles used, and this is projected to be higher in the future due to increasing income per
iii
capita. Chapter 6 focuses on the potential implementation of fuel economy standards for motor vehicles in Malaysia. The fuel economy standard is developed based on the fuel consumption data that is obtained from manufacturers and other related sources. With the increasing number of vehicles, fuel economy standards are one of the highly effective policies for decreasing energy use in the transportation sector. Fuel economy standards are also capable of reducing air pollution and contribute towards a positive environmental impact. In this study, the potential efficiency improvements of vehicles are analyzed by using the engineering-economic analysis. Meanwhile the possible efficiency improvement of motor vehicle in reducing the fuel consumption of Malaysias transportation sector in the future are examined by predicting the energy, economical and environmental impacts due to its implementation.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report is impossible to be completed without help and support from several individuals and organization. We would like to thank and acknowledge all of them. However, the following individuals and organizations have given very important input to us to make this study a success, those are: Economic Planning Unit, Prime Ministers Department who have given us the opportunity to be involved in this project and provided us with latest secondary data. Officers from several government agencies and non-government agencies that provided us with the latest data and information that have been used in this report. The respondents that allocated their busy time to fill the questionnaires. Without their helps it is impossible to complete this report. Our research assistants Husnawan Mutiara, Mahendra Varman and Yusria Darma for their excellent work on data collection and data analysis. All individuals that provided input information for us and allocating their time to make the study a success, we wish to thank them for their help. We hope this document can be used by energy policymakers and practitioner especially from Economic Planning Unit, Prime Ministers Department in taking their decision related to energy for transport sector as well as anybody involved in energy sector in Malaysia. Masjuki Hj Hassan Mohd Rehan Karim T.M. Indra Mahlia Consultancy Unit, University Of Malaya (UPUM) Level 2, Block D, Perdanasiswa Complex University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur December 2004
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .. CONTENTS ... LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF TABLES . NOMENCLATURES . CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .. 1.1 Background ... 1.2 Objectives of the study .. 1.3 Contributions of the study .. 1.4 Limitation of the study ...... 1.5 Organization of the report .. CHAPTER 2: INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCES ON REDUCTION OF ENERGY USE IN TRANSPORT SECTOR 2.1 Introduction ... 2.2 Program Review .... 2.3 Transportation Policy in selected countries ................ 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 2.3.6 2.3.7 2.3.8 2.3.9
2.3.10
ii v vi x xiv xxii 1 4 9 10 10 11
14 16 18 21 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 27 27 28 30
Thailand ......................................................... Singapore ....................................................... European Countries ........................................ Japan ............................................................... Australia ......................................................... India ............................................................... France ............................................................. New Zealand .................................................. Netherlands .................................................... Philippines ......................................................
2.4 Transportation Regulation ..
vi
2.5 Voluntary agreements program .. 2.6 Air quality policies . 2.7 Fuel economy . 2.8 Conclusions CHAPTER 3: HISTORICAL AND FUTURE TREND OF ENERGY DEMAND AND ENVIRONMENTAL EMISSIONS FROM THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR . 3.1 Introduction ... 3.2 Survey data ..... 3.3 Methodology ...... 3.4 Results and Discussion ............... 3.5 Conclusions .................................... CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN MALAYSIA ... 4.1 Introduction ... 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.5 4.2.6 4.2.7 4.2.8 4.2.9 4.3.1 Modes of Transportation ... Transportation Demand Analysis .. Study Objectives ... Conceptual Framework . Road Transport .. Rail Transport ... Air Transport ..... Maritime Transport ... Passenger Transport Mode Share .. Number of Vehicle Registration by Type of Fuel . Population ......... Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Employment ...... Trip Production .
30 32 34 46
50 51 53 57 58 65
66 67 68 69 70 71 72 72 79 84 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 99
4.2 Type of Data Collected ..
4.3 Review of HNDP and SMURT KL Study .
vii
4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5
Trip Generation and Attraction Model .. Trip Production Rates ... Model for Forecasting Vehicles Model Share ..
100 103 104 104 105 107 108 112 115 122 123 125 126 127 128 131 135 136 137 138 138 140 144 145 147 148 151 153 156 160
4.4 Future Socioeconomic Framework ... 4.5 Analysis For Transportation Demand ... 4.5.1 4.5.2 4.5.3 4.5.4 4.5.5 4.5.6 4.5.7 4.5.8 4.6.1 4.7.1 4.7.2 4.7.3 4.7.4 Method 1 ... Method 2 ... Method 3 ... Summary of Method 1, Method 2 and Method 3 .. Future Total Trip Generation Model Split Scenarios ... Future Trip Generation Based on Scenario ... Vehicle Kilometer ......... Do Nothing or Do Something Fuel Consumption Road Transport .. Rail Transport ... Air Transport ..... Total Energy Consumed by Road, Rail and Air Transport ...
4.6 Fuel Consumption In Transportation Sector . 4.7 Energy Consumption In Transportation Sector .
4.8 Conclusions and Recommendations .................. CHAPTER 5: FEASIBILITY AND POTENTIAL OF SWITCHING TO NGV FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN MALAYSIA 5.1 Introduction ... 5.2 Survey data ..... 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 5.2.4 5.2.5 Natural Gas Reserves Natural Gas Reserve in Malaysia .. Natural Gas Vehicle in Malaysia and Other Countries Number of Vehicles in Malaysia . Price of Oil and Natural Gas in Malaysia
viii
5.3 Methodology .. 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.4.1 5.4.2 5.4.3 5.4.4 5.5.1 5.5.2 Primary Data Collection .... Secondary Data Collection Conducting Economic Analysis Prediction for Number of Public Transport in Malaysia ... Public Transportation ........................................................ Companies and Managers of Pump Station ...................... Economic Analysis ........................................................... Conclusions ....................................................................... Suggestions .......................................................................
160 161 164 166 167 167 167 174 176 179 179 181 188 189 189 191 194 194 195 202 207 207 207 208 209 262 271 273 273 274
5.4 Results and Discussions .
5.5 Conclusions and Suggestions .
CHAPTER 6: STUDY ON VEHICLE EFFICIENCY STANDARDS ....... 6.1 Introduction ... 6.1.1 Background ....................................................................... 6.2 Survey data ..... 6.3 Methodology .. 6.3.1 6.3.2 6.3.3 6.4.1 6.4.2 6.4.3 6.4.4 6.4.5 6.4.6 6.5.1 6.5.2 Fuel Consumption ............................................................. Engineering Economic Analysis ....................................... Potential Fuel Savings ....................................................... Introduction ....................................................................... Fuel Consumption ............................................................. Vehicle Growth ................................................................. Engineering/Economic Analysis ....................................... Potential Fuel Savings ....................................................... Economic Impact of the Standards ................................... Conclusion ........................................................................ Recommendations .............................................................
6.4 Results and Discussions .
6.5 Conclusions and Recommendations ...
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
No. 1.1 1.2 1.3 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 Description Final energy use by sector in 2002 of 33290 ktoe ...... Final consumption for petroleum product in 2002 of 20,635 ktoe .. Percentage of transportation sector energy use based on fuel types in 2002 of 13,441 ktoe .. Austrian draft fuel economy label Australian draft fuel consumption labels . Canadian fuel economy label ...................... Danish draft fuel consumption label ... Swedish fuel economy label Swiss draft fuel economy label ... US fuel consumption label .. UK fuel economy label Environmental information guide ... Predicted energy demand based on percentage fuel mix for transportation sector in Malaysia Pattern of CO2 and CO emissions production by transportation sector in Malaysia Pattern of SO2 and NOx emissions production by transportation sector in Malaysia Federal highway view towards Kuala Lumpur Motorization rates in Malaysia from 1991 to 2002 .. Trends of private cars and public transport vehicles Integrated rail services in Klang Valley ... LRT passengers per day ... Park n ride at LRT station ... Proportion of passenger by modes ... Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled passenger car volumes 61 73 74 78 82 83 83 93 61 59 8 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Page 3 8
(method 1) 4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.15 4.16 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.20 4.21 4.22 5.1 5.2 5.3 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled bus volumes (method 1) ... Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled commercial vehicle (method 1) ........................................................................................ Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled passenger car volumes (method 2) Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled bus volumes (method 2) ... Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled commercial vehicle (method 2) ........................................................................................ Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled passenger car (method 3) Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled bus (method 3) . Scatter-plot of observed vs. modeled commercial vehicle (method 3) ........................................................................................ Forecasted petrol consumption by road transport sector (liter/day) . Forecasted diesel consumption by road transport sector (liter/day) . Forecasted petrol consumption by road transport sector (ktoe/year) Forecasted diesel consumption by road transport sector (ktoe/year) Forecasted energy used in transportation sector (do nothing) .. Forecasted energy used in transportation sector (do something) . Percentage of vehicles by type . Increasing number of vehicles in Malaysia (1987 2002) .. Number of public transport (bus and taxi) from the year 1987 to 2002 .. Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for class I (City) Payback period and life cycle cost for class I (city) . Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for class I (Highway) . Payback period and life cycle cost for class I (highway) . Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for class II (City)
109 110 111 113 114 115 119 120 121 134 134 136 137 139 140 158 159 159 238 239 240 240 241
xi
6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 6.19 6.20 6.21 6.22 6.23 6.24
Payback period and life cycle cost for class II (city) ... Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for class II (Highway) . Payback period and life cycle cost for class II (highway) Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for class III (City) Payback period and life cycle cost for class III (city) .. Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for class III (Highway) . Payback period and life cycle cost for class III (highway) .. Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for class IV (City) Payback period and life cycle cost for class IV (city) .. Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for class IV (Highway) . Payback period and life cycle cost for class IV (highway) .. Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 1) . Payback period and life cycle cost for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 1) Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 2) . Payback period and life cycle cost for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 2) Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for 4 stroke motorcycle Payback period and life cycle cost for motorcycles 4 strokes .. Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) Payback period and life cycle cost for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) .
242 243 243 244 245 246 246 247 248 249 249 250 251
252 252 253 254 255 255
xii
6.25 6.26 6.27 6.28 6.29 6.30 6.31 6.32 6.33 6.34 6.35 6.36 6.37 6.38
Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for medium duty lorry (class 4 - 6) .. Payback period and life cycle cost for medium duty lorry (class 4 6) .. Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for heavy duty lorry (class 7 & 8) . Payback period and life cycle cost for heavy duty lorry (class 7 & 8) . Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for busses ... Payback period and life cycle cost for busses .. Projected fuel savings for cars ...... Fuel consumption with and without standards (STD vs BAU) for cars ... Projected fuel savings for motorcycles Fuel consumption with and without standards (STD vs BAU) for motorcycles .. Projected fuel savings for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) Fuel consumption with and without standards (STD vs BAU) for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) .. Projected fuel savings for busses . Fuel consumption with and without standards (STD vs BAU) for busses ... 270 283 283 284 284 268 269 266 267 264 265 259 261 261 263 259 257 257
6.A1 Car growth in Malaysia 6.A2 Motorcycle growth in Malaysia ... 6.A3 Lorry growth in Malaysia . 6.A4 Bus growth in Malaysia
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
No. 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 Description Examples of transport regulations in selected countries ..... Examples of transport voluntary agreement program in selected countries .......................................................................... Emission limits for new cars ... Fuel economy labelling schemes in selected countries .... Final energy use by transportation sector ........................ Transportation sector energy use based on fuel types .. CO2, SO2, NOx and CO emission from fossil fuel per GJ energy use by transportation sector . Predicted energy demand and fuel mix of transportation sector in Malaysia ... Potential emissions production by transportation sector in Malaysia .. Mode classification scheme . Number of motocars and motorization rates in Malaysia from 1991 to 2002 . Number of motorcycles and motorization rates from 1991 to 2002 Number of buses, commercial and other vehicles from 1991 to 2002 .. Proportion of private cars and public transport vehicles from 1991 to 2002 .. Summary of road mileage in Malaysia KTMB passengers and freight traffic from year 1992 to 2002 Rail passengers from 1998 to 2002 .. Air traffic at public-use airports in Malaysia from year 1991 to 2002 .. Air passengers traffic at public-use airports in Malaysia from year 85 77 79 80 84 76 73 75 69 58 62 54 32 34 51 53 Page 30 31
xiv
1990 to 2002 . 4.11 4.12 4.13 4.14 4.15 4.16 4.17 4.18 4.19 4.20 4.21 4.22 4.23 4.24 4.25 4.26 4.27 4.28 4.29 4.30 4.31 4.32 4.33 4.34 4.35 4.36 4.37 4.38 International air passenger-km data of KLIA .. Domestic air passenger-km data of KLIA Air passenger-km data of Kota Kinabalu airport . Air passenger-km data of Kuching airport ... Air passenger-km data of Penang airport . Air passenger-km data of Langkawi airport . Total cargo throughput by ports from year 1991 to 2002 Number of new vehicle registration based on fuel type ... Malaysia population from 1991 to 2002 .. Gross domestic products (GDP) from 1991 to 2002 Employment in all sectors from 1991 to 2002 . Trip production regression model General equation fro the trip generation/attraction model (macro level) . General equation fro the trip generation/attraction model (micro level) . Average vehicle occupancy and load factor . Average daily trip production rates by vehicle type in Malaysia . Number of vehicles forecasting models in Malaysia ... Modal share in the Kuala Lumpur metropolitan area .. Projected populations, 2005 2020 . Projected employment from year 2005 to 2020 ... Projected gross domestic product (GDP) from year 2005 to 2020 .. Observed vs. modeled passenger car volumes (method 1) .. Observed vs. modeled bus volumes (method 1) .. Observed vs. modeled commercial veh. (method 1) Observed vs. modeled passenger car volumes (method 2) .. Observed vs. modeled bus volumes (method 2) .. Observed vs. modeled commercial vehicle (method 2) ... No. of cars, busses and commercial vehicle year 1991 to 2002 ...
86 87 88 89 90 90 91 92 94 95 96 97 101 102 102 103 103 104 105 106 106 107 109 110 111 112 113 114 116
xv
4.39 4.40 4.41 4.42 4.43 4.44 4.45 4.46 4.47 4.48 4.49 4.50 4.51 4.52 4.53 4.54 4.55 4.56 4.57 4.58 4.59 4.60 4.61 4.62 4.63 4.64 4.65 4.66 5.1
No. of daily rail passenger year 1998 to 2002 .. No. of daily air passenger . Method 3 regression model .. Observed vs. modeled passenger car volumes (method 3) .. Observed vs. modeled bus volumes (method 3) .. Observed vs. modeled commercial vehicle (method 3) ... Trips generation models ... Forecasted no. of passengers by type of modes ... Forecasted modal split by type of modes . Future modal split scenarios . Forecasted no. of vehicles by type of modes (do nothing scenario) Forecasted no. of vehicles by type of modes (do something scenario) ... Forecasted trip generation rates by type of modes ... Total vehicle-km of the traffic (do nothing scenario) .. Total vehicle-km of the traffic (do something scenario) .. Summary statistics for passenger cars, 1990 2000 Summary statistics for two-axle trucks, 1990 2000 .. No. of new vehicle registration based on fuel types Proportion of new vehicle registration based on fuel types . Forecasted no. of vehicles (do nothing scenario) . Forecasted no. of vehicles (do something scenario) Forecasted fuel consumption (do nothing scenario) Forecasted fuel consumption (do something scenario) Energy use by various types of vehicles .. Forecasted energy consumption of rail transport . Forecasted energy consumption of air transport .. Forecasted energy used in transportation sector (do nothing) .. Forecasted energy used in transportation sector (do something) . World natural gas reserves by country as January 1, 2003 (EIA2004)
116 117 118 119 120 121 123 124 125 126 127 127 127 128 128 129 129 130 130 132 132 133 133 135 137 138 139 139 150
xvi
5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12
World natural gas vehicles by country . Number of vehicles in Malaysia (JPJ,2002) Price of fuels in Malaysia . Prediction of total public transport (bus and taxi) from year 2005 to 2020 .. Feedback obtained based on the survey carried out on NGV user (taxi driver) ... Feedback obtained based on the survey carried out on non - NGV user (taxi driver) ... Feedback obtained based on the survey carried out on managers of bus companies .. Estimated annual consumption between petrol and natural gas ... Estimated annual consumption between diesel and natural gas ... Estimated annual maintenance cost (RM) for different fuels .. Comparison of total operation cost for public transport with different fuel consumption ... Total number of vehicles in Malaysia .. Fuel consumption data (CAR) . List of motorcycle model and price .. Fuel cost over the vehicles 10 years lifetime .. Types/classes of cars Types/classes of motorcycles .. Types/classes of lorry .. Potential increase in fuel economy and related price increase for cars ... Potential increase in fuel economy and cost for motorcycles .. Potential increase in fuel economy and related price increase for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) .. Potential increase in fuel economy and related price increase for medium duty lorry (class 4 - 6) Potential increase in fuel economy and related price increase for
156 157 160 169 170 171
173 177 177 178 179 191 192 193 208 210 210 211 212 213 214 215
xvii
heavy duty lorry (class 7 & 8) . 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 6.19 6.20 6.21 6.22 6.23 6.24 6.25 6.26 6.27 6.28 6.29 6.30 FES and incremental cost of design options for class I car .. FES and incremental cost of design options for class II .. FES and incremental cost of design options for class III . FES and incremental cost of design options for class IV . FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class I (CITY) .. FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class I (HIGHWAY) FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class II (CITY) .. FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class II (HIGHWAY) FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class III (CITY) .. FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class III (HIGHWAY) FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class IV (CITY) .. FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class IV (HIGHWAY) FES and incremental cost of design option for 2 stroke motorcycle (METHOD I) FES and incremental cost of design option for 2 stroke motorcycle (METHOD II) . FES and incremental cost of design option for 4 stroke motorcycle FES and incremental cost of combined design options for 2 stroke motorcycle (METHOD I) FES and incremental cost of combined design options for 2 stroke motorcycle (METHOD II) ... FES and incremental cost of combined design options for 4 stroke
216 218 219 219 220 220 221 221 222 222 223 223 224 224 225 225 226
226
xviii
motorcycle 6.31 6.32 6.33 6.34 6.35 6.36 6.37 6.38 6.39 6.40 6.41 6.42 6.43 6.44 6.45 6.46 6.47 FES and incremental cost of design option for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) . FES and incremental cost of design option for medium duty lorry (class 4 - 6) .. FES and incremental cost of design option for heavy duty lorry (class 7 & 8) . FES and incremental cost of design option for busses ......... FES and incremental cost of combined design options for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) FES and incremental cost of combined design options for medium duty lorry (class 4 - 6) . FES and incremental cost of combined design options for heavy duty lorry (class 7 & 8) FES and incremental cost of combined design options for bus ... The input value of baseline models for each class of car (city driving) The input value of baseline models for each class of car (highway driving) The input value of baseline models for each class of motorcycles .. The input value of baseline models for each class of lorries and busses ... Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for class I car (CITY) .. Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for class I car (HIGHWAY) Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for class II car (CITY) .. Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for class II car (HIGHWAY) Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for class III car
227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 236 237 237 238 239 241 242
xix
(CITY) .. 6.48 6.49 6.50 6.51 6.52 6.53 6.54 6.55 6.56 6.57 6.58 6.59 6.60 6.61 6.62 6.63 6.64 6.65 6.66 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for class III car (HIGHWAY) Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for class IV car (CITY) .. Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for class IV car (HIGHWAY) Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 1) . Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 2) . Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for 4 stroke motorcycle Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for medium duty lorry (class 4 - 6) Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for heavy duty lorry (class 7 & 8) Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for busses .. Input data for potential fuel saving of cars ... The calculation of fuel savings for cars ... Input data for potential fuel saving of motorcycles .. The calculation of fuel savings for motorcycles .. Input data for potential fuel saving of medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) .. The calculation of fuel savings for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) . Input data for potential fuel saving of busses ... The calculation of fuel savings for busses ... The calculation result from the cost-benefit analysis for cars ..
244 245 247 248 250 251 253 254 256 258 260 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 271
xx
6.67 6.68 6.69
The calculation result from the cost-benefit analysis for motorcycle The calculation result from the cost-benefit analysis for medium duty lorry .. The calculation result from the cost-benefit analysis for busses .. 272 273 272
xxi
NOMENCLATURES
Symbols Description Annual efficiency improvement Annual fuel cost Annualized net savings in year i of vehicle Applicable stock in year i of vehicle Applicable stock in year i-1 of vehicle Baseline fuel consumption in the year of standards enacted for vehicle Bill savings in year i of vehicle Annual maintenance cost Constant value Drag coefficient Natural gas consumption The conventional fuel consumption before conversion The capital recovery factor Annual distance travel Discount rate
Energy use in year i of fuel type n
Unit
AEI iv
AFC
(RM) (RM)
ANS iv AS iv AS iv1 BFC sv BS iv C C,k

Cd Cg Co
CRF
(RM) (RM) (RM)
(Liter/km) (Liter/km)
D d
ESin
(km) (%) (ktoe)

(Liter/100km)
F
n FE p
Fuel consumption
Emission per unit energy of fuel type n
(kg/GJ) (liter) (RM) (RM)
FS iv
Fuel savings in year i of vehicle Incremental cost for the more efficient vehicle Initial incremental cost for more efficient vehicle Life span of vehicles
IC v
IICsv
(year)
xxii
LCC
Mg Mo
Life Cycle Cost Maintenance cost of NGV Maintenance cost before conversion The base year fleet average fuel economy The potential new fleet average fuel economy Life time of the appliance Number of vehicles in year i Number of vehicles in year i-1 Net savings in year i for vehicle Annual operating expenses Fuel price Price of the conventional fuel (diesel or petrol) Price of natural gas Payback period Investment cost
(RM) (RM/year) (RM/year) (1/km) (1/km) (year)
MPG0 MPGTOT N Naiv Naiv1
NSiv
OC P
Po Pg
(RM) (RM) (RM) (RM/liter) (RM/liter) (year) (RM) (RM)
PAY PC PV ANS iv PWF R r

S
Present value of annualized net saving in year i Present worth factor Fuel price Discount rate saving Standard fuel consumption of vehicle Shipments in year i of vehicle Shipment survival factor in year i of vehicle Total efficiency improvement of vehicle
Total emission in year i
(RM) (%) (RM/year) (liter/yr)
SFCsv Shiv SSFi v TEI sv

TM i
(%) (kg, Ton)
Ui
Utilization increase
xxiii
UFSiv UFS sv X Y y
Initial unit energy savings in year i of vehicle Initial unit fuel saving Year predicted year start Predicted value Motor vehicles predicted data The average data Year of standards enacted of vehicle Year i of shipment of vehicle Year target calculation for vehicle
(Liter/year) (Liter/year)
ym
Yseiv Yshiv
v YtcT
(year) (year) (year)
Abbreviations
ASEAN ATF CAFE CF CNG CO CO2 CSE DAF EDI Gg GHG GJ HC IEA ktoe LPG
Association of Southeast Asian Nations Aviation Turbine Fuel Corporate Average Fuel Economy Conversion factor Compressed Natural Gas Carbon monoxide Carbon dioxide Centre for Science and Environment Dutch vehicle Maker Association Electronic Data Interchange Gigagram Green House Gas Giga Joule Hydrocarbon International Energy Agency Kilo ton oil equivalent Liquefied Petroleum Gas
xxiv
LRT I&M Mbd MPG Mt NG NGV OECD PJ SO2 SULEV SUV
Light Rail Transit Inspection and Maintenance Million Barrel per Day Mile per Gallon Metric ton Natural gas Natural Gas Vehicle Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Petajoule Sulfur dioxide Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle Sport Utility Vehicle
xxv
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Transportation is one of the major human activities around the world. Unfortunately, this activity is burning the limited nonrenewable energy that leads to some negative impact to our living environment. Therefore, there is a necessity to adopt suitable energy policy for transportation sector as one of the options to balance the demand and supply for energy at the government, society and individual levels. This effort would lead to the preservation of our limited nonrenewable energy resources and our living environment. In addition, it is the responsibility and contribution of the present people towards the future generations. Energy planning and policy has become very important in the public agenda of most developed as well as some developing countries today. The importance of energy planning and policy is linked to industrial competitiveness, energy security and environmental advantage. Transportation in Malaysia is still using traditional fossil fuel type such as gasoline, diesel and electricity. These activities create millions of tons of greenhouse gases each year. Pattern of emissions production by transportation sector in Malaysia is has not analysed accurately yet. Suitable energy planning and policy in transportation sector can reduce the demand for fossil fuel and hence reduce the production of greenhouse gases and other emissions. Based on fossil fuel consumption, transportation sector accounts for almost 49 percent of the national greenhouse gas emissions (MOSTE, 2000). Therefore, suitable policies can play an important role in helping Malaysia to meet overall greenhouse gas and emissions reduction target and at the same time
ECONOMIC PLANNING UNIT, MAY 2005
reducing the energy consumption, economic benefit as well as improving the competitiveness of our product in the international arena. Energy conservation in the transport sectors helps to reduce the energy consumption. In most countries, Transportation energy consumption ranges from 20% to 60% of the total electricity consumption. On average, the Transportation sector in Malaysia uses about 40% of the total energy demand (National Energy Balance, 2003). The final energy use by sector in Malaysia is presented in Figure 1.1. This energy is used by a variety of type transport such as motor car, motorcycle, bus, goods vehicle, train, LRT, airplane, marine and etc to provide transportation services and other end-uses for society. Ideally, fuel consumption by various vehicles such as motor car, motorcycle, bus and freight vehicle must be set to a certain level in order to ensure that they use energy efficiently. For the benefit of the consumers, the comparable energy consumption of the vehicle must be characterized. Based on type of fuel used, the petrol (gasoline) and diesel has been the largest of energy share in transportation sector, which are about 55% and 31% of total energy consumption in transport sector (National Energy Balance, 2003). In order to reduce energy consumption in this country, consumer should be educated to select the most efficient vehicle from the market or to promote alternative fuel. This objective can be achieved by introducing fuel economy program and implementing suitable policy such as shifting to public transport and switching to NGV. Using energy efficiently and caring about the environment are two important conducive factors under the current global market conditions. Realizing that, energy efficiency policy is becoming a strategic policy for many nations today. This is also
the main reason for the Malaysian government to focus extensively and allocate adequate resources in the 9th Malaysia Plan to encourage the efficient use of energy resources and to diversify fuel use in transportation sector. Parallel with the interest shown by the government, this study is investigate energy use in the transportation sector of Malaysia together with proposing policy recommendations with a view to reduce energy intensity in the transportation sector.
Transport 40%
Industrial 39%
Agriculture 0%
Non Energy 8%
Resid & Comm 13%
Figure 1.1. Final energy use by sector in 2002 of 33290 ktoe (National Energy Balance 2003)
1.1 Background For more than two decades, in average Malaysias economy grew more than 6% per annum. The Gross Domestic Product increased from RM 79,330 million in 1990 to RM 244,555 million in 2004. At the same time, the per capita income has increased from RM 6,230 to RM 15,376 (Economic Planning Unit, 2004). Economic growth is the main driving factor for increased energy demand in transportation sector in Malaysia. Transportation is a fundamental prerequisite for a societys development and improvement of peoples life. As the Malaysian economy grew rapidly in recent years, the importance of transportation sector has been realized for both continuous economic growth and improvement of standard of living. The increasing number of passenger and vehicle time to time increasing trip lengths and traffic densities, thereby increasing the energy used for propulsion of vehicles. Moreover, with the increase of income levels as well as unconstrained expansion of the cities, the private vehicle population has grown year by year in Malaysia. However, this phenomenon affects to increase of energy consumption especially from fossil fuels and consequently increase air pollution due to their combustion. In addition, traffic speeds also lead to increased energy consumption. Other parameters such as vehicle population, occupancy level, vehicle utilization pattern and fuel efficiency of different vehicles as well as emissions factor should be taken into the account in order to optimize energy use in this particular sector. Since the transportation systems is dependent on petroleum oil, which is limited in terms of availability, it is important for energy planners to plan for greater efficiency of energy use in transport sector in this country which would reduce rapid
use of petroleum oils and also reduce growing air pollution especially on CO2 emission which is two-third comes from transport fuels combustion. Recently, India as a low per capita income country but have greater CO2 emissions based transportation sector is already begin to manage the energy use for transport sector by conducting several studies and policies such as implementing fuels energy efficiency policy as well as improved the fuels quality standard. Furthermore, some studies on European and Japanese fuel economy initiatives: what they are, their prospects for success, their usefulness is given by Plotkin (2002). In European Countries which are mostly oils importer, the infrastructure improvement was done by traffic controlled in the cities to avoid traffic jam as well as by implementing strict rule on the vehicle speed at the highway was successfully reduce total fuel consumption and maintain air quality (Danielis, 1995); (Liaskas, 2000). Besides that, by implementing several efficiency policies such as fuel economy program as well as introducing alternative fuel cars with lower fuel consumption can lower emissions. Several developed countries such as Japan, England, USA and Sweden have also implemented the policy to reduce energy intensity by population such as higher taxation for petroleum fuels as well as for every gram of CO2 emits more than the level of standard. Malaysia with the rapid petroleum based fuel growth also tries to introduce Natural gas to be primary fuel. However, more than 80% of vehicles are still running with petrol fuels. It is a challenge for Malaysia government to implement energy security or reducing energy intensity especially in terms of petroleum fuels used in transport sector. Therefore, comprehensive study must initiate from this date to
overtake this problem while petroleum crisis and environmental impact being a great issues recently. This study is necessary to develop energy used database for transport sector and will be used for total energy used database in this country. The database will be dedicated to Malaysia policy makers for further action in order to manage energy consumption and economic growth simultaneously based on energy intensity. As stated earlier, motor vehicle is one of the major energy consuming in the transportation sector. According to National Energy Balance (2003), motor vehicle accounts more than 80% of overall consumption of petroleum product share. Therefore, it perhaps will save a significant amount of energy in transportation sector if suitable efficiency policy for motor vehicle implemented in this country. Since land transport is one of the major energy consumers in the transportation sector in Malaysia, implementing suitable energy efficiency policy for this sector may contribute a significant impact on energy consumption in the transportation sectors and offer great benefits for the consumers, government as well as to the environment. In agreement to this opinion DeCicco and Mark (1998) states that the transition toward a more sustainable transportation system can emanate from a suite of mutually reinforcing policies. Strong efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions standards would provide the foundation of the technology innovation strategy that includes pricing reforms, incentive, and voluntary programs. Combined with enabling R&D, the policies can facilitate market transformation toward advance technology highway vehicles, efficient air and intercity travel, and renewable fuels. Improvement in regional planning such as in Klang Valley, Penang and Johor Bahru and intermodal capacity would help by reducing travel needs and shifting travel to
more efficient modes. However, Dowlatabadi et al. (1996) claims that savings gasoline (in transportation sector) is attractive, but is not only one of many goals society seeks with respect to automobiles; the other include increased safety, lower emissions of air pollutants and greenhouse gases, and consumers attributes such as low price, attractiveness, good ride, size and performance. These goals are inherently contradictory (Lave, 1981), seeking to achieve one goal generally has unintended consequences in terms of other goals, e.g. lowering emissions leads to increased cost. Therefore, as a starting point, it is rather imperative to concentrate on land transport in order to reduce the energy consumption in this sector in order to reduce the complexity of the study. Final consumption for petroleum product in 2002 is shown in Figure 1.2 and percentage of transportation sector energy use based on fuel types is presented in Figure 1.3.
Motor Petrol 33.7%
Diesel 39.0%
Non Energy 3.1% ATF & AV Gas 8.6% Kerosene 0.4% LPG 7.5%
Fuel Oil 7.7%
Figure 1.2 Final consumption for petroleum product in 2002 of 20,635 ktoe (National Energy Balance 2003)
Petrol 51.6%
Electricity 0.0%
Diesel 34.8%
NG 0.2%
ATF & AV Gas 13.3%
Fuel oil 0.0%
Figure 1.3 Percentage of transportation sector energy use based on fuel types in 2002 of 13,441 ktoe (National Energy Balance 2003)
Energy policies and energy technology is a pair and it works simultaneously and mutually. The technologies continually remove the less efficient product from the market and energy policies are creating transformations in the market. As the consumers, become energy conscious, manufacturers use efficiency as a marketing tool to win their competition in the market. To make this program a success, there should be a good cooperation between the public and private sector. With an appropriate policy, the manufacturers and companies will have time to retool and invest in designing towards more efficient energy use. As a result, the transport manufacturer will develop more efficient product, which will benefit them, through increasing demand and competitiveness of the product in the international market. By the combination of suitable policies and technologies, Malaysia will be able to promote more efficient energy used product and will begin an important market transformation for the product in the country. It is expected that energy efficiency initiatives for transportation sector can indeed be tapped and expanded in Malaysia to decelerate the growth of energy consumption in the transportation sector, monetary savings as well as reducing the environmental impact.
1.2 Objectives of the study The main objective of research is to make policy recommendations with views to reduce the energy use and environmental emissions in the transportation sector in Malaysia. In order to achieve this main aim several other objectives have been identified, and these are:
To review energy consumption of the transportation sector in Peninsular Malaysia (particularly in the Klang Valley), Sabah and Sarawak To identify key energy-consuming sub-sectors within the transportation sector To examine international experiences related to the reduction of energy use in transport sector To analyze historical trend and project future trend of energy demand and environmental emissions from the transportation sector. To examine the potential of modal shift to public transport To examine the feasibility and potential of switching to NGV by commercial vehicles To study vehicle efficiency standards
1.3 Contributions of the study To proposed recommendations with a view to reduce energy intensity in the transportation sector in this country. The output will be a report entitled Energy Use in the Transportation Sector of Malaysia. It will cover all the points mentioned in the objectives.
1.4. Limitation of the study It is noted that an important qualification of the results in this study due to uncertainty in forecasting. Undoubtedly, pursuing the path outlined here would yield large reductions in energy used and emissions compare to what will ensue in the absence of policy change. Leaving aside upheaval in global oil supply or other
10
economic disruptions, unforeseen technology changes or other developments could push demand significantly higher or lower than the baseline assumed in the study. However, it is believed that the baseline and the data use in this study is more likely to understate the growth in transportation energy demand than to overstate it. Another limitation is, in this study is only involve about 452 respondents from NGVs taxi driver who not yet used NG as fuel. It also interviewed only several owner/manager of taxis and buses companies, president or chairman of association of public transportation. We also interviewed limited number of manager/owner pump station, both that have not been sell NGV and the one who did. However the study did not discussed about social impact of the policies.
1.5 Organization of the report The report is the study on energy use in transportation sector of Malaysia. The study includes several policy recommendations that is suitable to be implemented in this country. The report is divided into eight chapters and the organization of the report is as follows: Chapter 1 is an introduction, which introduces the background, objectives, contributions and limitation of the study together with organization of the report. Chapter 2 presents international experiences on reduction of energy use in transport sector. Chapter 3 is an analysis on historical and future trend of energy demand and environmental emissions from the transportation sector. .
11
Chapter 4 deals with the transportation system development and energy consumption in Malaysia. Chapter 5 examines the feasibility and potential of fuel switching to NGV by commercial vehicles in Malaysia. Chapter 6 presents a study on fuel economy standard for motor vehicle in Malaysia.
References Danielis, R. (1995). Energy use for transport in Italy : Past trends. Energy Policy 23 (9), 799807. DeCicco, J., Mark, J. (1998). Meeting the energy and climate challenge for transportation in the United States. Energy Policy 26 (5), 395-412. Dowlatabadi, H., Lave, L.B., Russell, A.G. (1996). A free lunch at higher CAFE? A review of economic, environmental and social benefits. Energy Policy 24 (3), 253264. Economic Planning Unit, (2004). The Malaysian Economic in Figures, Economic Planning Unit, Prime Ministers Department, Putrajaya, Malaysia. Liaskas, K., Mavrotas G., Mandaraka, M., Diakoulaki, D. (2000). Decomposition of industrial CO2 emissions:The case of European Union. Energy Economics 22 (4), 383394. MOSTE, J. (2000). Malaysia initial National Communication. Ministry of Science and Technology and Environment, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
12
National Energy Balance 2002, (2003). Ministry of Energy, Communications and Multimedia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Plotkin, S. E. (2001). European and Japanese fuel economy initiatives: what they are, their prospects for success, their usefulness as a guide for US action. Energy Policy 29 (13), 10731084.
13
CHAPTER 2 INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCES ON REDUCTION OF ENERGY USE IN TRANSPORT SECTOR

SUMMARY
Transportation is one of the key factors for the economy and society. Therefore transport policymakers have to create the policies frameworks that are required for transport sector to sustain energy with three dimensional objective namely ecology, economy and social acceptability. This chapter discusses international experiences on reduction of energy use in transportation sector. There are many methods and policies to reduce energy consumption in transport sector, however only several of them that are suitable to be used in Malaysia will be elaborated in this chapter. Those include fuel economy standard for motor vehicle, fuel economy labels, fuel switching, fuel taxation, emission abatement, further improvements to vehicles which are have been implemented in other develop as well as developing countries. The study found that many policies can be implemented directly in Malaysia while other must be modified to make it suitable in this country. For example fuel economy label guide program can be directly implemented in this country, however for fuel economy standard must me modified to make it suitable because Malaysia has it local vehicle manufacturers that have to be protected.
14
2.1. Introduction There are many methods and policies to reduce energy consumption in the transportation sector. To provide an impression of the coverage, a number of these measures are: relocation of enterprises to reduce transport requirements; increase in density in zoning; elimination or decrease of fiscal deductibility of travel expenses; introduction of a four day work week; improvement of car and truck engines; restriction of energy-consuming options in cars; research and development of alternative vehicle engines; production of smaller cars; reduction of taxation for car pooling; creation of parking facilities and reservation of lanes for car pools; subsidization of public transport; improvement of quality of service of public transport; introduction of toll roads; taxes on peak hour travel; speed limit; limit on highway construction; parking levies; parking limitation; introduction of gasoline coupons; limiting number of gasoline stations; and measures to restrict the energy consumption in the transport sector. However just several of them that is suitable to be implemented in Malaysia will be discussed in this study.
2.2. Program review In America it has been reported that Americans spend more than $500 million per day to fuel their cars, SUVs, and other light trucks. Nationally, these vehicles account for 45 percent of U.S. oil consumption which is 8.8 million barrels a day (mbd). Fuel economy standards have improved the efficiency of Americas cars and trucks and resulted in dramatic oil savings. Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards passed by Congress in 1975 led to a 70 percent increase in
15
Americas gas mileage over the subsequent decade. The National Academy of Science has estimated this saves about 2.8 mbd. However, CAFE standards have remained static for almost two decades due to federal gridlock. The current standard of 27.5 miles per gallon (mpg) for automobiles first applied in 1985, and the 20.7 mpg standard for light trucks is only 0.2 mpg above the 1987 standard (but is now set to rise to 22.2 mpg by 2007). Besides that, in the city of Los Angeles, the state government are allowing owners of environment friendly electric and super ultra low emission vehicle (SULEV) to park in metered space for free. The concept is to promote the use of green transportation alternative. Meanwhile, it has been reported in Canada that between 1990 and 2002, the amount of energy used by the transportation sector increased by 23 percent, from 1877.9 PJ to 2306.0 PJ. As a result, energy-related GHGs rose by 22 percent, or 29.9 Mt. Passenger transportation was the transportation sub-sector that consumed the most energy in 2002 with 57 percent, while freight transportation accounted for 39 percent and off-road vehicles accounted for 4 percent. Improvements in the overall energy efficiency of passenger transportation saved 49.8 PJ of energy and 3.5 Mt of related GHGs. Despite the increasing popularity of larger and heavier light-duty vehicles with greater horsepower, the light-duty vehicle (cars, light trucks and motorcycles) segment of passenger transportation helped save 24.8 PJ, while air transportation avoided 21.2 PJ. Besides that, improvements in the energy efficiency of freight transportation led to savings of 127.8 PJ of energy and 9.3 Mt of GHGs. Most of the improvements in freight energy efficiency occurred in heavy trucks and rail.
16
Dhakal (2003) on the other hand analyzed the energy and environmental implications of transportation policies in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal up to the year 2020. From this study, it could be summarized that increasing the average speed of vehicles on the street to 40 km/h would reduce total energy demands by 27% and reduce CO2 emissions by 25%. Besides that, the policy to increase the share of public transportation is expected to bring 27% of savings in total energy demands and 20% of CO2 reduction in the year 2015. The other policy that is reported to bring substantial implication is the promotion of electric vehicle. It is reported that this move would reduce the total energy demand and CO2 emission by 20% in the year 2015. Meanwhile, in Curitiba, Brazil local authorities have developed an integrated plan for transport, urban planning, infrastructure, business and local community development. By planning and zoning residential and industrial development along so-called arteries in the proximity of public transport, transportation needs have been managed sustainably. The arteries are supplemented with a system of ring roads. Separate bus lines operate in close connection with express buses which enter the residential areas. The move made Curitibas gasoline use per capita lower than that of comparable Brazilian cities. It also led to annual fuel savings of approximately 27 million liters. In Indonesia on the other hand, Blue Sky Programme was launched in 1992, for mobile sources, the major activities of the program are, among others, to encourage the use of CNG and LPG as an alternative cleaner fuel for motor vehicle; to phase-out leaded gasoline and introduce low-sulfur diesel fuel (Winyantoro,
17
2001). Additionally inspection and maintenance (I&M) program for vehicles have been introduced as a first step towards improving ambient temperature in the Metropolitan Jakarta. I & M program in gasoline fueled cars could result to a five percent savings in fuel consumption and could reduce the emissions of HC (35%) and CO (5%). In diesel-fueled car, I & M program could reduce emission of particulate matter by 45%. At present, I & M program are voluntary but will become compulsory for all vehicle registered in Metropolitan Jakarta in the near future. In Western Australia, the state government has devised a plan to move freight transportation more efficiently between the port and industrial areas. This will see the use of rail into Fremantle Port increase from three per cent to 30 per cent and reduce the number of trucks on their roads. The Planning and Infrastructure portfolio has also reduced the number of six-cylinder vehicles by 15 per cent since 2003 and has also increased the number of Toyota Prius hybrids in the fleet to 16. Meanwhile, from February 2001 to June 2004, the State Government has spent more than $50million on cycling infrastructure, with another $8million earmarked this year. As a result, the number of people using the Perth Bicycle Network has doubled during the last five years. Additionally the Government has embarked on the State's biggestever public transport project-the $1.5billion New MetroRail Project. New MetroRail will carry almost 35,000 people each weekday and take 25,000 cars off their freeways. It is estimated that work-related patronage on the Southern Suburbs Railway alone will save almost 15million litres of fuel each year (Mactiernan, 2004). Meanwhile vehicle emissions in Myanmar are expected to contribute significantly to air pollution problems which are increasing at a rate of 87.13 Gg CO2
18
equivalent per year. In Myanmar, motor vehicle inspection is pursued by the Road Transport Administration Department of the Ministry of Rail Transportation. Although Myanmar does not yet have any vehicle emission standards, the department has adopted standard requirements and testing procedure for motor vehicle inspection. The requirements include among others, brake minimum efficiency, exhaust emission (smoke), noise, and depth of tyre groove, which are based from the existing ASEAN standards (Myint, 2001). In Korea, motor vehicle registration nationwide has increased 18.1 times, from 527,729 in 1980 to 9,553,062 in 1996. The passenger car ownership increased 27.7 times since 1980, from 249,102 to 6,893,633 in 1996. This figure reflects an increase of an average 23.1% per year. The road system, which handles more than 90% of the country's transportation, has been intimately connected to Korea's rapid economic growth and land development since 1960s when it began to expand dramatically. In preparation for the 21st century, the government is eagerly pursuing a New Road Policy, with the goal of building a safe, convenient and fast road system. To achieve this goal, the government plans to reduce the travel time to just half a day between any points in the country in the early 2000s. The government also plans to reduce the access time to any road network system from anywhere in the country to less than thirty minutes. There will be seven north-south trunk routes and nine east-west trunk routes, totalling 6,160 km. Meanwhile, to meet the rapidly increasing container traffic, two new terminals, Pusan's fourth phase and Kwangyang's first phase, which house four berths each are opened in 1998. It is predicted that Korea's container handling capacity will still lag behind the maritime
19
traffic demand of the 21st century. The Korean government has also decided to develop a new container terminal located about 25 km west of the existing port. This project will provide 24 modern berth terminals. The construction for the first phase began in late 1997, and the first 10 berth terminals will commence operations before 2005. Additionally in order to facilitate the flow of cargoes and information in all areas of trade, the Ministry of Maritime Affairs & Fishery has been operating the EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) system on a commercial basis since July 1995. The EDI network (PORT-MIS) provides EDI services by connecting government agencies, shipping companies, stevedoring companies, trucking companies, forwarders, and terminals. In Malaysia, the government embarked on the construction of a integrated public transport system, emphasizing the environment-friendly features. The government has implemented two phases of Light Rail Transit (LRT) systems and the fuel efficient electrified double track commuter service. The improved transport services is viewed that it will change the pattern of the existing transportation usage, reducing number of private vehicles on the road thus reducing fuel consumption which lead to reduction of emission. Apart from that, the Ministry of Finance has allocated tax exemption on kits and necessary components for converting vehicle to utilize natural gas. Furthermore, the road tax of vehicles using only natural gas is discounted by 50% of the prevailing rate while 25% was given to bi-fuel vehicles. Moreover, special capital allowance was also given to companies operating monogas buses and for NGV petrol station entrepreneur (Norhayati & Yuzlina, 2001).
20
2.3 Transportation policy in selected countries Mobility is one of the key factors for the economy and society. Transport policymakers have to create the statutory and policy frameworks that are required if transport needs are to be met taking account of sustainability in its three dimensions (ecology, economy and social acceptability). In the transport sector, land transport, especially road transport, can make a significant contribution towards reducing vehicle emissions if improved fuels and engines are introduced. This scope for improvement is being exploited. However, if the CO2 emission reduction targets agreed on in Kyoto protocol are to be met, even more has to be done for the transport sector. The Government is thus supporting the search for a fuel of the future based on renewable energy and having extremely low emissions. In conjunction with further improvements to fuels and vehicles on the basis of fossil resources, the wide-scale use of renewable energy in transport and in the production of fuel will make it possible to take a big step towards more sustainable transport. Moreover, the need of such policy which will be implemented on fossil fuels usage is becomes much necessary. Among the countries which have been implemented the policy of fuels usage on transport sector are some European countries, USA, Australia, Japan, etc.
2.3.1. Thailand According to Thailand Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, Thailand will more concern on energy policy on fossil fuel started at this year. As the subsidies on petrol prices come to an end this year, Thailand government is also trying to set a suitable
21
policy for energy and fuel conservation, to keep the economy and the country's coffers in good shape. Paradoxically, the government is letting petrol prices float and will continue subsidizing diesel at least through to the end of the cool season. That is the way Thailand can minimize the impact of higher fuel prices in the short term (Diesel News, 2003)
2.3.2. Singapore In Singapore the rapid economic development in the last three decades has led to increased demand for land transportation which is presently heavily dependent on oil. As a small city-state with no indigenous supply of conventional energy resources, Singapore needs to constantly promote energy conservation and to explore the use of alternative fuels. At the same time, the Singaporean government is also concerned with the environmental problems associated with rapid industrialization. Various measures and recommendations on promoting clean technology, protection of the local and global environment, reduction of CO2 and SO2 emissions, etc., were announced and documented in the Singapore Green Plan (Singapore Ministry of Environment, 1993). Other policy which has been used in Singapore is to provide financial incentives to promote the use alternative fuels and electric vehicles. This is based on a reduction of imported vehicle tax and vehicle road tax (Poh and Ang, 1999).
22
2.3.3. European Countries High oil prices and rising fuel taxes have lead an explosion of fury across the European continent, resulting in protests and blockades of depots and refineries. Following the recent oil price rise, the Europeans have finally realized what a massive burden fuel taxes place on their budgets. In response to the people's outcry for relief, most European leaders have arrogantly dismissed requests for reduced fuel taxes, claiming that such an action would be "pandering." Indeed many have argued that the continuation of massive fuel taxes is a tough but "principled" and virtuous policy. Nevertheless, the fact is fuel taxes in the U.K. and Europe is punitively high. According to a Sept. 11th editorial in Investor's Business Daily, entitled "The French are Onto Something", taxes comprise $2.82 of the $4.07 gallon in France, $2.56 of the $3.91 gallon in Germany, and $2.53 of the $3.97 gallon of fuel in Italy. In the U.S., fuel taxes comprise about 39 cents of the average $1.64 gallon of gas. However, an acquaintance in England releases a shocking note: "Part of the tax is pegged to price, so an increase in fuel prices raises the tax. Prices are now some 90 pence per liter, over $6.00 per gallon, with $5.00 of that tax. The average Britain pays over $100 a week to run his car, and some $80 of it goes to the government." (Capitalism Magazine, 2000). Of course, Blair and other European leaders have numerous explanations for why high fuel taxes are so necessary and desirable. One hired gun, a professor of economics named Andrew Oswald, in an editorial "The
23
Economic Case for High Fuel Taxes: published Sept. 12, 2000 by The Financial Times listed no less than eight reasons, which have been summarized as follows: (i) (ii) If government did not take consumers' money, OPEC would. People need to be able to plan for high fuel taxes with certainty - lower taxes might surprise them. (iii) It is unfair to cut taxes now, because humans are too selfish to volunteer to pay higher fuel taxes if the oil price fell. (iv) Fuel is a good thing to tax because people will keep buying it anyway. (v) A tax on fuel is a well-deserved punishment for oil's pollution.
(vi) A fuel tax is the next best thing to road-use taxation. (vii) The fuel tax punishes the rich with cars while helping the poor without cars. (viii) Our grandchildren might not have enough oil if we don't tax it highly.
2.3.4. Japan Japan is considering stricter fuel efficiency standards for cars as part of sweeping revisions of environmental policy to curb pollution and climate change. Transport Ministry official Yuji Matsuzaki said the ministry's proposal would force automakers to produce passenger cars and cargo trucks that spew less carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which are believed to cause global warming. Under the
24
ministry's current guidelines, automakers must make passenger cars 10 percent more fuel efficient and less polluting by 2010, compared to 2000. Trucks are exempt from such standards.
2.3.5. Australia Due to its geographical nature Australia is a highly transport dependent society. Despite significant efforts to promote the benefits of public transport, its use has declined while the affordability of motor cars has continued to improve and car ownership and use are rising. Consumers want affordable and safe cars, cheap fuels, ample parking, congestion free roads and environmentally friendly vehicles as long as they dont have to pay for it. As a community they are hyper sensitive about petrol prices and as we have seen a few cents a litre rise at the petrol pump can cause politicians to become weak at the knees. Conversely Governments Federally to the tune of $12.5billion/year through excise and States receipts of $2.7billionn/year are keenly aware of the revenue generated from petroleum products (Environment News Service, 2000). According to Dr. Sharman Stone, Parliamentary Secretary to Environment Minister Robert Hill "In European countries there are many smaller cars on the roads, which have highly efficient motors driven by the cleaner, better quality fuel. These smaller cars go further on a liter of fuel and they have less effect on the air quality."
25
The transport sector is the largest single contributor to Australia's greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for almost 16 percent of the 72.6 million tonnes of carbon dioxide pumped into the environment every year. The new rules will mean higher octane, lower sulphur content fuel. This should help reduce pollution as well as cut greenhouse gas emissions. Australia is struggling to meet international commitments to limit emissions of carbon dioxide and other climate warming gases to eight percent of 1990 levels. Such emissions have actually grown by 16 percent. The Fuel Quality Standards Bill forms part of the Australian government's A$1 billion (US$540,000) greenhouse plan known as Measures for a Better Environment package. The new law in Australia will introduce tougher penalties to protect consumers and environment (Australian Greenhouse Office, 2004).
2.3.6. India According to a Times of India report, India's government has been announced its final conclusions regarding the "auto-fuel policy report" delivered by an expert committee headed by India's top science advisor. This report recommended fuel neutrality (with ultra-low sulfur diesel by 2010) rather than the CNG monopoly scheme for major cities pushed by India's Supreme Court and anti-diesel "green" group, Center for Science & Environment (CSE). Currently, the comprehensive study or results still yet to publish regarding this policy. However, this policy was aimed to reduce the incentive on diesel oil shared to other alternative fuels.
26
2.7.7. France France policymakers so far have implicitly assumed that adequate supplies of NG would be available for transport. Clearly, NG is one of the possible alternative fuel that produce major reductions in transport oil use, NG as transport fuels is still available in large quantities in the years 2020. This now seems unlikely. The IEA has recently analyzed world energy prospects out to 2020 and beyond (IEA, 1998). For NG, it was assumed that ultimate reserves, both already produced and still to be produced, were 260 btoe, slightly less than the 310 btoe estimated for oil. World demand for NG is growing faster than that for oil as gas increases its share of energy in the developed countries and gas grids are introduced in an increasing number of industrializing countries.
2.3.8. New Zealand The New Zealand example is instructive. A major shift to NG-based transport fuels occurred in the 1980s, based on CNG and synthetic petrol. At its peak, NG supplied 30% of New Zealands transport fuels. Today, the figure is only about 10%, and will decline to near zero by 2014, the expected date of gas field exhaustion, assuming no imports (Statistics New Zealand, 2000).
2.3.9. Netherlands Based on information provided by the Dutch Auto LPG association in 1999, the Dutch vehicle maker (DAF) considers CNG (natural gas) to be very well suited for use in a private vehicle but autogas (i.e. LPG) to be the best fuel for buses. Their
27
reasons for this choice are: no need for such a big tank, the composition is clearly defined and there is no need to have the gas compressed in an expensive compression station.
2.3.10. Philippines The Philippines first attempted to commercialize liquid biofuels for motor vehicles following the oil shocks of the 1970s; unfortunately, the ambitious program was abandoned during the political crisis of the mid-1980s. Today biofuels are receiving renewed interest in the Philippines due to a combination of economic and environmental factors. The principal economic incentive is the reduction of dependence on imported petroleum. This issue is particularly true for the transport sector which is almost entirely dependent on oil. Reduction of CO2 emissions resulting from fossil fuel use is one of the primary environmental considerations (Philippine Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 2000). As with the biofuels program of the early 1980s, a biodiesel program can help insulate the Philippines from world oil price fluctuations, and simultaneously revitalize stagnant sectors of the economy. These benefits may very well enough to compensate for the relatively high production cost of biodiesel. Implementation of carbon trading through the Clean Development Mechanism can also be employed to subsidize such a program. However, this particular program has been introduced to the government meeting for further considerations in the future (Philippine Department of Energy, 2002)
28
2.4. Transport Regulations Table 2.1 lists various international regulations and or guidelines aimed at improving new vehicle fuel efficiency for selected countries (OECD Ministry of Transport, 2000). There are of course many other guidelines and regulations relating to efforts to reduce emissions by the transport sector but only those directly related the study that have been listed in this section.
2.5. Voluntary agreements or program The costs (both financial and environmental) of regulatory measure can outweigh the benefits of that program. In the case of fuel efficiency standards, the cost of developing and implementing technological advances and the consumers tendency to use some of the savings from reduced fuel consumption to drive further (the rebound effect) could outweigh the actual fuel savings achieved. Voluntary agreements program can be an alternative means of achieving improved fuel efficiency. Table 2.2 lists a number of examples of voluntary agreement program (OECD Ministry of Transport, 2000).
29
Table 2.1. Examples of transport regulations in selected countries Country Czech Republic Japan Regulation description Specific fuel implemented consumption targets agreed and
Fuel efficiency targets for 2000 set, average 8.5% improvement over fiscal 1992 levels. 5% target for average improvement in fuel efficiency for petrol trucks. Development of vehicle fuel efficiency standards proposed Target for private car average fuel consumption of 6.3 liters per 100 km by 2005 has been proposed. Since new car fuel economy was 8.4 litres/100km in 1993i, this implies an improvement of 25% over the period 1993 to 2005. Volvo has committed itself to a 25% reduction in average fuel consumption by 2005. Federal Government Ordinance on reducing the specific fuel consumption of cars. Requirement is for a 15% reduction in average fuel consumption in the period 1996 to 2001 (3.2% per year) Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) standards. Implemented in 1975, came into effect for cars in 1978. Last revised in 1992 currently 27.5 mpg (8.55 litres/100 km). Commission Communication COM (95) 689, 20 December 1995, Council Conclusion of 25 June 1996. Objective is to achieve an average of 120 gm/km CO2 emissions (approx. 5 l/100km) for new cars by 2005. Target is aimed at European made vehicles, but plans are to extend the targets to imports as well.
Russian Federation Sweden
Switzerland
United States
European Union
30
Table 2.2. Examples of transport voluntary agreement programs in selected countries Country Austria Canada France Germany Country Voluntary agreement programs Agreement with motor vehicle manufacturers to improve fuel efficiency to 3 litres / 100 km. (envisaged measure) Voluntary agreement with each of the manufacturers on increasing fuel efficiency of new vehicles French car manufacturers have set a target of cutting average CO2 emissions to 150 gm/km by 2005 Agreement with domestic vehicle manufacturers on fuel economy. Calls for a 25% reduction in average fuel consumption between 1990 and 2005 (a rate of 1.9% a year) Volvo has committed itself to a 25% reduction in average fuel consumption of its cars sold in the EU by 2005. UK manufacturers are committed to meeting the ACEA target of a 10% improvement in fuel efficiency by 2005. Agreement reached between the European Commission and ACEA to cut CO2 emissions down to 140 gm/km approximately 5.7 litres/100 km) by 2008. There is also a commitment to review emissions targets in 2003 with a view towards achieving the Commissions objective of 120 gm/km (approximately 5 litres/100 km) by 2012.
Sweden United Kingdom European Union
2.6. Air quality policies In addition to carbon dioxide, vehicle usage results in other gas emissions, many of which have implications for local air quality. Three of these are covered by the Euro standards: carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides, all measured separately for petrol and diesel cars, and also particulate matter for diesel cars only tabulated in Table 2.3.
31
Table 2.3. Emission limits for new cars Limit value (g/km)
Mass of carbon monoxide (CO) Stage I 1993* Directive 91/441/EEC Petrol Diesel Stage II 1997* Directive 94/12/EC Petrol Diesel, indirect injection Diesel, direct injection Stage III 2000 Directive 98/69/EC Petrol Diesel Stage IV 2005 Directive 98/69/EC Petrol Diesel Mass of hydrocarbons (HCs) Mass of oxides of nitrogen (Nox) Combined mass of hydrocarbons (HCs) and oxides of nitrogen (HC + Nox) 1.13 1.13 Mass of particulate matter (PM)
3.16 3.16
0.18
2.2 1.0 1.0
0.5 0.7 0.9
0.08 0.10
1.0 0.5
0.1 -
0.08 0.25
0.3
0.025
1.0 0.5
0.1 -
0.08 0.25
0.3
0.025
Stage III came into force from 1 January 2000 (Directive 98/69) and stage IV comes into force from1st January 2005. (These stages are often referred o as Euro 3 and Euro 4 respectively). These are maximum permitted mean emissions and as the table indicates, they are being tightened up over the four legislated stages. Diesel produces about 15% more CO2 per liter than petrol, but diesel engines on the whole produce less CO2 per km because the diesel engine is inherently more efficient than the petrol one. At the same time, diesel-engine vehicles emit around ten times the mass of fine particles and up to twice the oxides of nitrogen of comparable petrol-
32
fuelled vehicles. Policy needs, therefore, to be a balanced one, to reflect the impacts of both local air quality change and global climate change, recognizing that fuels have different benefits and disadvantages. In Europe, the Directive is part of a trio of policy approaches, concerned with climate change. These include the voluntary agreement to reduce missions by technical improvements to new cars and fiscal measures. In the UK, the fiscal measures include differentiated vehicle excise duty, related on carbon dioxide emissions, and reduced company car allowances.
2.7. Fuel economy This chapter compares existing and planned vehicle fuel economy labelling schemes in several selected countries. Some of the planned schemes within European countries are refer to earlier drafts of the EU Directive. This is an area of policy that should considered for every countries around especially for developing countries that have been rapidly increase in the number of vehicles. The simultaneously survey in this section gives a dated snapshot of the current situation in the country. So some of the data given in this study section might be have already change. Vehicle labelling schemes have been in existence for several years in Sweden and the United States (both since 1975) and in the UK (since 1983). The American scheme was amended in 1990 and the Canadian scheme in 1998, in the light of consumer feedback. There is little evidence of the way these schemes influenced consumer purchases. Summary of fuel economy energy labels for motor vehicle in several selected countries is given in Table 2.4 (Brenda et al, 2000). The fuel economy label for several selected countries is given Figs. 2.1 2.9.
33
Table 2.4. Fuel economy labeling schemes in selected countries

Austria Planned or Existing Planned Australia Planned Belgium Planned Canada Existing Denmark Planned Netherlands Planned for attachment to cars-existing on website As directive Sweden Existing Switzerland Planned. Temporary label in meantime As directive USA Existing EU Directive Directive 1999/94/EC adopted New passenger cars
Scope
As directive
Passenger cars, maybe extension to light commercial vehicles, 4x4 2000
As directive
New cars, vans, light duty trucks 1998
As directive
All passenger cars
New cars, vans, light duty trucks
Introduction date
As directive
As directive
1 Jan 2000
As directive
1977
As directive but temporary label prior to that
1975
To be implemented in EU MS by January 18th 2001 Yes L/100km or km/l or combination No requirement for comparison
Mandatory? Units of consumption Comparison by absolute measure or relative scale
Yes L/100km
Yes L/100km
Yes L/100km
No L/100km ;mpg Absolute
Yes mpg
Yes L/100km
No L/100km
No: Temporary Not shown;L/100km in guide No scale shown but efficient designation with sales weighted comparison for all same weight
Yes mpg
Relative by size and sales weighted
Absolute but perhaps label changed to appliance star style (relative)
Absolute comparing all cars
Absolute
No scale but range of consumption shown for cars of same size
34
Table 2.4. Continue

Comparison parameter Other measures of consumption Austria width X length As directive Australia None None Belgium width X length As directive Canada None Annual fuel cost (focus of label) No Denmark None Krona/yr Krona/20000 km Krona/60000 km Yes (g CO2/km) No Yes Intended Yes with fuel consumption tax (green owner) Netherlands width X length Cost/50000km Cost/litre Sweden None None Switzerland weight None USA size class None EU Directive N/A Units can be in gallons and miles if compatible with Directive 80/181/EEC CO2 emissions in g/km No Yes Not required but considered No
CO2
Intention to include values No Intended Intended Yes - with fuel consumpti on tax (NoVA) 15% maximum
No
As directive No Yes Yes Intended
Yes (g CO2/km) No Yes Yes Yes with relative consumption
Yes (g CO2/km) Yes, ranking 1 to 3 Yes Yes With enviro. rating
Environment al Ranking Printed Guide Online Guide
No Yes Yes No
No Yes Yes No
Not shown but in guide (g /km) No Yes Intended Intended either to CO2 or fuel consumption < 5%
No intended for the guide In guide by ACEEE Yes Yes
Fiscal integration
New cars sold to fleet buyers
10-15%
10%
10%
10%
N/A
35
Figure 2.1. Austrian draft fuel economy label
36
Figure 2.2. Australian draft fuel consumption labels
37
Figure 2.3. Canadian fuel economy label
38
Figure 2.4. Danish draft fuel consumption label
39
Figure 2.5. Swedish fuel economy label
40
Figure 2.6. Swiss draft fuel economy label
41
Figure 2.7. US fuel consumption label
42
Figure 2.8. UK fuel economy label
43
Figure 2.9. Environmental information guide
44
2.8. Conclusions There are not many policies around the world have been implemented for reducing transport sector energy use other than for motor vehicle. This may be because the technology replacement for airplane and ship not so progressive such as for motor vehicle. There was a replacement for railway especially in Japan and France, however the replacement was not really related to energy but more to increasing speed of mass railway transport. Therefore the study is more favored to motor vehicle since they are the major energy consumer in the transportation sector in this country. Several countries are using the opportunity to experiment with innovative approaches that go considerably beyond this minimum level. This is in order to reduce the contribution that new cars are making to environmental degradation and climate change. The focus on fuel economy provides substantial benefits to consumers, particularly at a time of rising real oil prices and concerns about the cost of petrol. As a result of the proposed fuel economy standard and fuel economy label, consumers will be able to differentiate efficient vehicle with ease. This will create healthy competition among vehicle manufactures to come up with a more efficient vehicle gradually. Eventually if these measures are implemented, it will bring great benefit to government, consumers as well as to the environment. Overall, dependency on petrol fuel could be reduced and greenhouse gas emission could be mitigated. Additionally, the fuel subsidy on petrol and diesel by government in the future should be withdrawn; consumers will not pay more ton efficient vehicle unless
45
it proven will be using lesser amount of fuel and benefit them due to higher cost of fuel.
References
Australian Greenhouse Office. (2004). Australia Green House Report-(2001). http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/
Brenda Boardman, Nick Banks, Howard R Kirby, Sarah Keay-Bright, Barry J Hutton. Stephen G Stradling, (2000). Choosing Cleaner Cars: The Role Of Labels And Guides. Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford, UK. Dhakal S. (2003). Implications of transportation policies on energy and environment in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. Energy Policy, Volume 31, Issue 14, Pages 1493-1507 Hill, NW and Larsen, RP (1990). Draft evaluation of the Federal fuel economy information program. Interim Report. Argonne National Laboratory. USA IEA. (1998). World Energy Prospects to 2020, OECD/IEA, Paris Mactiernan, A. (2001). Western Australia moving to reduce oil dependence, Western Australia Dept. Planning & Infrastructure.
Myint, S. (2001). Transport Energy Use and Vehicle Emissions in Myanmar, ASEAN energy bulletin, ASEAN Centre for Energy, Jakarta. Vol. 5, No. 1. Norhayati K., Yuslina M.Y. (2001). Vehicle Emissions, Measures and Challenges in Malaysia Road Transporttion Sector, ASEAN energy bulletin, ASEAN Centre for Energy, Jakarta. Vol. 5, No. 1.
46
OECD Ministers of Transport. (1997). CO2 Emissions from Transport, European Conference of Ministers of Transport, OECD. Philippine Department of Energy (2002). Philippine Energy Plan 20022011. Manila. Philippine Department of Environment and Natural Resources (2000). Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 8749Clean Air Act of 1999, Manila. Pirkey, D, McNutt, B, Hemphill, J and Dulla, R (1982), Consumer response to fuel economy information alternative sources, uses and formats. SAE Technical Paper 820792, Warrendale, Pa, USA. Poh K.L and Ang B.W.. (1999). Transportation fuels and policy for Singapore: an AHP planning approach, Journal. Computer & Industrial Engineering. Singapore Ministry of Environment. (1993). Singapore Green Plan. Report on by Ministry of Environment Singapore. Singapore. Statistics New Zealand (2000) New Zealand Official Yearbook 2000, 102nd edition, GP Publications, Wellington, NZ.
Widyantoro, T. (2001). Energy Efficiency Towards Sustainable Transport and Clean Air in Indonesia, ASEAN energy bulletin, ASEAN Centre for Energy, Jakarta. Vol. 5, No. 1.
47
CHAPTER 3 HISTORICAL AND FUTURE TREND OF ENERGY DEMAND AND ENVIRONMENTAL EMISSIONS FROM THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR
SUMMARY
Emissions in the transportation sector produce adverse effects on the environment that influent human health, organism growth, climatic changes and so on. The Kyoto protocol by the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate change (UNFCC) in December 1997, prescribed legally binding greenhouse gas emission target about 5% below their 1990 level. About 160 countries including Malaysia now adopt this protocol. The transportation sector is the main contributors for emission in the country. In order to calculate the potential emission by this activity, the type of fuel use should be identified. The study found that there are no radical changes of fuel used for transportation sector in Malaysia. The data shown that fuel type use are 53% of petrol, 34% of diesel, 13% of ATF 0.06% Natural Gas, and 0.03% of electricity in year 2000 to 46% of petrol, 42% of diesel, 12% of ATF, 0.29% Natural Gas and only 0.07% of electricity in the year of 2020. The calculation is based on emissions for unit fuel used and the type of fuel use and energy demand in transportation sector. The study found that, the transportation sector has contributed huge emissions from their activities in this country and the change on fuel type is necessary to change the pattern of emission production.
48
3.1. Introduction Over the past decades, it has been observed that there is an increasing atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases such carbon dioxide (CO2) and other emissions that give negative impact to the environment such as sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO). One of the main contributors of these gases is generated by transportation sector because a conventional vehicle still using fossil fuels as their main energy sources. Burning fossil fuels is releases the emissions such as mentioned gasses which known can cause greenhouse gas emission effect, acid rain and other negative impact to environmental and humankind. CO2 is a colorless, odorless gas and produced when any form of carbon is burned in an excess of oxygen. Due to this reason, CO2 greenhouse effect in the world has been enhanced. This means that the atmosphere is trapping more heat that has to escape to space. This enhancement has linked the greenhouse effect is causing global warming. CO2 is the largest contributor of greenhouse effect out of all the gasses produce by human activities. SO2 is a colorless gas, from the family of sulfur oxides (SOx). It reacts on the surface of a variety of atmosphere solid particles and can be oxidized within atmosphere water droplets. Fossil fuel combustion is the main sources of SO2 produce by human activities. NOx are a collective term used of two types of oxides of nitrogen namely nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). NO is a colorless, flammable gas with a slight odor. NO2 is a nonflammable gas with a detectable smell and in certain
49
concentration will highly toxic, which is in longtime can cause serious lung damage. NO2 is plays a major role in the atmospheric reactions that produce ozone or smog. In the atmosphere, NO2 will mix with water vapor producing nitric acid and deposited as acid rain. CO is a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas. Exposure to CO reduces the blood's ability to carry oxygen. CO is a product of incomplete burning of hydrocarbon-based fuels. CO consists of a carbon atom and an oxygen atom linked together. During normal combustion, each atom of carbon in the burning fuel joins with two atoms of oxygen forming a harmless gas. When there is a lack of oxygen to ensure complete combustion of the fuel, each atom of carbon links up with only one atom of oxygen forming CO gas. Malaysia planning to reduce the production of CO2, SO2, NOx and CO in the country but the data of production of these gasses is unavailable therefore the study attempts to estimate potential production of these gases from transportation sector in this country. With exact figure of these emissions, Malaysia can contribute to undermine the disaster caused by these gases by maximizing of using renewable fuel. Similar study on emissions from electricity generation in Malaysia has been discussed by Mahlia (2002).
3.2. Survey Data The data used for this study are the fuel consumption data, distribution of fuel type for transportation sector data and emissions of CO2, SO2, NOx and CO from
50
fossil fuel for unit fuel consumption in (g/GJ). These data are collected from the National Energy Balance (2002). All of the survey data are tabulated in Tables 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3.
Table 3.1. Final energy use by transportation sector Year 1980 1985 1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Total (ktoe) 2,398 3,477 5,387 7,827 8,951 10,201 9,793 11,393 12,071 13,137 13,442
Type of fossil fuel used in transportation sector in Malaysia are include, Natural Gas, Aviation gasoline (Avgas), Motor gasoline (Mogas), Aviation Turbine Fuel (ATF or Avtur), Diesel oil and fuel oil. Natural Gas fuel is a mixture of gaseous hydrocarbons (mainly methane) which occurs either in gas fields or in association with crude oil in oil fields. Aviation gasoline (Avgas) is a special blended grade of
51
gasoline for use in aircraft engines of the piston type. Distillation range normally falls within 30oC and 200oC. Motor gasoline (Mogas) Petroleum distillate for used as fuel in spark-ignition internal combustion engines. Distillation range is within 30oC and 250oC. ATF or Avtur is fuel for use in aviation gas turbines mainly refined from Kerosene. Distillation range within 150oC and 250oC. Diesel oil is Distillation falls within 200oC to 340oC. Diesel fuel for high speed diesel engines (i.e. automotive) are more critical on fuel quality than diesel for stationary and marine diesel engines. Marine oil usually consists of a blend of diesel oil and some residual (asphalt) material. Meanwhile, fuel oil is heavy distillates, residues or blends is used as fuel for production of heat and power. Fuel oil production at the refinery is essentially a matter of selective blending of available components rather than of special processing. Fuel oil viscosities vary widely depending on the blend of distillates and residues. Transportation sector energy use based on fuel types is given in Table 3.2 (National Energy Balance, 2002).
52
Table 3.2. Transportation sector energy use based on fuel types Year Petrol 1980 1985 1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1296 2057 2889 4477 5161 5574 5849 6778 6378 6820 6940 Diesel 847 1032 1826 2168 2417 3106 2311 3174 4103 4534 4680 Fuel Type (ktoe) ATF 250 386 628 1158 1333 1437 1618 1423 1574 1762 1785 Fuel oil 41 17 32 75 9 13 4 5 4 NG 0 0 0 5 4 5 4 0 7 14 28 Elect 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 4 4 5.17 4
The summation of total energy use in Table 3.2 is not very similar to the data in Table 3.1 is because the are some other types of fuel are not included in the table such as LPG and Avgas which have been used for transport fuel in a very little quantity. Time series data for these types of fuels is also unavailable and difficult to predict. The type of equivalency in energy data in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2 is given by tones oil equivalent (toe) unit across different type of fuels. Toe generally refers to energy content to one metric ton of crude oil. The international table standard defines
53
one toe as having a net calorific value of 10 Gcal. There are different definitions in the literature for ton oil equivalent. The one used in this study is the conversion factor that 1 toe = 10 Gcal = 41.868 GJ (EIA, 2004; IEA, 2002; UN, 1991). Since the emission per unit energy conversion as well as the usage of electricity and fuel oil in transportation sector in this country is very little compare to other types of fuel that are 0.03% each, therefore emission from these fuel are can be neglected. Even though Natural Gas also has very little percentage compare to other fuel but this fuel will be considered in this calculation because from the data given in Table 3.2, Natural Gas seem to be increased rapidly in the future. Emission from fossil fuel per GJ energy used by transportation is presented in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3. CO2, SO2, NOx and CO emission from fossil fuel per GJ energy use by transportation sector Fuels CO2 (kg/GJ) Petrol Diesel ATF NG 73.00 74.00 72.00 53.90 Emission SO2 (g/GJ) 2.28 2.34 2.30 0.00 NOx (g/GJ) 1368.76 284.55 310.16 488.00 CO (g/GJ) 3490.86 102.66 132.06 214.00
54
3.3. Methodology This study uses the scenario approach for the analysis. Schwartz (1996) states that scenarios are tools for ordering perceptions about alternative future environments and the end-result might not be an accurate picture of tomorrow, however can give better decisions about the future. No matter how things might actually turn out, both the analyst and the policy maker will have a scenario that resembles a given future and that will help us think through both the opportunities and the consequences of that future. This analysis is generally based on modeling methodologies to figure out the potential emissions from transportation sector in Malaysia in the future. For this purpose, initially, the type of fuel use for transportation sector should be identified. Some of the data are already available but others have to be calculated with respect to the county fuel consumption trend. Several methods have been employed to analyze and predict unavailable data. Those are linear, logarithmic, quadratic, power growth and exponential curve fitting. From the calculation found that the best method used to estimate the rest of the calculation data is polynomial curve fitting. The best fit from these methods will be used for this study. The method is an attempt to describe the relationship between variable X as the function of available data and a response Y. Which seeks to find some smooth curve that best fit the data, but does not necessarily pass through any data points. Mathematically, a polynomial of order
k in X is expressed in the following form (Klienbaum, 1998):
Y = C 0 + C1 X + C 2 X 2 + ... + C k X k
(3.1)
55
The pattern of emission due to the fuel changes is potential emissions released by transportation sector in Malaysia. The common gasses are consisting CO2, SO2, NOx and CO. Emission pattern of the transportation sector can be calculated by the following equation:
2 n TM i = CF (ESi1 FE1 + ESi2 FE p + ESi3 FE 3 + ... + ESin FE p ) p p
(3.2)
3.4. Results and Discussions There are two types of data to be analyzed i.e. fuel consumption data based on fuel type and emission data of transportation sector. These fuels are Petrol, Diesel, ATF, Natural Gas and Electricity. The usage of the mentioned fuels is potentially to be increased in the future. Based on the data shown in Table 3.2, using Eq. (3.1), the petrol consumption by transportation sector in Malaysia from year 2003 to year 2020 can be predicted by the following equation:
Y1 = 1204.3 + 139.32 X + 6.2865 X 2 ,
R 2 = 0.9795
(3.3)
Based on the data shown in Table 3.2, using Eq. (3.1), the diesel fuel consumption in transportation sector in Malaysia from the year 2003 to 2020 can be predicted. The total of diesel fuel use in transportation sector can be predicted by the following equation:
56
Y2 = 1015.1 73247 X + 10.661 X 2 ,
R 2 = 0.9183
(3.4)
The total of ATF fuel used for transportation sector in Malaysia can be predicted by the following equation:
Y3 = 194.46 + 40.729 X + 157.52 X 2 ,
R 2 = 0.9687
(3.5)
The total of natural gas fuel uses in transportation sector in Malaysia can be predicted by the following equation:
Y4 = 2.2755 1.5059 X + 0.1026 X 2 ,
R 2 = 0.7406
(3.6)
The total of electricity uses in transportation sector in Malaysia can be predicted by the following equation:
Y5 = 0.4584 0.3592 X + 0.0254 X 2 ,
R 2 = 0.8214
(3.7)
The results of the predicted data based on Equations (3.3), (3.4), (3.5), (3.6) and (3.7) from the year 2003 to 2020 are tabulated in Table 3.4.
57
Table 3.4. Predicted energy demand and fuel mix of transportation sector in Malaysia Year Petrol 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 7734 8169 8616 9076 9549 10 034 10 532 11 042 11 565 12 100 12 648 13 208 13 781 14 367 14 965 15 576 16 200 16 836 Diesel 4970 5398 5847 6318 6809 7322 7857 8413 8990 9588 10 208 10 849 11 511 12 195 12 900 13 626 14 374 15 143 Fuel Type (ktoe) ATF 1965 2079 2197 2318 2442 2570 2700 2834 2971 3111 3254 3400 3550 3702 3858 4017 4179 4344 NG 22 25 29 32 36 41 45 49 54 59 64 70 75 81 87 93 100 106 Elect 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 22 23 25 27 Total 14 696 15 678 16 697 17 753 18 846 19 977 21 145 22 350 23 593 24 873 26 190 27 545 28 936 30 366 31 832 33 336 34 877 36 455
58
The predicted fuel percentage trend based on fuel type of energy consumption in transportation sector in Malaysia is presented in Fig. 3.1.
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 ATF NG Diesel Elect Petrol
Figure 3.1. Predicted energy demand based on percentage fuel mix for transportation sector in Malaysia
The small changes of energy sources for transportation sector have contributed for emissions pattern in Malaysia. To replace petrol the authority has to increase the use of diesel. This replacement can be avoided if Malaysian government plans early. The authority should switch this replacement to another renewable energy sources such as bio-diesel or hydrogen fuel. Gradual replacement of petrol and diesel with natural gas is another alternative option since Malaysia has reserve a large amount of this fuel and that is known that natural gas has lower emission than petrol and diesel.
59
This can help to reduce emission in the future and also helps to secure Malaysias energy security. This is due to high cost of imported crude oil and higher cost of conserving emissions in the future. Conducting life cycle cost analysis of conserved emissions and investment is necessary. However, this analysis is not discussed in this study. Detail explanation of cost of conserved emissions is discussed by Krause and Koomey (1990). The pattern of emissions is a function of the total energy consumption multiplied by the percentage of fuel mix and the amount of emissions by the fossil fuel from every unit of energy used. The pattern of emissions by transportation sector in Malaysia is tabulated in Table 5 and illustrated in Fig. 3.2 3.3.
60
120000000 108000000 96000000 CO2 Emission (Ton) 84000000 72000000 CO2 CO
2700000 2400000 2100000 1800000 1500000 CO Emission (Ton)

NOx Emission (Ton)
60000000 1200000 48000000 36000000 24000000 12000000 0 1980 1990 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
1400000 1200000 1000000 800000 2000 600000 1500 1000 500 0 1980 1990 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 400000 200000 0
900000 600000 300000 0
Figure 3.2. Pattern of CO2 and CO emissions production by transportation sector in Malaysia
4000 3500 SO2 3000 SO2 Emission (Ton) 2500 NOx
Figure 3.3.Pattern of SO2 and NOx emissions production by transportation sector in Malaysia
61
Table 3.5. Potential emissions production by transportation sector in Malaysia Year CO2 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 45 008 529 48 016 315 51 138 549 54 375 232 57 726 362 61 191 940 64 771 967 68 466 442 72 275 364 76 198 735 80 236 554 84 388 821 88 655 537 93 036 700 97 532 311 102 142 371 106 866 878 111 705 834 Emissions production by transportation (Ton) SO2 1414 1509 1607 1709 1814 1923 2035 2151 2271 2394 2521 2651 2785 2923 3064 3209 3357 3509 NOX 528 397 559 968 592 559 626 169 660 799 696 449 733 119 770 808 809 517 849 245 889 993 931 761 974 548 1 018 355 1 063 182 1 109 028 1 155 894 1 203 780 CO 1 162 818 1 228 867 1 296 865 1 366 811 1 438 706 1 512 549 1 588 341 1 666 082 1 745 771 1 827 408 1 910 994 1 996 528 2 084 011 2 173 443 2 264 823 2 358 151 2 453 428 2 550 654
62
The results from Table 3.5 show that the total emissions production from 2003 to 2020 are about 1,363,734,444 tons of CO2, 42,845 tons of SO2, 15,173,572 tons of NOx and 32,626,252 tons of CO. These are huge amount of emission for small developing country like Malaysia. The authorities and policymakers should find a suitable policy to reduce this emission in order to contribute to Kyoto Protocol and to leave a better environment for future generation.
3.5. Conclusions
The emissions from transportation sector contributed the largest emission for the country. Government intervention to abate this emission is urgently needed at the present. The emissions pattern from fossil fuel used in transportation sector can be reduce by switching from fossil fuel to renewable fuel such as bio-diesel and hydrogen fuel. This policy offers solution and multiple benefits to utility, society and most important to protect the environment. Malaysian authority has to find ways to reduce these emissions, such as by introducing emissions taxation which can be used to subsidies renewable fuel or lower emission fuel or for replanting threes of the rain forest in the country. The increase in emissions is suspected due the increase in vehicle population in Malaysia. The greater the increase in vehicle population, the higher would be the corresponding emissions. Thus, one would have to conclude that in order to bring down the emissions to considerably low levels, the growth in vehicle population, particularly the passenger cars, has to be controlled or as mentioned early is to introduce low emission fuel or to initiate renewable fuel type. The data from the study can be a basis for calculating cost benefit analysis for
63
implementation of new renewable energy sources for transportation sector and emission abatement program in Malaysia.
References
Beer T, Grant T, Brown R, Edwards J, Nelson P, Watson H, Williams D. (2000). Life-cycle Emissions Analysis of Alternative Fuels for Heavy Vehicles. CSIRO Atmospheric Research Report C/0411/1.1/F2. Australian Greenhouse Office. Energy Information Administration. (2004). DOE:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ipsr/contents.html IEA. (2002). Oil Information 2002. IEA/OECD, Paris. Klienbaum DG. (1998). Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods. ITP co., USA. Krause F, Koomey J. (1990). Unit costs of carbon savings from urban trees, rural trees, and electricity conservation: a utility cost perspective, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley. Mahlia TMI. (2002). Emissions from electricity generation in Malaysia. Renewable Energy 27(2):293-300. National Energy Balance (2003). Ministry of Energy, Communications and Multimedia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Schwartz P. (1996). The Art of the Long View: Planning in an uncertain world, Doubleday, New York.
64
UN (United Nations). (1991). Energy Statistics: A Manual for Developing Countries, Series F, No. 56, United Nations, New York.
65
CHAPTER 4 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN MALAYSIA
SUMMARY
This chapter discusses the main part of the transport and energy investigations and projections. The first part of the chapter discusses a review of existing data available from related authorities and transportation studies that were undertaken to date. Consideration of population growth as well as socio-economic data and energy use in transportation sector data has also been considered. Forecasting future transportation growth based on population growth and socio-economic data and needs up to 20 years is also presented. Consideration of relationship between transportation trips production and energy consumption is elaborated. Formulation of a model for forecasting energy consumption by transportation sector and model validation that takes into consideration the correlation coefficient is discussed in detail. Furthermore, the uses of the model to analyze energy consumption based on the modal split scenarios are also presented.
66
4.1. Introduction
It has been extensively described in the literatures that transportation sector is one of the most energy consuming sector in many countries for years. For example in United States, the consumption of energy in transportation sector (year 19732001) range from 24.5% to 27.9% of the total energy consumed (U.S Department of Energy, 2002). In year 2001, transportation sector was positioned second after industrial sector in consuming energy in United States. Japanese transportation sector consumes about 20-25% of the total energy in recent years. In Malaysia, total amount of energy consumed in transportation sector was about 40% of the total energy consumed compared to 39% in industrial sector and only 13% for commercial and residential sector. These figures show that energy is essential to transportation and on the other hand could reasonably be judged as in dire need of energy. Unfortunately, one of the greatest challenges to the transportation system is that of dealing with its environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of transportation include large-scale impacts due to the system as a whole as well as smaller scale impacts due to specific transportation facilities and activities. Air quality is one of the most important impacts of the transportation besides energy consumption and land use. Noise pollution and reduced water quality due to the construction and the operation of transportation facilities and modes are also issues that have to be taken into consideration. The road transport, mainly automobiles is the major source of CO2 emission as the major global warming gas.
67
Therefore, sustainability has become the key word in transportation policy goals in both developed and developing countries. The planning for urban transportation systems has to address one additional requirement than in the past. The goal of achieving long term sustainability in urban transportation should be involved in any transportation plan.
4.1.1 Modes of Transportation
The transportation system is often analyzed in terms of the various modes of the transportation. Although very commonly used, the term mode does not have a very clear definition. In general, it means a kind of transportation (Banks, 2002). The modes are distinguished in terms of their physical characteristics as highway, rail, air and water transportation. Sometimes the modes are classified as road, rail, maritime, and air transport. Moreover, in other cases the organizational characteristics are important: mass transit is almost universally referred to as a mode of transportation, although physically, it is primarily a combination of highway and rail transportation. Table 4.1 highlights the modes in transportation system.
68
Table 4.1 Mode Classification Scheme Descriptions Urban Intercity Freight Truck (Highway) Truck (Highway) Rail Ocean Shipping Inland water Air Pipeline Conveyor belt Cable systems Passenger Private auto (Highway) Transit (Highway/rail) Private auto (Highway) Bus (Highway) Rail Air
Special purpose
Source: Banks, 2002
4.1.2 Transportation Demand Analysis
The need for transportation is derived from the interaction among social and economic activities dispersed in space. The diversity of these activities and the complexity of their pattern of interaction result in numerous determinants of transportation needs. The reasons people need to travel are endless and range from the indispensable quest for food and shelter to the voluntary exercise of mobility for its own recreational value. Commodities are also transported from place to place for a multitude of reasons, such as from the economic necessities of production and consumption and from the pursuit of economic advantage and gain. The initial step in understanding the relationship between socioeconomic activities and transportation needs is to adopt a meaningful measure of these needs. The need for transportation is manifested in the form of traffic volume, either in
69
terms of the flow of automobiles on road, passengers on a flight, or tons of cargo on a train. Transportation demand is defined in much the same way. To transport people and goods consumes time and energy, for which a cost is incurred (Kanafani, 1983). Transportation demand analysis is the process of relating the demand for transportation to the socioeconomic activities that generate it. In this process, the type, level, and location of human activities are related to the demand for movement of people and goods between the different points in space where these activities take place. The results of this analysis are the relationships, often in the form of models, between measures of activity and measures of transport demand. Since transportation demand is itself expressed by a relationship between traffic volumes and transportation cost characteristics, the results of transportation demand analysis, become, then, relationships between traffic volumes, on the one hand, and transportation system characteristics and socioeconomic activity levels on the other.
4.1.3 Study Objectives
The main purpose of this study is to recommend a transportation system policy in achieving sustainable transport system in Malaysia by reviewing the energy consumption of transportation sector and correlating the energy consumed with the transportation characteristics. An analysis of the available historical and existing transportation data would result in forecasted transportation demand in future.
70
Several scenarios based on transportation modal split are adopted for supporting the recommendations.
4.1.4 Conceptual Framework
The study focuses on analysis of the historical and existing transportation conditions and future transportation demand as well as the energy consumption of transportation sector. Transportation impacts on the energy consumption based on varying modal split was also conducted. The analysis has been carried out with consideration of transportation demand for existing and future conditions. The following tasks formed the main part of the transport and energy investigations and projections: A review of existing data available from related authorities were undertaken; Consideration of population growth as well as socio-economic data and energy use in transportation sector data; Forecasting future transportation growth based on population growth and socioeconomic data and needs up to 20 years; Consideration of relationship between transportation trips production and energy consumption; Formulation of a model for forecasting energy consumption by transportation sector; Model validation that takes into consideration the correlation coefficient;
71
Use of the model to analyze energy consumption based on the modal split scenarios.
4.2. Type of Data Collected
A wide range of data is necessary for the successful completion of the study and this has been identified. Some of the data were obtained from government agencies while some others were obtained through visual appraisal.
4.2.1 Road Transport
The road transport classification in Malaysia involves several types of vehicles such as motorcar, motorcycle, bus, commercial vehicle and other vehicles. For modal split purposes, the vehicles are also classified into private and public services vehicles. Figure 4.1 shows the types of vehicles on the Federal Highway which connects Kuala Lumpur to Shah Alam in Selangor.
Motorcars and Motorization
As depicted in Table 4.2 the numbers of motorcars increase significantly every year. The annual growth of motorcars population from year 1991 to 2002 is about 9.53% while for motorization level is 6.78%. Compared to the population annual growth rate (2.57% in this case), the increase of motorcars ownership is relatively higher (almost 10% per year). Figure 4.2 illustrates the motorization rates in Malaysia from year 1991 to 2002 per 1,000 populations.
72
Figure 4.1 Federal Highway View towards Kuala Lumpur Table 4.2 Number of Motorcars and Motorization Rates in Malaysia from 1991 to 2002
Motorcars Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Population in '000 Number ('000) 18,547 19,043 19,564 20,112 20,689 21,169 21,666 22,180 22,712 23,275 24,012 24,527 2.57 1863.2 1983.0 2132.3 2350.1 2608.6 2946.0 3333.4 3517.5 3852.7 4212.6 4624.6 5069.4 9.53 Motorization Level 100 104 109 117 126 139 154 159 170 181 193 207 6.78
Source: Road Transport Department and Department of Statistics, Malaysia (2002)
73
Referring to the figure, it is seen that the rate in 1998 appears relatively lower compared to the other rates during 1991-2002. This may be due to the impact of economic downturn during that period which has led to a general reduction in car utilization.
230 210
MOTORIZATION RATES
190 170 150 130 110 90 70 50 1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
YEAR
Figure 4.2 Motorization Rates in Malaysia from 1991 to 2002
Motorcycles and Motorization
Compared to the motorization rates of motorcars as illustrated above, the motorization rates of motorcycles seem relatively higher. However, the annual rate of increase of motorcycles is lower than motorcars (only 4.95% per year). On the other hand, the population of motorcycles is higher than the population of motorcars. Nevertheless, referring to Table 4.2 and Table 4.3 the disparity is not significant between both types of motor vehicles.
74
Table 4.3 Number of Motorcycles and Motorization Rates from 1991 to 2002
Motorcycles Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Population in '000 18,547 19,043 19,564 20,112 20,689 21,169 21,666 22,180 22,712 23,275 24,012 24,527 2.57
Number ('000) 2,595.7 2,762.7 2,970.8 3,297.5 3,608.5 3,951.9 4,329.0 4,692.2 5,082.5 5,356.6 5,609.4 5,842.6 7.65
Motorization Level 140 145 152 164 174 187 200 212 224 230 234 238 4.95
Source: Road Transport Department and Department of Statistics, Malaysia (2002)
Bus, Commercial and Other Vehicles
The population of buses, commercial and other vehicles in Malaysia from year 1991 to 2002 is highlighted in Table 4.4. From the table it is seen that bus has the lowest annual rates amongst the three types of vehicles. Moreover, after comparing population of all types of vehicles for year 2002, motorcycles accounted the highest population (48.60%) followed by motorcars (42.17%). Bus population is the lowest with about 0.43% of the total road transport vehicles.
75
Table 4.4 Number of Buses, Commercial and Other Vehicles from 1991 to 2002
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Bus 26,147 27,827 29,924 33,529 36,000 38,965 43,444 45,643 47,674 48,662 49,771 51,158 6.29
Commercial 313,514 333,674 358,808 393,833 440,723 512,165 574,622 599,149 642,976 665,284 689,668 713,148 7.76
Other Vehicles 143,472 152,698 164,199 178,439 203,660 237,631 269,983 286,898 304,135 315,687 329,198 345,604 8.32
Source: Road Transport Department, Malaysia (2002)
Private and Public Transport Vehicles of Road Transport
Public transport is the key player in maintaining congestion at reasonable levels on the roads. Almost without exception public transport modes makes use of road space more efficiently than the private car. If some drivers could be persuaded to use public transport instead of cars the rest of the car users would benefit from improved levels of service (Ortuzar and Willumsen, 1990). Table 2.4 detail the modal split between private and public transport modes in Malaysia from year 1991 to 2002. It needs to be mentioned here that road public transport modes may also include taxis although this mode is usually referred to as para-transit.
76
Motorcars population mentioned earlier involve taxis and hired cars. Referring to Table 4.5 and Figure 4.3, there is a big gap between the proportion of private cars and public transport vehicles numbers. For example, in year 2002 the percent share of private cars is around 97.7% of the total vehicles while the proportion of public transport vehicles is only about 2.3%. Moreover, public transport share appears to have a diminishing trend from year 1991 to 2002.
Table 4.5 Proportion of Private Cars and Public Transport Vehicles from 1991 to 2002
Private Cars Number 1,824,679 1,942,016 2,088,300 2,302,547 2,553,574 2,886,536 3,271,304 3,452,852 3,787,047 4,145,982 4,557,992 5,001,273 9.60 % Share 96.58 96.58 96.58 96.60 96.56 96.70 96.87 96.91 97.09 97.30 97.51 97.67 Bus 26,147 27,827 29,924 33,529 36,000 38,965 43,444 45,643 47,674 48,662 49,771 51,158 6.29 Public Transport Vehicles Taxi 33,444 35,596 38,278 42,204 46,807 49,485 51,293 54,590 55,626 56,152 56,579 58,066 5.14 Hire Car 5,033 5,357 5,762 5,308 8,195 9,971 10,826 10,042 10,020 10,433 9,986 10,073 6.51 % Share 3.42 3.42 3.42 3.40 3.44 3.30 3.13 3.09 2.91 2.70 2.49 2.33
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
77
100 90 80 70
Private Cars
% S H AR E
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Public Transport
YEAR
Figure 4.3 Trends of Private Cars and Public Transport Vehicles
Road Mileage
Table 4.6 depicts the distribution of road infrastructures for Federal Road and State Road based on type of pavement. The proportion of paved roads in year 2002 accounts for 78.45% of the total road mileage.
78
Table 4.6 Summary of Road Mileage in Malaysia (KM)

Federal Road Paved 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Annual Growth (%) 12,623.10 12,972.40 13,589.95 13,759.77 13,846.57 14,423.75 14,749.16 15,141.98 14,782.00 15,920.50 16,001.08 16,128.53 Unpaved Total Paved State Road Unpaved Total Paved Total Mileage Unpaved Total
Year
1,639.70 14,262.80 27,448.20 14,026.60 41,474.80 40,071.30 15,666.30 55,737.60 1,368.90 14,341.30 29,162.67 13,987.69 43,150.36 42,135.07 15,356.59 57,491.66 960.19 14,550.14 30,710.20 14,497.26 45,207.46 44,300.15 15,457.45 59,757.60 990.50 14,750.27 31,743.31 14,713.71 46,457.02 45,503.08 15,704.21 61,207.29 990.50 14,837.07 31,743.31 14,713.71 46,457.02 45,589.88 15,704.21 61,294.09 961.42 15,385.17 32,731.64 15,266.32 47,997.96 47,155.39 16,227.74 63,383.13 961.42 15,710.58 33,920.85 15,349.20 49,270.05 48,670.01 16,310.62 64,980.63 938.91 16,080.89 36,262.85 15,283.33 51,546.18 51,404.83 16,222.24 67,627.07 1,299.00 16,081.00 36,263.00 13,846.00 50,109.00 51,045.00 15,145.00 66,190.00 855.42 16,775.92 35,845.39 14,969.15 50,814.54 51,765.89 15,824.57 67,590.46 855.42 16,856.50 41,135.32 15,025.76 56,161.07 57,136.40 15,881.18 73,017.57 855.42 16,983.95 41,457.35 14,961.68 56,419.03 57,585.88 15,817.10 73,402.98 3.35 0.09 2.53
Source: Highway Planning Unit, Ministry of Works Malaysia (2002)
4.2.2 Rail Transport
Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad (KTMB) enjoyed a long and eventful track record dating back over a century to June 1885. Then the railway system has progressed to a nationwide single track network of 1,700 km spanning the whole of Peninsular Malaysia operated by the Government-owned enterprise, KTMB (Abdullah, 2003). From the 1990s, new entrants into the railway industry took place. Development of new rail routes was limited to urban centres within the Klang Valley. The KTM Komuter service provided the Malaysian public of their first taste
79
of modern urban transport through the introduction of Malaysias first electrified train service on 3rd August 1995. The KTM Komuter service consists of two routes from Rawang to Seremban and Port Klang to Sentul covering a total distance of 150 km. The KTM passengers and freight traffic from year 1992 to 2002 are shown in Table 4.7. In terms of passenger number, it is seen in general that passengers of KTM is on the decrease during 1992 to 2002 while number of container increase significantly, with an annual growth of 10.91%. Nevertheless, in year 1996 the passengers increase to 6.111 million passengers from 5.146 million passengers in year 1995 before dropping back the following year.
Table 4.7 KTMB Passengers and Freight Traffic from year 1992 to 2002
PASSENGER YEAR NUMBER ( ' 000 ) 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Annual Growth (%) 7,614 6,510 5,426 5,146 6,111 5,375 4,924 4,344 3,825 3,511 3,437 -7.65 PASSENGER-KM ( ' 000,000 ) 1,859 1,553 1,348 1,270 1,370 1,492 1,397 1,316 1,220 1,181 1,123 -4.92 TONNE ( ' 000 ) 3,550 4,196 5,164 5,249 5,405 5,106 3,695 3,845 5,481 4,150 3,741 0.53 FREIGHT TONNE-KM ( ' 000,000 ) 1,081 1,157 1,463 1,416 1,417 1,337 992 907 916 1,094 1,107 0.24
CONTAINER TEU 93,192 95,569 121,450 137,137 124,588 135,217 112,133 106,744 255,312 149,669 262,478 10.91
Source: Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad (KTMB, 2002)
80
Apart from KTM Komuter, other Klang Valley rail operators such as PUTRA and STAR Light Rail Transit (LRT), ERL and KL-Monorail converge at KL Sentral. The STAR LRT was fully completed in September 1998 and covers a route length of 27 km from Ampang to Sentul Timur and Sri Petaling to Sentul Timur. Another addition to Klang rail showcase was the PUTRA LRT. Running on both elevated and underground tracks, PUTRA has been operating since full completion in June 1999 and covers a distance of 29 km. In the meantime, the Express Rail Link (ERL) interface directly with the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) to offer airline passenger seamless rail to air transfers. In addition to world-class comfort and convenience, the ERL service also features an airline check-in service at the KL Sentral rail terminal itself. In addition, the latest project of rail based system is the KL Monorail, which is a service which connects passengers to the most popular shopping areas within Kuala Lumpur. The KL Monorail service commenced operation in August 2003. The Integrated Rail Services (KTM Komuter, PUTRA and STAR LRT, ERL and KL Monorail) route is depicted in Figure 4.4 while Figure 4.5 depicts the average daily passenger traffic of the LRT from year 1998 to 2003. Referring to the figure it is seen that the number of passengers is increasing during the period. The significant increase of passengers occurred during September 1998 to January 2001. Since then, the ridership appears to stagnate at around 160,000 commuters/day.
81
LEGEND
Source: Syarikat Prasarana Negara Berhad (SPNB, 2004)
Figure 4.4 Integrated Rail Services in Klang Valley
The integrated rail services are complemented with supporting facilities such as feeder bus and park and ride system as depicted in Figure 4.6.
82
Source: Yusoff, 2003
Figure 4.5 LRT Passengers per Day
Figure 4.6 Park n Ride at LRT Station
83
Based on the rail passengers data as mentioned earlier, the total rail passengers from year 1998 to 2002 could be summarized as in Table 4.8. From the table, it is observed that the total number of rail passengers in year 2002 is more than 56.3 million passengers and most of them are using LRT (93.9%). Moreover, there is a significant increase of LRT passengers in year 2000 as compared to the previous year. This may be due to the operation of PUTRA LRT since June 1999.
Table 4.8 Rail Passengers from Year 1998 to 2002

RAIL PASSENGERS BY YEAR YEAR 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 KTMB ( ' 000 ) 4,924 4,344 3,825 3,511 3,437 LRT ( ' 000 ) 7,300 10,950 40,150 51,100 52,925 TOTAL ( ' 000 ) 12,224 15,294 43,975 54,611 56,362
Source: Consultants Estimation
4.2.3 Air Transport
The main air transportation system includes commercial airlines and air freight carriers. The major market is intercity passenger travel, particularly long-distance travel. In addition, some intercity freight is shipped by air. The air transportation system in Malaysia includes 22 public-use airports. Commercial aviation accounted for more than 32.7 million passengers in year 2002.
84
Table 4.9 and Table 4.10 illustrate the air traffic (passenger and/or cargo) at Malaysian airports during 1991 to 2002. Table 4.11 to Table 4.16 highlights the passenger-kilometer data of Malaysian Airports.
Table 4.9 Air Traffic at Public-use Airports in Malaysia from year 1991 to 2002
Freight (Tonne) 284,689.9 291,384.5 312,045.1 381,410.0 482,031.4 541,416.5 617,027.6 524,765.7 640,980.5 762,378.0 777,625.6 782,992.9 9.63 Commercial Aircraft Movements 304,975 365,750 372,658 383,722 406,338 441,596 425,825 389,470 365,852 362,004 372,885 388,831 2.23
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Passenger 19,951,836 21,745,245 22,880,336 24,192,387 26,340,287 28,873,231 31,275,494 27,007,630 28,322,902 31,663,342 31,386,848 32,680,018 4.59
Source: Malaysia Airports Berhad (2002)
Referring to Table 4.9 above, both passenger and cargo is on the increase. Freight air carriers have the highest annual growth of 9.63% per year during 1991 2002. The detail of number of passengers served based on airports in Malaysia are shown in Table 4.10 as follows.
85
Table 4.10 Air Passengers Traffic at Public-use Airports in Malaysia from year 1990 to 2002
AIRPORTS KLIA SUBANG PULAU PINANG KOTA KINABALU KUCHING PULAU LANGKAWI JOHOR BHARU KOTA BHARU IPOH KUALA TERENGGANU ALOR SETAR MELAKA KUANTAN PULAU TIOMAN PULAU PANGKOR LABUAN LAHAD DATU SANDAKAN TAWAU BINTULU MIRI SIBU 7,521,282 1,889,564 1,749,551 1,456,035 165,730 514,340 292,919 281,642 110,208 207,943 4,529 174,687 47,235 n.a 210,216 103,120 460,488 458,118 226,589 802,325 532,597 8,843,558 2,175,706 1,819,236 1,683,617 254,820 688,883 339,236 342,440 134,848 256,856 2,736 247,481 47,038 n.a 255,198 106,952 456,833 454,623 287,605 948,672 605,498 9,803,856 2,508,718 1,898,569 1,696,163 479,046 823,574 366,008 421,224 151,093 313,166 7,777 300,912 50,984 n.a 301,159 85,124 393,968 482,541 309,555 750,631 601,177 10,726,468 2,671,395 1,796,153 1,783,553 719,549 807,726 377,203 448,150 156,732 330,522 17,102 300,483 70,991 3,933 315,452 55,531 291,549 390,582 291,615 736,065 589,582 11,343,648 2,654,485 2,096,241 1,890,855 873,144 708,310 446,492 261,119 189,930 286,930 10,746 353,552 97,275 9,719 353,843 63,089 345,751 406,448 266,593 963,067 571,150 12,544,729 2,735,604 2,410,807 2,067,252 888,131 864,561 501,528 219,228 236,597 304,165 18,323 374,493 102,338 10,091 357,681 73,377 380,702 441,256 269,368 944,860 595,196 14,314,547 2,849,399 2,478,558 2,163,562 867,541 916,729 560,590 221,761 282,357 328,129 13,483 452,684 94,556 546,379 84,467 413,740 452,679 289,024 922,035 621,011 15,819,863 2,907,033 2,732,146 2,257,214 839,064 1,081,681 602,068 196,625 313,384 343,865 6,411 512,549 82,739 586,091 92,094 424,781 461,234 335,698 1,049,253 631,701 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 6,377,290 8,129,104 2,392,823 2,259,438 1,940,737 735,823 810,743 487,541 146,211 272,618 239,797 6,962 403,489 80,959 404,966 79,881 374,654 391,164 255,064 692,439 525,927 1999 12,779,711 1,999,302 2,451,352 2,629,788 2,174,348 793,353 847,500 471,085 132,154 297,933 273,933 14,941 387,375 75,425 4,453 447,316 88,632 401,517 436,389 263,718 771,855 580,822 2000 14,352,848 2,100,727 2,681,718 2,969,639 2,482,601 947,293 983,843 512,834 147,381 343,186 311,224 12,684 419,441 74,762 6,498 475,490 102,492 448,500 461,026 288,449 913,219 627,487 2001 14,206,055 1,955,689 2,502,777 2,912,802 2,624,502 820,625 966,529 506,632 131,387 355,063 306,514 8,467 433,270 83,358 8,999 520,544 104,270 444,066 472,301 326,676 1,003,860 692,462 2002 15,936,882 1,130,169 2,479,946 3,137,935 2,860,933 712,912 865,136 534,959 132,314 309,202 287,465 7,438 388,746 64,067 8,811 548,920 108,151 444,601 495,379 363,176 1,135,808 727,068
JUMLAH
17,209,118
19,951,836
21,745,245
22,880,336
24,192,387
26,340,287
28,873,231
31,275,494
27,007,630
28,322,902
31,663,342
31,386,848
32,680,018
Source: Malaysia Airports Berhad, 2002
86
Table 4.11 International Air Passenger-Km Data of KLIA

AIRPORT NAME: KUALA LUMPUR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
DESTINATIONS SINGAPORE BANGKOK MANILA MEDAN JAKARTA B.SERI BEGAWAN PHUKET DENPASAR HO CHI MINH CITY HANOI PHNOM PEHN SUBIC BAY SURABAYA CEBU YANGON MATARAM MANADO BALIKPAPAN PADANG HONGKONG TOKYO TAIPEH SEOUL GUANGZHOU FUKUOKA NAGOYA OSAKA KAOHSIUNG BEIJING XIAMEN SHANGHAI HANGQIAU SHANGHAI PUDONG HANGZHOU FUZHOU MACAU HAIKOU KUNMING MELBOURNE PERTH SYDNEY BRISBANE AUCKLAND ADELAINE MUMBAI KARACHI CHENNAI NEW DELHI DHAKA COLOMBO BANGALORE HYDERABAD KATHMANDU MALE TASHKENT JEDDAH DUBAI AMMAN TEHERAN RIYADH 2002 Arrival 962,062 386,922 51,542 39,592 266,068 53,905 66,539 61,408 81,758 23,786 29,692 3,842 85,211 5,829 27,589 0 0 0 0 378,672 167,475 165,902 82,351 108,092 16,704 26,793 74,113 14,184 61,172 37,291 19,253 73,317 380 7,706 1,424 0 0 122,638 87,068 154,808 52,279 49,287 33,055 44,171 10,662 132,376 44,912 87,005 38,785 24,112 12,571 0 12,588 7,148 77,879 36,561 8,760 12,728 25,176 Departure 1,008,872 387,194 50,992 58,093 277,993 63,313 64,316 60,686 68,123 24,955 28,907 3,777 96,616 6,614 19,553 9,824 0 0 0 455,393 168,827 169,426 91,481 100,762 17,443 26,371 80,350 13,608 63,885 32,878 19,835 73,545 181 7,627 2,005 0 0 90,154 88,263 164,475 51,494 53,346 33,683 40,956 9,886 129,706 43,655 89,914 34,449 25,169 10,682 0 13,215 73,226 61,394 8,881 12,026 15,709 Total 1,970,934 774,116 102,534 97,685 544,061 117,218 130,855 122,094 149,881 48,741 58,599 7,619 181,827 12,443 47,142 9,824 0 0 0 834,065 336,302 335,328 173,832 208,854 34,147 53,164 154,463 27,792 125,057 70,169 39,088 146,862 561 15,333 3,429 0 0 212,792 175,331 319,283 103,773 102,633 66,738 85,127 20,548 262,082 88,567 176,919 73,234 49,281 23,253 0 25,803 7,148 151,105 97,955 17,641 24,754 40,885 Arrival 741,853 380,006 59,184 36,601 310,774 50,836 54,126 68,206 86,878 46,528 33,107 3,444 104,072 7,342 32,883 0 754 38 213 290,777 158,326 124,163 97,017 94,435 4,014 22,723 62,891 6,543 47,227 36,776 5,863 79,564 390 13,388 3,495 644 2,167 123,637 90,864 143,606 48,163 63,278 33,879 44,422 16,770 147,917 46,755 90,893 52,823 24,393 10,718 28,039 11,409 7,462 82,848 43,417 8,340 14,958 8,784 2003 Departure 778,002 389,869 56,474 50,299 264,208 55,650 50,515 67,410 67,094 33,667 31,765 3,132 82,794 7,156 16,293 10,756 785 70 371 321,098 161,325 124,016 106,655 93,280 4,531 21,844 68,313 6,306 49,149 33,388 5,284 78,781 390 13,718 5,009 653 2,089 125,008 97,669 153,414 51,093 72,883 36,946 41,428 12,900 115,149 44,474 61,885 36,214 25,183 10,314 14,013 11,713 85,525 66,845 8,687 13,985 4,931 Total 1,519,855 769,875 115,658 86,900 574,982 106,486 104,641 135,616 153,972 80,195 64,872 6,576 186,866 14,498 49,176 10,756 1,539 108 584 611,875 319,651 248,179 203,672 187,715 8,545 44,567 131,204 12,849 96,376 70,164 11,147 158,345 780 27,106 8,504 1,297 4,256 248,645 188,533 297,020 99,256 136,161 70,825 85,850 29,670 263,066 91,229 152,778 89,037 49,576 21,032 42,052 23,122 7,462 168,373 110,262 17,027 28,943 13,715 Approx. Distance (km) 297 1,246 1,341 351 1,129 1,484 706 1,962 1,048 2,100 1,035 2,434 1,667 1,341 1,687 2,028 2,581 1,743 431 2,541 5,405 3,243 4,637 2,588 4,543 5,118 4,939 2,983 4,410 2,992 3,771 3,793 3,633 3,210 2,507 2,132 2,475 6,313 4,151 6,566 6,438 8,716 5,680 3,623 4,446 2,630 3,874 2,640 2,468 2,879 4,360 3,272 3,132 5,370 7,067 5,547 7,567 6,332 6,376 Passengers - Km 2002 584,707,726 964,228,516 137,518,744 34,301,453 614,363,583 173,894,286 92,406,961 239,543,105 157,056,028 102,374,402 60,665,851 18,541,179 303,064,425 16,688,569 79,544,667 19,927,779 0 0 0 2,119,065,824 1,817,842,223 1,087,322,736 806,114,228 540,454,524 155,129,824 272,082,756 762,833,381 82,902,408 551,449,359 209,974,396 147,409,666 556,979,290 2,038,004 49,212,510 8,598,148 0 0 1,343,392,283 727,879,844 2,096,564,189 668,058,674 894,544,722 379,047,167 308,413,895 91,350,605 689,363,064 343,147,324 467,126,259 180,755,866 141,871,168 101,389,923 0 80,818,245 38,382,068 1,067,798,714 543,333,875 133,487,873 156,734,927 260,697,409 2003 450,888,240 958,945,984 155,120,672 30,514,370 649,280,139 157,973,238 73,895,203 266,072,679 161,342,871 168,439,613 67,160,107 16,002,991 311,463,297 19,444,738 82,976,720 21,818,321 3,972,226 188,277 251,925 1,554,559,179 1,727,837,136 804,736,465 944,491,791 485,752,827 38,819,936 228,085,024 647,966,121 38,328,045 424,978,077 209,959,434 42,037,852 600,528,970 2,833,589 86,998,911 21,323,607 2,765,044 10,533,033 1,569,738,403 782,687,434 1,950,374,731 638,979,617 1,186,773,299 402,259,816 311,033,314 131,904,441 691,951,313 353,461,077 403,385,819 219,760,767 142,720,420 91,705,710 137,595,296 72,421,015 40,068,130 1,189,824,776 611,597,976 128,841,790 183,258,422 87,451,754
87
Table 4.11 International Air Passenger-Km Data of KLIA (cont)

MEDINAH ABU DHABI BEIRUT CAIRO MUSCAT DOHA SANAA LONDON AMSTERDAM FRANKFURT PARIS ROME MANCHESTER VIENNA ZURICH ISTANBUL LOS ANGELES NEW YORK BUENOS AIRES CAPE TOWN JOHANNESBURG MAURITIUS TOTAL 5,193 15,933 9,070 6,443 0 18,324 3,121 264,962 110,213 63,634 42,523 18,506 36,729 24,988 27,955 14,445 62,375 12,342 4,117 10,481 19,733 8,511 26,803 15,932 9,658 6,628 5 17,387 2,884 270,125 118,074 68,468 42,304 18,269 38,343 33,518 27,097 15,225 63,208 11,665 3,868 12,720 19,977 10,100 31,996 6,641 31,865 9,370 18,728 12,818 13,071 10,773 5 282 35,711 16,981 6,005 3,253 535,087 263,662 228,287 125,447 132,102 59,837 84,827 48,577 36,775 23,892 75,072 49,701 58,506 23,396 55,052 27,710 29,670 7,806 125,583 47,206 24,007 15,649 7,985 7,468 23,201 12,832 39,710 21,167 18,611 6,956 10,670,727 20,188 10,711 11,445 11,476 315 16,567 2,874 253,117 126,403 62,947 46,859 23,668 50,097 28,085 28,744 7,798 50,025 16,864 8,130 13,618 20,236 6,887 26,829 20,081 24,263 22,249 597 33,548 6,127 516,779 251,850 122,784 95,436 47,560 99,798 51,481 56,454 15,604 97,231 32,513 15,598 26,450 41,403 13,843 9,981,499 7,059 5,586 7,652 7,962 5,210 5,911 6,447 10,605 10,234 9,998 10,440 9,728 10,681 9,416 10,017 8,375 14,157 15,167 15,900 9,543 8,502 5,445 225,853,947 177,999,604 143,299,032 104,073,337 26,050 211,090,221 38,712,868 5,674,447,276 2,336,231,721 1,320,737,500 885,577,084 357,763,208 801,820,910 550,893,637 551,473,391 248,497,367 1,777,915,025 364,105,039 126,963,276 221,397,385 337,626,539 101,341,097 40,040,240,164 189,381,033 112,173,546 185,650,599 177,150,002 3,110,418 198,304,576 39,499,374 5,480,296,080 2,577,369,535 1,227,577,426 996,332,944 462,684,383 1,065,911,700 484,746,100 565,517,670 130,689,347 1,376,527,522 493,112,306 248,011,669 252,401,225 352,020,942 75,378,261 39,489,928,630
Source: Consultants estimation based on Malaysia Airports Berhad data, 2004
Table 4.12 Domestic Air Passenger-Km Data of KLIA

AIRPORT NAME: KUALA LUMPUR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Arrival Departure Total Arrival Departure Total Distance (km) 2003 2004 ALOR SETAR 172,382 176,526 348,908 162,770 161,483 324,253 410 142,947,014 132,845,903 KOTA KINABALU 566,997 556,864 1,123,861 573,067 544,727 1,117,794 1,625 1,826,573,409 1,816,712,919 BINTULU 26,308 24,284 50,592 44,602 39,302 83,904 1,257 63,607,323 105,489,185 IPOH 40,397 35,056 75,453 26,486 24,953 51,439 214 16,120,601 10,989,989 JOHOR BHARU 192,955 184,187 377,142 239,290 228,524 467,814 250 94,343,957 117,026,011 KOTA BHARU 279,643 285,682 565,325 275,469 279,183 554,652 385 217,680,313 213,570,638 KUCHING 572,158 579,573 1,151,731 575,501 578,583 1,154,084 966 1,112,963,159 1,115,236,956 KUANTAN 176,706 172,265 348,971 158,005 157,165 315,170 200 69,643,479 62,897,878 LABUAN 81,222 82,079 163,301 79,802 79,283 159,085 1,526 249,218,686 242,784,518 LANGKAWI 286,265 270,888 557,153 311,664 282,598 594,262 455 253,248,826 270,116,384 MIRI 141,979 145,487 287,466 149,246 154,724 303,970 1,371 394,019,326 416,640,766 PENANG 607,158 590,229 1,197,387 657,345 636,700 1,294,045 325 389,392,048 420,825,375 SIBU 76,382 74,487 150,869 90,547 86,134 176,681 1,141 172,069,338 201,508,479 SANDAKAN 33,674 31,908 65,582 42,660 43,804 86,464 1,842 120,818,610 159,288,529 TERENGGANU 191,615 191,223 382,838 197,812 198,214 396,026 329 126,060,169 130,402,689 TAWAU 49,507 49,333 98,840 60,674 61,416 122,090 1,827 180,549,783 223,020,265 TOTAL 6,945,419 7,201,733 5,429,256,043 5,639,356,484 DESTINATIONS 2003 2004 (until November) Approx. Passengers - Km
88
Table 4.13 Air Passenger-Km Data of Kota Kinabalu Airport

AIRPORT NAME: KOTA KINABALU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT DESTINATIONS BALIK PAPAN CEBU BANDAR SERI BEGAWAN SINGAPORE MANILA POCHENTONG TARAKAN, INDON DENPASAR, BALI PALAWAN MANADO BANGKOK JAKARTA HO CHI MINH NARITA TOKYO / NARITA / OSAKA TAIPEH HONG KONG SEOUL KANSAI, OSAKA SHENZHEN GUANGZHOU KAOHSHIUNG SHANGHAI,PUDONG MACAU CANTON XIAMEN PUSAN SAPPORO, JAPAN PERTH SYDNEY JEDDAH ARLANDA, SWEDEN BAHRAIN SHARJAH DUBAI TOTAL 2002 Arrival Departure 1,610 2,253 48,380 47,027 20,775 23,979 5,434 5,564 0 0 38 2 5,378 3,237 9,093 6,592 41,770 40,974 40,775 42,106 11,155 8,591 524 506 274 274 21,302 19,145 0 0 0 0 362 2,150 718 353 1,408 358 Total 3,863 95,408 44,754 10,998 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,615 15,685 82,743 82,881 19,746 0 1,030 549 40,448 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,512 1,071 1,766 412,109 2003 Arrival Departure 1,956 1,885 1,818 2,166 47,324 45,404 6,430 11,872 5,832 6,391 0 22 869 938 138 101 0 39 734 753 7 162 11,377 9,134 32,857 31,841 42,072 41,559 16,671 15,104 10,843 11,031 397 396 362 345 2,318 2,342 547 528 1,391 1,395 355 0 0 0 5,001 4,654 1,406 1,572 Approx. Pasenger - Km
Total Distance (km) 2002 2003 3,841 805 0 3,093,922 3,984 1,004 3,878,977 4,000,502 92,728 166 15,822,742 15,378,338 18,302 1,431 64,037,616 26,187,904 12,223 1,097 12,062,597 13,406,616 22 1,379 0 30,338 1,807 335 13,393 604,996 239 1,634 0 390,564 39 1,097 0 42,775 1,487 1,100 0 1,635,336 169 1,907 0 322,364 0 1,694 0 0 0 1,168 0 0 20,511 4,143 35,694,218 84,984,099 0 4,143 64,987,786 0 64,699 2,199 181,949,084 142,269,558 83,631 1,836 152,165,750 153,542,537 31,775 3,681 72,678,123 116,950,056 0 3,775 0 0 0 1,872 1,927,867 0 0 1,940 1,064,425 0 21,874 1,908 77,190,993 41,743,752 793 2,862 0 2,269,239 707 1,821 0 1,287,407 4,660 3,795 0 17,682,712 1,075 2,081 0 2,236,590 2,786 3,509 0 9,775,630 355 4,823 0 1,712,227 0 4,211 0 0 9,655 5,770 0 55,713,476 2,978 8,411 0 25,044,344 0 9,890 24,843,722 0 0 7,264 7,779,487 0 0 6,780 11,974,032 0 380,339 728,070,813 720,305,283
89
Table 4.14 Air Passenger-Km Data of Kuching Airport

AIRPORT NAME: KUCHING INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT DESTINATIONS 2002 2003 Approx. Total Distance (km) 69,673 705 9,099 638 28,262 209 1,061 1,862 2,181 790 1,101 1,838 0 2,313 7 981 120 705 26 209 92 803 0 1,622 0 943 4,473 2,347 0 4,348 0 4,348 535 2,696 1,040 4,335 0 2,871 13,899 3,764 1,916 8,003 4 4,096 0 10,716 133,489 Passenger-Km 2002 83,197,679 11,630,712 3,877,588 7,908,527 2,371 0 499,590 0 0 0 0 0 0 18,122,560 51,627 2,912,955 0 0 0 48,486,527 32,933,548 0 0 209,623,683 2003 49,124,098 5,801,680 5,912,515 1,975,863 1,724,058 2,023,424 0 6,864 84,608 5,439 73,867 0 0 10,499,833 0 0 1,442,124 4,507,919 0 52,320,972 15,334,308 16,385 0 150,853,957
Arrival Departure Total Arrival Departure SINGAPORE 52,641 65,359 118,000 34,696 34,977 BRUNEI 9,518 8,722 18,241 4,315 4,784 PONTIANAK 9,676 8,859 18,535 13,009 15,253 MANILA 2,133 2,114 4,247 549 512 BALIK PAPAN 0 3 3 1,092 1,089 SUBIC BAY 0 0 0 226 875 YANGON 0 216 216 0 0 BANDUNG 0 0 0 0 7 SELETAR 0 0 0 0 120 NATUNA 0 0 0 0 26 KOTA KINABALU 0 0 0 0 92 MANADO 0 0 0 0 0 JAKARTA 0 0 0 0 0 HONGKONG 4,264 3,456 7,720 2,480 1,993 HIROSHIMA 0 12 12 0 0 FUZHOU 352 318 670 0 0 XIAMEN 0 0 0 174 361 CANTON 0 0 0 548 492 TAIPEH 0 0 0 0 0 PERTH 8,608 4,273 12,880 4,658 9,241 JEDDAH 2,191 1,924 4,115 943 973 MADRAS 0 0 0 0 4 FRANKFURT 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 184,639
Table 4.15 Air Passenger-Km Data of Penang Airport

AIRPORT NAME: PENANG INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT DESTINATIONS PHUKET MEDAN SINGAPORE MANILA BANGKOK SUBIC BAY HO CHI MINH CITY B.S.BEGAWAN NARITA GUANGZHOU ZHENGHOU TAIPEH KUNMING, CHINA CHENGDU, CHINA HONG KONG SHANGHAI CANTON PUDONG, CHINA KANSAI WUHAN XIAMEN JEDDAH SAN PEDRO HULA, HONDURAS LONDON TOTAL 2002 Arrival Departure 0 0 176,241 147,065 283,366 298,680 0 0 70,525 74,974 0 2 Total 0 323,306 582,046 0 145,500 2 0 0 1,295 26,565 527 52,954 116 133 46,033 4 0 0 0 0 0 14,460 290 0 1,193,232 2003 Approx. Passenger-Km 2003 60,664 85,149,550 231,624,652 0 0 277,677,921 213,526 120,091 13,075,556 1,344,899 778,182 218,966,063 8,804,872 1,761,396 119,365,180 3,332,294 67,672,583 1,217,937 401,462 1,044,902 3,243,513 76,662,361 4,456,275 30,717,474 1,147,691,353
1,295 13,399 274 28,698 116 0 12,818 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,432 290 0
0 13,167 252 24,257 0 133 33,215 4 0 0 0 0 0 7,029 0 0
Arrival Departure Total Distance (km) 2002 80 79 159 382 0 172,979 151,772 324,751 262 84,770,632 186,936 197,088 384,024 603 351,062,001 0 0 0 2,488 0 0 0 0 958 139,388,729 59,124 55,259 114,383 2,428 4,855 114 115 229 932 0 63 11 74 1,623 0 2,457 4 2,461 5,313 6,882,871 554 0 554 2,428 64,489,996 112 108 220 3,537 1,862,762 34,933 34,923 69,856 3,135 165,987,547 1,993 1,998 3,991 2,206 255,917 478 143 621 2,836 377,239 29,589 20,285 49,874 2,393 110,172,602 598 322 920 3,622 14,500 7,609 8,517 16,126 4,196 0 0 334 334 3,647 0 83 0 83 4,837 0 164 164 328 3,186 0 586 546 1,132 2,865 0 6,121 5,137 11,258 6,810 98,469,885 0 254 254 17,544 5,087,873 2,990 0 2,990 10,273 0 984,622 1,028,827,410
90
Table 4.16 Air Passenger-Km Data of Langkawi Airport

AIRPORT NAME: LANGKAWI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT DESTINATIONS PHUKET SINGAPORE SELETAR KANSAI HONG KONG INCHON, SEOUL DENMARK FINLAND RUSSIA YEKATERINBURG, RUSSIA LONDON MILAN AUCKLAND TOTAL 2002 Arrival Departure Total 45 42 87 36,166 39,112 75,279 0 0 0 290 0 290 5,735 5,086 10,821 0 0 0 0 33,202 33,202 909 1,129 2,038 297 0 297 90 89 179 2,435 0 2,435 376 0 376 607 0 607 125,611 2003 Approx. Passenger-Km
Arrival Departure Total Distance (km) 2002 2003 0 0 0 253 22,054 0 31,654 32,228 63,882 729 54,847,922 46,544,400 17 9 26 729 0 18,944 0 0 0 4,796 1,390,821 0 2,722 2,692 5,414 2,339 25,314,601 12,665,579 798 353 1,151 4,421 0 5,088,015 0 0 0 9,243 306,884,403 0 0 0 0 8,554 17,432,682 0 0 0 0 7,687 2,280,826 0 90 89 179 7,687 1,375,904 1,375,904 2,435 0 2,435 10,155 24,728,317 24,728,317 376 0 376 9,580 3,602,223 3,602,223 0 0 0 9,119 5,538,533 0 73,463 443,418,287 94,023,382
4.2.4 Maritime Transport
The market for maritime transportation system is intercity freight. Usually coastwise shipping specializes in bulk goods while foreign going shipping carries all types of cargo. This system provides low speed and relatively low accessibility, but extremely high capacities. The maritime transport in Malaysia consists of foreign going and coastal shipping. The types of ship that operated in Malaysian ports includes oil tanker, liquefied gas carriers, oil carriers, cargo carriers, passenger carriers, container ships and vehicle carriers. There are fourteen (14) ports throughput cargo carriers with total cargo as shown in Table 4.17. It is seen also that cargo carriers have annual growth rates of 6.33% per year.
91
Table 4.17 Total Cargo Throughput by Ports from year 1991 to 2002
PORT 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth Rate (% ) = 6.33 KELANG PULAU PINANG JOHOR KUANTAN BINTULU TG.BRUAS KUCHING MIRI RAJANG PEL-PEL SABAH PORT DICKSON KEMAMAN TELUK EWA TANJUNG PELEPAS TOTAL 26,296 12,062 10,711 2,842 12,931 534 2,939 9,774 5,424 13,679 12,195 1,700 1,544 28,403 13,219 10,741 2,877 13,590 531 3,138 8,966 5,890 14,159 11,310 1,019 1,560 30,788 14,362 11,798 3,401 14,698 538 3,396 7,109 5,543 13,168 13,081 2,542 1,713 33,857 15,135 13,223 4,159 15,284 461 3,726 6,722 5,789 14,579 12,984 1,960 2,053 40,034 16,675 16,504 4,208 18,639 389 4,282 7,123 5,946 16,257 12,215 2,568 2,538 49,025 17,501 19,017 5,052 21,816 510 5,658 6,536 5,971 17,455 13,677 2,538 4,758 55,767 19,693 20,805 5,855 24,586 579 6,055 4,403 5,576 19,608 13,853 3,631 3,234 47,342 16,476 19,322 5,500 23,342 710 4,051 4,270 4,534 16,595 12,395 1,798 2,964 60,970 18,760 21,512 5,510 23,641 746 4,743 6,867 5,107 16,789 10,122 2,001 2,586 65,277 20,473 24,536 6,027 24,897 818 5,301 6,033 5,582 18,074 7,829 2,155 3,167 248 70,150 20,453 27,306 7,532 25,210 679 5,368 5,813 5,052 17,831 12,842 2,054 3,589 n.a 82,271 21,800 29,019 8,999 25,592 708 5,983 5,692 4,691 19,018 12,595 1,480 3,487 n.a
112,631 115,403 122,137 129,932 147,378 169,514 183,645 159,299 179,354 190,417 203,879 221,335
Source: All the Ports and Marine Department, 2002
4.2.5 Passenger Transport Mode Share
In terms of number of passenger carried, road transport is still leading amongst the transportation modes in Malaysia. In year 2002, more than 85% of passengers were carried by road transport and about 14% by rail services. The air transport mode only serves about 0.24% of the total daily passengers. The transport mode share for daily passengers is illustrated in Figure 4.7.
92
Rail 14.05%
Air 0.24%
Transport Mode Share in 2002
Road 85.71%
Figure 4.7 Proportion of Passenger by Modes
2.4.6 Number of Vehicle Registration by Type of Fuel
According to Road Transport Department for year 1999, 2000 and 2002, about 57% of the total new vehicles registered is passenger car which 99.6% uses petrol and only 0.4% passenger car uses diesel. On the other hand, for bus registration, the proportion of bus is only 0.03% of the total vehicles and 90.5% of the bus using diesel. The number of new vehicle registration in year 1999, 2000 and 2002 based on fuel type is represented in Table 4.18.
93
Table 4.18 Number of New Vehicle Registration Based on Fuel Type

No. of Vehicle Registration Based on Fuel Type Types of Traffic Mode Petrol P. Car Bus Lorry Motorcycle Others 294,928 22 3,923 236,759 2,274 1999 Diesel 1,548 223 4,998 12 6,348 Petrol 338,866 24 5,257 238,672 2,699 2000 Diesel 1,061 205 10,472 15 9,431 Petrol 409,224 10 4,271 222,661 5,014 2002 Diesel 1,290 102 3,250 14 10,790
4.2.7 Population
Malaysia with approximately 330,000 square km of land consist about 24.5 million populations in 2002. The annual population growth rate during the period 1991 to 2002 is around 2.57%. As seen in Table 4.19, population of Malaysia has been growing from 18.5 million in 1991 to 24.5 million in 2002. It means the population has grown 1.3 times in these 12 years.
94
Table 4.19 Malaysia Population from 1991 to 2002
No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Population in '000 18,547 19,043 19,564 20,112 20,689 21,169 21,666 22,180 22,712 23,275 24,012 24,527 2.57
Source: Department of Statistics Malaysia, 2002
4.2.8 Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
The Gross Domestic Products (GDP) and the Gross Domestic Products (GDP) per Capita of Malaysia during year 1991 to 2002 periods are shown in Table 4.20. The GDP annual rate is 5.95% while GDP per Capita is 3.30%.
95
Table 4.20 Gross Domestic Products (GDP) from 1991 to 2002

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Million) 116,093 126,408 138,916 151,714 166,625 183,292 196,714 182,237 193,422 209,959 210,640 219,309 5.95
Gross Domestic Product Per Capita (GDP/P) (RM)
No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
6,259 6,638 7,101 7,543 8,054 8,659 9,079 8,216 8,516 8,936 8,772 8,942 3.30
4.2.9 Employment
Referring to Table 4.21 it can be seen that in Malaysia, the unemployment rates decrease 0.55% per year as the result of 3.08% annual growth rate of employment. Number of employment in 2002 achieved 9.5 million from only 7.0 million in 1992. Compared to the population annual growth rate of 2.57%, the employment rate is relatively higher.
96
Table 4.21 Employment in All Sectors from 1991 to 2002
No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Year 1992 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Employment ('000) 7,047.8 7,383.4 7,645.0 8,399.3 8,569.2 8,599.6 8,837.8 9,321.7 9,535.0 9,542.6 3.08
Unemployment Rates (%) 3.7 4.1 3.1 2.5 2.5 3.2 3.4 3.1 3.6 3.5 -0.55
4.3 Review of HNDP and SMURT KL Study
The HNDP (Highway Network Development Plan) Study was conducted from May 1991 to February 1993 with the technical cooperation from the Government of Japan (JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency). The HNDP Study targeted the following two objectives covering the whole of Malaysia (Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak). To formulate a development plan of the national highway network up to the year 2010;
97
To prioritize new and improved linkages in the planned network with respect to technical and economic consideration, and to formulate a road development program. The highway network development plan was approved by the cabinet and incorporated as the basic guidelines for the future development of highways in the Mid-Term Review of the Sixth Malaysian Plan. Subsequently, the Government of Malaysia and the Government of Japan through JICA had conducted another transportation study called A Study on Integrated Urban Transportation Strategies for Environmental Improvement in Kuala Lumpur. The study started in March 1997 and ended in February 1999. The study is also called as Strategies for Managing Urban
Transport in Kuala Lumpur, and the abbreviation of the study is known as
SMURT-KL. The objectives of SMURT-KL study are: To formulate urban transportation policies and strategies to alleviate traffic congestion and to improve the quality of the urban environment by promoting the usage of public transportation; and To formulate an Urban Transportation Master Plan in Kuala Lumpur Metropolitan Area for the period up to the year 2020. The target year of the Master Plan was defined as the year 2020, with and intermediate target year of 2010.
98
4.3.1 Trip Production
The trip production is defined as the process of estimating the total trip generated within the study area. Trips are usually thought of as being two-way excursions originating at the trip-makers home. In general, trips to be produced by residential development and attracted by economic or other activity. Trips are normally stratified by purpose: for each trip type, the number produced in a particular zone is assumed to depend on the size and characteristics of the zones resident population. Where there is more than one predictive factor (x), this is accomplished through multiple regression. In this technique, a function of the form is fitted to data. j is coefficient to be determined through regression analysis.
= 0 + 1 x1 + 2 x 2 + . . . + k x k
(3.1)
In the HNDP Study, the multiple linear regression is selected over other method (such as grow factor method, trip production rate method, or the vehicle based method) to model trip production. This is due to the high correlation and no major difference among the results from the total passenger and the freight demand and the low reliability as the growth factor and the trip production method. The multiple regression utilize the population, employment, GDP, and GDP per capita. The trip production model as well as the correlation coefficient from the HNDP Study is illustrated in Table 4.22.
99
4.3.2 Trip Generation and Attraction Model
The trip generation is defined as the number of trips generated by each traffic zones per unit of time and the trip attraction is defined as those attracted be each traffic zone per unit of time in the study area. The total trip generation and attraction by zone is controlled by trip production whereby passenger and the freight are converted into vehicle trips. The trip generation step is to estimate the number of vehicle-trips, which will begin or end in each traffic analysis zone within a study area for a typical day of the target year. Each trip has two ends, which are described in terms of trip purposes such as work trips, school trips, shopping trips, and social or recreational trips. Trip ends at residential zones are referred to as productions, and trip ends at nonresidential zones are referred to as attractions. According to land use, trips can also be classified as home-based or as non home-based. A home-based trip consists of trips that either begin or end at a resident zone. For example, a home-based work trip would be considered to have a trip end produced in the resident zone and attracted to the work zone. A non-home-based trip consists of trips that neither begin nor end at a resident zone. Commonly used methods for trip generation include regression models, trip-rate analysis models, and cross-classification models. The equations for the tip Generation and Attraction Model for the Macro and the Micro Level is shown in Table 4.23 and Table 4.24 respectively. Table 4.25 shows the average vehicle occupancy and average load factor.
100
Table 4.22 Trip Production Regression Model Types of Transport Mode Passenger Passenger Car Bus Rail Air All Modes Freight Lorry Rail Air Water All Modes -31,265 + 8.961 GDP 7.742 EMP -1,042 + 0.0449 GDP -19 + 0.00013 GDP + 0.00447 EMP -4,928 + 0.0569 GDP + 1034 EMP -31,895 + 9.150 GDP 8.601 EMP 0.842 0.808 0.987 0.989 0.845 -165,938 + 69.39 POP + 33.293 GDP -275,744 + 89.970 POP + 2.903 GDP -1,872 + 0.987 GDP/P -3,644 + 1.365 GDP/P -102,335 + 158.671 POP + 36.371 GDP 0.989 0.953 0.764 0.987 0.991 Formula Coefficient
Source: HDNP Study, 1991 Note: EMP = Employment POP = Population GDP = Gross Domestic Product GDP/P = Gross Domestic Product per Capita
101
Table 4.23 General Equation for the Trip Generation/Attraction Model (Macro Level) Vehicle Type Generation / Attraction Car Generation Attraction Bus Generation Attraction Lorry Generation Attraction
Source: HDNP Study, 1991 Note: ZEMP = Employment by Zone ZGDP = GDP by Zone
Formula
Coefficient
-112170 + 1216.71 ZEMP -112133 + 1216.63 ZEMP 253.73 ZEMP 254.1 ZEMP 20720 + 17.31 GDP 20766 + 17.31 GDP
0.945 0.945 0.838 0.838 0.803 0.803
Table 4.24 General Equation for the Trip Generation/Attraction Model (Micro Level) Vehicle Type Generation/ Attraction Car Generation Attraction Bus Generation Attraction Lorry Generation Attraction
Source: HDNP Study, 1991 Note: EMP = Employment POP = Population GDP = Gross Domestic Product
Formula
Coefficient
75.84 POP + 962.18 EMP 73.895 POP + 967.514 EMP 4.216 POP + 1.485 GDP 4.156 POP + 1.500 GDP 48.814 POP + 164.706 EMP 47.374 POP + 168.298 EMP
0.945 0.945 0.838 0.838 0.803 0.803
102
Table 4.25 Average Vehicle Occupancy and Load Factor Vehicle Type Car Bus Lorry
Source: HDNP Study, 1991
Average Vehicle Occupancy 1.8 28 -
Average Load Factor 1.9
4.3.3 Trip Production Rates
Besides providing the trip production and as well as the trip generation and trip attraction, the HNDP Study also highlighted the average daily trip production rates as shown in Table 4.26.
Table 4.26 Average Daily Trip Production Rates by Vehicle Type in Malaysia
State Perlis Kedah P. Pinang Perak Kuala Lumpur Selangor N. Sembilan Melaka Johor Pahang Terengganu Kelantan Malaysia P.Car 3.9 3.5 3.5 3.8 2.8 3.1 3.6 3.0 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.4 Goods Veh 4.5 3.6 3.7 4.6 3.0 3.5 3.2 2.9 3.8 3.7 3.3 3.9 3.6 Bus 7.8 7.2 6.8 5.7 6.9 8.4 9.2 5.6 7.1 6.5 5.3 4.6 7.1 Taxi 7.4 6.9 9.2 8.2 6.8 5.1 5.8 4.1 5.8 4.4 4.5 5.7 6.1 All Vehicle 4.2 3.7 3.6 4.0 2.9 3.3 3.6 3.0 3.8 3.8 3.5 3.8 3.5

103
4.3.4 Model for Forecasting Vehicles
HNDP study provides linear regression model for forecasting number of vehicles by areas that is obtained from the analysis of number of vehicles by states. The areas stated here is for Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak. The linear regression models are illustrated in Table 4.27.
Table 4.27 Number of Vehicles Forecasting Models in Malaysia Vehicle Type P. Car Bus Lorry Formula -10,981+ 24.9448 GDP -166 + 1.6175 POP Coefficient 0.944 0.730 0.909
-1,805 + 7.2319 GDP
4.3.5 Modal Share
Referring to SMURT-KL study, the share of the public mode of transport in the Kuala Lumpur metropolitan area was estimated at 24.0 percent in 2000, 23.6 percent in 2010, and 25.6 percent in 2020 under the Base case (as shown in Table 4.28). In Base case, both highway and public transportation network was assumed to have been completed according to the schedule.
104
Table 4.28 Modal Share in the Kuala Lumpur Metropolitan Area

Year 1997 Case HIS WHO 2000 BASE MP WO 2010 BASE MP WO 2020 BASE MP Motorcycle 1162 (23.2%) 1464 (22.4%) 1461 (22.3%) 1467 (22.4%) 1391 (17.2%) 1411 (17.5%) 1411 (17.5%) 1307 (13.3%) 1316 (13.4%) 1316 Car 2876 (57.4%) 3520 (53.8%) 3514 (53.7%) 3490 (53.3%) 4722 (58.4%) 4770 (59.0%) 4622 (57.2%) 5986 (60.8%) 6013 (61.0%) 5686 Conventional Bus 943 (18.8%) 1075 (16.4%) 1084 (16.6%) 1094 (16.7%) 1346 (16.7%) 1312 (16.2%) 1408 (17.4%) 1674 (17.0%) 1632 (16.6%) 1837 Trunk Bus and Rail 28 (0.6%) 486 (7.4%) 487 (7.4%) 494 (7.5%) 622 (7.7%) 592 (7.3%) 643 (8.0%) 883 (9.0%) 891 (9.0%) 1013 Private Mode of Transport 4038 (80.6%) 4984 (76.1%) 4975 (76.0%) 4957 (75.7%) 6113 (75.7%) 6181 (76.5%) 6033 (74.6%) 7292 (74.0%) 7329 (74.4%) 7002 Public Mode of Transport 971 (19.4%) 1561 (23.9%) 1570 (24.0%) 1587 (24.2%) 1968 (24.4%) 1904 (23.6%) 2052 (25.4%) 2556 (26.0%) 2523 (25.6%) 2850 Total 5009 (100.0%) 6545 (100.0%) 6545 (100.0%) 6545 (100.0%) 8084 (100.0%) 8084 (100.0%) 8084 (100.0%) 9852 (100.0%) 9852 (100.0%) 9852
Source: WO: BASE: MP:
(13.4%) (57.7%) (18.6%) (10.3%) (71.1%) (28.9%) (100.0%) SMURT-KL Estimate Without area pricing, trunk bus system, and new highways With trunk bus system and highway development but without area pricing scheme SMURT-KL Master Plan Case (including area pricing scheme, highway development, trunk bus system Damansara-Cheras LRT development in 2020). Kuala Lumpur metropolitan area; the city of Kuala Lumpur and its conurbation area.
4.4 Future Socioeconomic Framework
The likely future changes in the travel demand for each traffic zone in the study area are assessed by the examination of the control totals for the study area. The control total is established by making the appraisal of the changes in the following socio-economic framework and indicators. Existing and Future Population; Existing and Future GDP ; Existing and Future Employment; and Historical Traffic Growth.
105
Table 4.29 shows the forecasted population in Malaysia. The average annual population growth for the period 1991 2002 was approximately 2.57%. The population of the country is expected to reach 38.748 million by the year 2020. Meanwhile, Table 4.30 provides the forecasted employment within the study area. The employment is expected to reach 16.465 million people by the year 2020 with an average annual growth rate of 3.08%. For the Gross Domestic Product, the forecasted data is illustrated in Table 4.31.
Table 4.29 Projected Populations, 2005 - 2020
No
1 2 3 4
Year 2005 2010 2015 2020
Population in '000 26,469 30,055 34,126 38,748
Source: Consultants estimation, 2004
Table 4.30 Projected Employment from year 2005 to 2020
No 1 2 3 4
Year 2005 2010 2015 2020
Employment ('000) 10,451 12,161 14,150 16,465
Unemployment Rates (%) 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.2
106
Table 4.31 Projected Gross Domestic Product (GDP) from year 2005 to 2020
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Million) 260,854 348,310 465,087 621,016
Gross Domestic Product Per Capita (GDP/P) (RM)
No 1 2 3 4
Year 2005 2010 2015 2020
9,856 11,591 13,631 16,031
4.5 Analysis for Transportation Demand
Referring to the HNDP Study as mentioned above, there are several models for estimating the trip generation within the study area. Trip generation could be estimated in the unit of person trips (for people movement) and tonnage (for goods movement) and sometimes in vehicular units depending on the purposes of the study. In this study, it will concentrate on the number of vehicles particularly for passenger car, bus and commercial vehicles. Three types of techniques are used in determining the number of vehicles, namely Method 1, Method 2 and Method 3. In the first method, the regression model as depicted in Table 4.22 was utilized. From these regression models, the number of passengers is obtained and then using the vehicle occupancy of each mode, the number of vehicles was determined. In the second method, the model for forecasting number of vehicles as shown in Table 4.27 was utilized. In this method the number of vehicles was determined faster. Method 3 was obtained by developing models to forecast number of vehicles and/or passengers based on the existing data. However, the incorporated parameters
107
in the models still using the parameters of the models from the HNDP study. This is because the parameters that significantly affected the number of vehicles and/or passengers had been determined and validated in the study. Nevertheless, in order to obtain the optimum results, three types of techniques for determining the number of vehicles were compared. Moreover, the method used to judge whether one technique is better than the other is based on the disparity of the numbers from modeled versus observed and also the linear correlation of the model.
4.5.1 Method 1
Table 4.32, Table 4.33, and Table 4.34 show the number of observed and modeled vehicles from year 1991 to 2002 by utilizing Method 1. The table also provides the annual growth rates between the observed and modeled data. Figure 4.8, Figure 4.9, and Figure 4.10 depict the scatter-plot and R-square of observed and modeled number of vehicles.
108
Table 4.32 Observed Vs. Modeled Passenger Car Volumes (Method 1)

P.Car ('000) Observed 1,863.2 1,983.0 2,132.3 2,350.1 2,608.6 2,946.0 3,333.4 3,517.5 3,852.7 4,212.6 4,624.6 5,069.4 9.53 Modelled 2,770.1 2,980.0 3,231.4 3,489.2 3,787.3 4,114.1 4,381.5 4,133.5 4,360.9 4,688.5 4,729.5 4,909.7 5.34
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Passenger Car Method 1

6000
5000
Modelled Number
4000
3000
2000 R Sq Linear = 0.913 1000
0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Observed Numbers
Figure 4.8 Scatter-plot of Observed vs. Modeled Passenger Car Volumes (Method 1)
109
Table 4.33 Observed Vs. Modeled Bus Volumes (Method 1)

Bus Observed 26,147 27,827 29,924 33,529 36,000 38,965 43,444 45,643 47,674 48,662 49,771 51,158 6.29 Modelled 61,784 64,447 67,418 70,506 73,906 77,176 80,165 80,315 83,184 86,708 89,147 91,700 3.66
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Bus Method 1
100000 90000 80000
Modelled Numbers
70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000 R Sq Linear = 0.968
Observed Numbers
Figure 4.9 Scatter-plot of Observed vs. Modeled Bus Volumes (Method 1)

110
Table 4.34 Observed Vs. Modeled Commercial Veh. (Method 1)

Commercial Observed 333,674 358,808 440,723 512,165 574,622 599,149 642,976 665,284 689,668 713,148 7.89 Modelled 551,007 608,631 738,249 813,783 876,393 807,991 859,772 935,794 938,137 978,992 5.92
Year 1992 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Commercial Method 1
1600000 1500000 1400000 1300000 1200000 1100000 1000000 900000 800000 700000 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 1400000 1600000 100000 300000 500000 700000 900000 1100000 1300000 1500000 R Sq Linear = 0.936
Modelled Number
Observed Number
Figure 4.10 Scatter-plot of Observed vs. Modeled Commercial Vehicle (Method 1)
111
4.5.2 Method 2
Similar to the analysis in Method 1, in this method the observed and modeled volumes were analyzed. Table 4.35, Table 4.36, and Table 4.37 show the number of observed and modeled vehicles form year 1991 to 2002. While Figure 4.11, Figure 4.12, and Figure 4.13 depict the scatter-plot and R-square of observed and modeled number of vehicles.
Table 4.35 Observed vs. Modeled Passenger Car Volumes (Method 2)

Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
112

6000
5000
Modelled Numbers
4000
3000
2000 R Sq Linear = 0.895 1000
0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Observed Numbers
Figure 4.11 Scatter-plot of Observed vs Modeled Passenger Car Volumes (Method 2) Table 4.36 Observed vs. Modeled Bus Volumes (Method 2)
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
113
Bus Method 2
100000 90000 80000
Modelled Numbers
70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000 R Sq Linear = 0.955
Observed Numbers
Figure 4.12 Scatter-plot of Observed vs. Modeled Bus Volumes (Method 2) Table 4.37 Observed vs. Modeled Commercial Vehicle (Method 2)
Commercial Observed 313,514 333,674 358,808 393,833 440,723 512,165 574,622 599,149 642,976 665,284 689,668 713,148 7.76 Modelled 837,768 912,365 1,002,822 1,095,375 1,203,210 1,323,744 1,420,811 1,316,115 1,397,004 1,516,597 1,521,522 1,584,216 5.96
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
114
Commercial Method 2
1600000 1500000 1400000 1300000 1200000 1100000 1000000 900000 800000 700000 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 1400000 1600000 100000 300000 500000 700000 900000 1100000 1300000 1500000 R Sq Linear = 0.946
Modelled Number
Observed Number
4.5.3 Method 3
As mentioned earlier, Method 3 was obtained by developing models to forecast number of vehicles and/or passengers based on the existing data. Nevertheless, the parameters in the models are the same as that used in the HNDP study. The parameters involve population, GDP and GDP per capita. The multiple linear regression type was adopted for the model. The available historical number of vehicles and passengers from year 1991 to 2002 had been analyzed to develop the model. The number of vehicles consists of number of passenger cars, buses, and commercial vehicles. As for passenger data, the numbers of rail and air transport passengers were analyzed.
115
The following tables illustrate number of passenger cars, buses, commercial vehicles, and also numbers of rail and air transport passengers till year 2002.
Table 4.38 No. of Cars, Buses and Commercial Vehicle Year 1991 to 2002
Types of Traffic Mode P.Car 1,863.2 1,983.0 2,132.3 2,350.1 2,608.6 2,946.0 3,333.4 3,517.5 3,852.7 4,212.6 4,624.6 5,069.4 9.53 Bus 26,147 27,827 29,924 33,529 36,000 38,965 43,444 45,643 47,674 48,662 49,771 51,158 6.29 Commercial 313,514 333,674 358,808 393,833 440,723 512,165 574,622 599,149 642,976 665,284 689,668 713,148 7.76
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Table 4.39 No. of Daily Rail Passenger Year 1998 to 2002

RAIL PASSENGER PER DAY KTMB 13,490 11,901 10,479 9,619 9,416 LRT 20,000 30,000 110,000 140,000 145,000 TOTAL 33,490 41,901 120,479 149,619 154,416
YEAR 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Source: Consultants estimation from KTMB (2002) and Yusoff (2003)
116
Table 4.40 No. of Daily Air Passenger

Average Daily Air Passenger 54,663 59,576 62,686 66,281 72,165 79,105 85,686 73,994 77,597 86,749 85,991 89,534
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Source: Consultants estimation from MAB data (2002)
The trip generation models for Method 3 are summarized in Table 4.41. These regression models are used to obtain the numbers of passenger car, bus and lorry as well as the number of rail and air transport passengers per day.
117
Table 4.41 Method 3 Regression Model Types of Transport Mode Passenger Car Bus Lorry Rail Air -9829378 + 662.701 POP 7.1 GDP -38218 + 2.813 POP + 0.102 GDP -201949 + 4.133 GDP -1353404 + 167.51 GDP/P -21093.4 + 11.861 GDP/P 0.989 0.975 0.946 0.791 0.955 Formula R-sq
Source: Consultants Estimation Note: GDP = Gross Domestic Product POP = Population
GDP/P = Gross Domestic Product per Capita
The following Table 4.42, Table 4.43, and Table 4.44 show the number of observed and modeled vehicles or passengers by utilizing Method 3. Figure 4.14, Figure 4.15, and Figure 4.16 depict the scatter-plot and R-square of observed and modeled number of vehicles or passengers.
118
Table 4.42 Observed vs. Modeled Passenger Car Volumes (Method 3)

Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)

6000
5000
Modelled Number
4000
3000
2000 R Sq Linear = 0.989 1000
0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Observed Number
Figure 4.14 Scatter-plot of Observed vs. Modeled Passenger Car (Method 3)
119
Table 4.43 Observed vs. Modeled Bus Volumes (Method 3)

Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Bus Method 3
100000 90000 80000
Modelled Number
70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000 R Sq Linear = 0.975
Observed Number
Figure 4.15 Scatter-plot of Observed vs. Modeled Bus (Method 3)
120
Table 4.44 Observed vs. Modeled Commercial Vehicle (Method 3)

Commercial Observed 313,514 333,674 358,808 393,833 440,723 512,165 574,622 599,149 642,976 665,284 689,668 713,148 7.76 Modelled 277,863 320,495 372,191 425,085 486,712 555,597 611,070 551,237 597,464 665,812 668,626 704,455 8.83
Year 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
Annual Growth (%)
Commercial Method 3
1600000 1400000 1200000
Modelled Number
1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000 0 0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000 1200000 1400000 1600000
R Sq Linear = 0.946
Observed Number
121
4.5.4 Summary of Method 1, Method 2 and Method 3
According to the simple linear regression of the three methods that had been employed as shown in Table 4.45, it could be concluded that all methods have good fitness with the observed volumes (in this case, the observed data was obtained from the official statistic report). This is based on the R square values. However, as can be observed from the scatter-plots of the observed and the predicted volumes for Method 1 and Method 2, there is a correction factor that needs to be applied in order to bring the predicted volumes to be close to the actual observed volumes. Although the R-square values are showing good correlation between the respective sets of data, however, the models do not give good prediction of the forecasted volumes. Methods 1 and 2 based on models derived from the HNDP study appear not to be able to give a good prediction of the forecasted volumes. Results obtained by using the models developed based on more recent data as shown in Method 3 indicate less disparity between the modeled and the observed trips and a better coefficient of correlation. Therefore, Method 3 was chosen to be employed in this study.
122
Table 4.45 Trips Generation Models Types of Transport Mode
Method Method 1
Formula -165,938 + 69.39 POP + 33.293 GDP -10,981+ 24.9448 GDP -9,829,378 + 662.701 POP 7.1 GDP -275,744 + 89.970 POP + 2.903 GDP -166 + 1.6175 POP
Coefficient 0.913 0.895 0.989 0.968 0.955 0.975 0.912 0.940 0.946
Passenger Car
Method 2 Method 3 Method 1
Bus
Method 2 Method 3 Method 1
-38,218 + 2.813 POP + 0.102 GDP -31,265 + 8.961 GDP 7.742 EMP -1,805 + 7.2319 GDP -201,949 + 4.133 GDP
Lorry
Method 2 Method 3
4.5.5 Future Total Trip Generation
The traffic projections shall take into account present and potential traffic generating sources based on existing and future economic development plans, land use development plans as well as committed and future road schemes, population and historical traffic growth and other socioeconomic factors. As mentioned earlier, the model was developed based on the HNDP Study in year 1991 and the validation process utilized the data from year 1991 to 2002. However, in order to acquire an optimum result in forecasting the future trip generation as well as taking into consideration the model validation using the existing data, the HNDP 1991 regression model was revised. The new regression
123
models for forecasting the future trip generation was formulated in Method 3 of this study. After employing the model and the forecasted population and socioeconomic data in future, the future trip generation was obtained. Numbers of passengers by type of modes are shown in Table 4.46. The number of trips obtained as shown in Table 4.46 is referred to as Do Nothing Scenario. In this scenario the proportion of passengers using private and public modes was based on the trends in year 1991 to 2002. As seen in Table 5.16, the proportion of passengers using passenger car is about 80% of the total passengers generated. The proportion of passenger car is decreased from year to year. It is estimated that passenger using private car only at 79.66% of the total passengers by year 2020.
Table 4.46 Forecasted No. of Passengers by Type of Modes

Types of Traffic Mode P. Car Bus Rail Air TOTAL No. of Passenger per day by year 2005 10,547,847 1,759,738 297,527 95,805 12,700,917 2010 13,706,961 2,291,907 588,159 116,384 16,703,411 2015 17,070,648 2,946,068 929,955 140,586 21,087,256 2020 20,591,743 3,755,477 1,331,920 169,048 25,848,189
124
Table 4.47 Forecasted modal split by type of modes

Types of Traffic Mode P. Car Bus Rail Air TOTAL Modal Split by Year (%) 2005 83.05 13.86 2.34 0.75 100 2010 82.06 13.72 3.52 0.70 100 2015 80.95 13.97 4.41 0.67 100 2020 79.66 14.53 5.15 0.65 100
According to Table 4.47, it could be seen that passenger car has the highest proportion in transport modal split in future. However, this would occur if there is no adjustment from the transport authority in terms of the share of modal usage.
4.5.6 Modal Split Scenarios
The transport authorities had set up a target for modal split amongst the land transport modes, particularly for private and public transport (bus and rail). For example, as mentioned earlier, in SMURT-KL study, it was targeted around 70 (P.Car) : 30 (Public) by year 2020 under MP Case option. The Malaysian Government plans to set up a modal split target of 40 (P.Car) : 60 (Public). However, according to experience in developed countries and the transportation demand analysis as mentioned above it is not easy to achieve the target. Therefore, some scenarios of transport modal split between passenger car and public transport need to be set up in order to illustrate the impact of modal share on number of vehicles (referred as Do Something Scenario). Afterwards, based on the
125
scenarios of modal split as well as the number of vehicles the future transport infrastructures could be determined. The adopted future modal split scenarios for this study is shown in Table 4.48. The scenarios based on the future modal split scenarios estimated in SMURT-KL study under Base Case option. The modal split target of 40 (P.Car) : 60 (Public) by Malaysian Government is also taken into consideration.
Table 4.48 Future Modal Split Scenarios

Public Transport (%) Bus 16.6 16.4 16.2 16.4 40.0 Rail 7.4 7.4 7.3 8.2 20.0 Total 24.0 23.8 23.5 24.6 60.0
Year 2005 2010 2015 2020 Target
P. Car (%) 76.0 76.3 76.5 75.5 40.0
Total (%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source: Consultants estimation based on SMURT-KL study (1999)
4.5.7 Future Trip Generation Based on Scenarios
The following tables show the forecasted no. of passengers as well as the forecasted no. of vehicles and the total vehicle trips.
126
Table 4.49 Forecasted No. of Vehicles by Type of Modes (Do Nothing Scenario)
Types of Traffic Mode P. Car Bus Lorry No. of Vehicle by Year 2005 5,859,915 62,848 876,161 2010 7,614,978 81,854 1,237,616 2015 9,483,693 105,217 1,720,256 2020 11,439,857 134,124 2,364,709
Table 4.50 Forecasted No. of Vehicles by Type of Modes (Do Something Scenario)
Types of Traffic Mode P. Car Bus Lorry No. of Vehicle by Year 2005 5,322,158 74,730 876,161 2010 7,026,449 97,153 1,237,616 2015 8,902,335 121,191 1,720,256 2020 10,763,840 150,406 2,364,709 Target (40 : 60) 2020 5,706,476 366,845 2,364,709
Table 4.51 Forecasted Trip Generation Rates by Type of Modes

Types of Traffic Mode P. Car Bus Lorry Future Trip Generation Rates 2005 3.1 6.8 3.9 2010 3.0 6.7 4.0 2015 2.9 6.6 4.1 2020 2.8 6.5 4.2
Source: Consultants estimation based HNDP study (1991)
4.5.8 Vehicle-Kilometer
According to HNDP Study, the mean trip length for the total vehicle population is 17.2 km. The trip length distribution for passenger car and taxi display a similar pattern to the total. For goods vehicle, the average trip length is found to be
127
about 21.5 km. Table 4.52 illustrates the forecasted Vehicle-km for Do Nothing Scenario while Table 5.22 for Do Something Scenario respectively.
Table 4.52 Total Vehicle-km of the Traffic (Do Nothing Scenario)

Types of Traffic Mode P. Car Bus Lorry Total Vehicle-kilometer 2005 312,450,674 12,820,947 73,466,060 2010 392,932,873 16,452,616 106,434,970 2015 473,046,626 20,832,906 151,640,538 2020 550,943,528 26,154,217 213,533,222
Table 4.53 Total Vehicle-km of the Traffic (Do Something Scenario)

Types of Traffic Mode P. Car Bus Lorry Total Vehicle-kilometer 2005 283,777,489 15,244,983 73,466,060 2010 362,564,759 19,527,670 106,434,970 2015 444,048,467 23,995,907 151,640,538 2020 518,386,527 29,329,247 213,533,222 Target (40 : 60) 2020 274,823,871 71,534,749 213,533,222
4.6 Fuel Consumption In Transportation Sector
In general, the fuel consumption by transportation modes are calculated by multiplying the trip length of vehicle traveling with the fuel consumed per vehiclekm. The fuel consumption of passenger car, bus and lorry adopted in this study is based on the average fuel consumption per vehicle-km analyzed from the U.S. Highway Statistics, 2000. Table 4.54 and Table 4.55 provide details on the data.
128
Table 4.54 Summary Statistics for Passenger Cars, 1990 - 2000

Registration (thousands) 133,700 128,300 126,581 127,327 127,883 128,387 129,728 129,749 131,839 132,432 133,621 Veh-Travel (million miles) 1,408,266 1,358,185 1,371,569 1,374,709 1,406,089 1,438,294 1,469,854 1,502,556 1,549,577 1,569,100 1,601,914 Fuel Use Fuel Use per Fuel Use per Veh-km (liter) 0.11620 0.11139 0.11222 0.11472 0.11354 0.11133 0.11077 0.10941 0.10883 0.10986 0.10707
YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Annual Growth (%)
(million gallons) Veh-mile (gallon) 69,568 64,318 65,436 67,047 67,874 68,072 69,221 69,892 71,695 73,283 72,916 0.04940 0.04736 0.04771 0.04877 0.04827 0.04733 0.04709 0.04652 0.04627 0.04670 0.04552
-0.01
1.30
0.47
-0.82
-0.82
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, FHWA, 2000
Table 4.55 Summary Statistics for Two-Axle Trucks, 1990 - 2000

Registration (thousands) 48,275 53,033 57,091 59,994 62,904 65,738 69,134 70,224 71,330 75,356 79,085 Veh-Travel (million miles) 574,571 649,394 706,863 745,750 764,634 790,029 816,540 850,739 868,175 901,022 924,018 Fuel Use Fuel Use per Fuel Use per Veh-km (liter) 0.14579 0.13843 0.13620 0.13516 0.13570 0.13578 0.13641 0.13656 0.13672 0.13799 0.13449
YEAR 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Annual Growth (%)
(million gallons) Veh-mile (gallon) 35,611 38,217 40,929 42,851 44,112 45,605 47,354 49,389 50,462 52,859 52,832 0.06198 0.05885 0.05790 0.05746 0.05769 0.05773 0.05799 0.05805 0.05812 0.05867 0.05718
5.06
4.87
4.02
-0.80
-0.80
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, FHWA, 2000
129
Referring to the data from the Road Transport Department 1999 2002, for the new vehicle registration, 57.23% of the total vehicles are passenger car using petrol while 0.22% is passenger car using diesel. Bus is only 0.03% of the total vehicle registered with more then 90% of the bus using diesel. Table 4.56 and 4.57 depicts the new vehicle registration based on fuel type in year 1999, 2000 and 2002 respectively.
Table 4.56 No. of New Vehicle Registration Based on Fuel Types

No. of Vehicle Registration Based on Fuel Type Types of Traffic Mode Petrol P. Car Bus Lorry Motorcycle Others 294,928 22 3,923 236,759 2,274 1999 Diesel 1,548 223 4,998 12 6,348 Petrol 338,866 24 5,257 238,672 2,699 2000 Diesel 1,061 205 10,472 15 9,431 Petrol 409,224 10 4,271 222,661 5,014 2002 Diesel 1,290 102 3,250 14 10,790
Source: Consultants estimation from Transport Statistics Malaysia
Table 4.57 Proportion of new vehicle registration based on fuel types

Proportion of Vehicle based on Fuel Type (%) Types of Traffic Mode Petrol P. Car Bus Lorry Motorcycle Others 53.523 0.004 0.712 42.966 0.413 1999 Diesel 0.281 0.040 0.907 0.002 1.152 Petrol 55.854 0.004 0.866 39.339 0.445 2000 Diesel 0.175 0.034 1.726 0.002 1.554 Petrol 62.322 0.002 0.650 33.910 0.764 2002 Diesel 0.196 0.016 0.495 0.002 1.643 Average Petrol 57.233 0.003 0.743 38.738 0.540 Diesel 0.217 0.030 1.043 0.002 1.450
Source: Consultants estimation from Transport Statistics Malaysia
130
4.6.1 Do Nothing and Do Something Fuel Consumption
The forecasted number of vehicles by types of fuel is shown as in Table 4.58 and Table 4.59. While the total fuel consumption by passenger car, bus and lorry is determined as in Table 4.60 and Table 4.61. The fuel consumption is also based on Do Nothing and Do Something scenarios. Figure 4.17 and Figure 4.18 present the forecasted total petrol and diesel consumed by the vehicles in year 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020 respectively. From the figures, it is seen that if the modal split set up is achieved (by year 2020), the petrol consumption may be reduced by about 4.7%. However, the decrease of diesel consumption is not quite significant although the modal split scenario is achieved. The reduction of diesel consumption may be only around 1.9%. The significant decrease of petrol consumption would occur if the set up modal split target of 40 (P.Car) : 60 (Public) by Government of Malaysia is achieved. Under the 40:60 modal split, the petrol consumption may be reduced by about 40% and although it is a significant decrease in petrol consumption the increase of diesel, however, is not relatively high (only 27%).
131
Table 4.58 Forecasted No. of Vehicles (Do Nothing Scenario)

Type of Fuel Petrol 2005 Diesel Petrol 2010 Diesel Petrol 2015 Diesel Petrol 2020 Diesel 43,294 121,327 1,722,671 35,891 11,396,563 95,177 12,797 1,253,192 642,038 28,819 9,447,802 74,044 10,039 901,593 467,064 22,177 7,586,159 56,851 7,810 638,276 336,023 Forecasted No. of Vehicle Based on Fuel Type P.Car 5,837,738 Bus 5,997 Lorry 237,885
Year
Table 4.59 Forecasted No. of Vehicles (Do Something Scenario)

Forecasted No. of Vehicle Based on Fuel Type P.Car 5,302,017 20,142 6,999,857 26,592 8,868,644 33,691 10,723,104 40,736 5,684,879 21,596 Bus 7,130 67,600 9,270 87,883 11,563 109,628 14,351 136,055 35,002 331,842 Lorry 237,885 638,276 336,023 901,593 467,064 1,253,192 642,038 1,722,671 642,038 1,722,671
Year
Type of Fuel Petrol
2005 Diesel Petrol 2010 Diesel Petrol 2015 Diesel Petrol 2020 Diesel Petrol Target Diesel
132
Table 4.60 Forecasted Fuel Consumption (Do Nothing Scenario)

Type of Fuel Petrol 2005 Diesel Petrol 2010 Diesel Petrol 2015 Diesel Petrol 2020 Diesel 208,506 3,548,807 18,703,126 179,025 54,885,847 2,826,771 374,325 13,282,018 13,326,857 148,706 47,125,637 2,232,419 298,165 9,322,515 9,464,063 118,247 39,144,581 1,739,646 235,474 6,434,807 6,642,731 Forecasted Fuel Consumption by Type of Mode (Liters) P.Car 31,126,820 Bus 183,496 Lorry 4,585,103
Year
Table 4.61 Forecasted Fuel Consumption (Do Something Scenario)

Type of Fuel Petrol 2005 Diesel Petrol 2010 Diesel Petrol 2015 Diesel Petrol 2020 Diesel Petrol Target Diesel 104,008 9,706,390 18,703,126 196,184 27,378,380 3,979,620 1,023,822 18,703,126 13,326,857 168,051 51,642,468 3,255,951 419,767 13,282,018 13,326,857 137,213 44,236,796 2,649,666 343,435 9,322,515 9,464,063 107,396 36,119,263 2,068,558 279,485 6,434,807 6,642,731 Forecasted Fuel Consumption by Type of Mode (Liters) P.Car 28,270,353 Bus 218,190 Lorry 4,585,103
Year
133
41,729,059
2020
68,587,030 65,389,093
2015 YA E R 2010
56,887,866 54,044,294
46,022,786 43,041,478
TARGET 40:60
2005
35,895,419 33,073,645
DO N OTH G IN DO SOM ETH G IN
PETROL (LITER/DA Y)
Figure 4.17 Forecasted Petrol Consumption by Road Transport Sector (liter/day)
2020
28,513,524 22,460,439 22,878,930
2015 YEAR 2010
16,287,814 16,706,020
11,703,640 12,109,394
TARGET 40:60
2005
8,292,700 8,610,760
DO NOTHING DO SOMETHING DIESEL (LITER/DA Y)
Figure 4.18 Forecasted Diesel Consumption by Road Transport Sector (liter/day)
134
4.7 Energy Consumption in Transportation Sector
In this study, the future trip generation (both person trips and vehicle trips) was obtained by employing the trip generation model that was formulated in the previous studies. By utilizing the models, besides having the number of trips, several trips characteristics of the study area was also established. This involves the average travel distance of trip makers (vehicles or passengers). The vehicle-kilometer or passenger-kilometer is the key point in estimating the energy consumed in transportation sector. Table 4.62 below shows the energy use by various types of vehicles based on passenger travel distance.
Table 4.62 Energy Use by Various Types of Vehicles Energy Use No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Vehicle Type (btu/passenger-mile) Single-occupancy automobile New heavy rail Carpool Old heavy rail (existing) Light rail transit Bus Aircraft* 8,360 3,080 2,390 2,320 2,590 1,420 3,666
Source: Grava (2003), * Davis et al (2002)
135
4.7.1 Road Transport
In Section 4.6.1 of this report, the forecasted total fuel consumption by road transport modes till year 2020 has been highlighted. The fuel consumption consists of petrol and diesel. Referring to Davis et al (2002) there is about 125,000 btu in one gallon gasoline and 138,700 btu in one gallon diesel. On the other hand, the National Energy Balance (2000) states that 1000 toe = 43.3 TJ petrol and 1000 toe = 42.496 TJ diesel. After adopting that 1 btu = 1,055 joule, the total energy consumed in road transport sector based on both scenarios could be illustrated as in Figure 7.1 and 7.2. Referring to Figure 4.19 and 4.20, it is seen that in Do Nothing scenario the consumption of petrol would achieve 20,142 ktoe/year and diesel about 7,457 ktoe/year by 2020. While the consumption of petrol would only about 19,203 ktoe/year and diesel at 7,596 ktoe/year in Do Something scenario.
12,254
2020
20,142 19,203
2015
YEAR
16,706 15,871
2010
13,515 12,640
TARGET 40:60 2005

10,541 9,713
DO N OTH G IN DO SOM ETH G IN
PETROL (ktoe/year)
Figure 4.19 Forecasted Petrol Consumption by Road Transport Sector (ktoe/year)
136
9,467
2020
7,457 7,596
2015 YEAR 2010
5,408 5,547
3,886 4,021
TARGET 40:60
2005
2,753 2,859
DO NOTHING DIESEL (ktoe/y ear) DO SOMETHING
Figure 4.20 Forecasted Diesel Consumption by Road Transport Sector (ktoe/year)
4.7.2 Rail Transport
Figure 4.20 shows the forecasted energy consumed by rail transport until year 2020. The rail transport mode involves the intercity, commuter and transit. Most of the rail transport passengers choose transit as their transport mode. Referring to KTMB data, it was estimated that the intercity passenger travel distance is about 300km. While the travel distance for transit passengers was estimated only 10km in average.
Table 4.63 Forecasted Energy Consumption of Rail Transport

Energy Consumption (ktoe/year) 2005 55 2010 110 2015 173 2020 248
Types of Traffic Mode Rail
137
4.7.3 Air Transport
According to the data from Malaysia Airports Berhad, it was estimated that the average travel distance for domestic flights is 780km. While for international flights the average travel distance achieve 3,350km. It needs to be emphasised here that the calculation of the forecasted fuel consumption of air transport involve departure and arrival passengers. The forecasted energy consumed by the air transport till year 2020 as shown in Table 4.64
Table 4.64 Forecasted Energy Consumption of Air Transport

Energy Consumption (ktoe/year) 2005 3,629 2010 4,409 2015 5,326 2020 6,404
Types of Traffic Mode Air
4.7.4 Total Energy Consumed by Road, Rail and Air Transport
This section summarizes the forecasted total energy use by road, rail and air transport mode in Malaysia up to the next twenty years. Table 4.65 and Table 4.66 tabulated the total energy use based on the Do Nothing and Do Something scenarios. While Figures 4.21 and 4.22 shows the energy use in graph format.
138
Table 4.65 Forecasted Energy Use in Transportation Sector (Do Nothing)

Types of Transport Mode Road Rail Air TOTAL Energy Use (ktoe/year) 2005 13,295 55 3,629 16,979 2010 17,401 110 4,409 21,920 2015 22,114 173 5,326 27,613 2020 27,599 248 6,404 34,251
Table 4.66 Forecasted Energy Use in Transportation Sector (Do Something)

Energy Use (ktoe/year) 2005 12,572 55 3,629 16,256 2010 16,660 110 4,409 21,179 2015 21,418 173 5,326 26,917 2020 26,799 248 6,404 33,451
Types of Transport Mode Road Rail Air TOTAL
Forecasted Energy Use by Road, Rail & A Transport ir in Malay under Do Nothing Scenario (ktoe per y sia ear)
27,599
22,114 17,401 13,295
3,629 55 110
4,409 173
5,326 248
6,404
YEAR
2005
2010
2015
2020
Total (year 2020) =34,251 ktoe
Rail
Air
Road
Figure 4.21 Forecasted Energy Use in Transportation Sector (Do Nothing)

139
Forecasted Energy Use by Road, Rail & A Transport ir in Malay under Do Som sia ething Scenario (ktoe per y ear)
26,799 21,418 16,660 12,572
3,629 55 110
4,409 173
5,326 248
6,404
YEAR
2005
2010
2015
2020
Total (year 2020) =33,451 ktoe
Rail
Air
Road
Figure 4.22 Forecasted Energy Use in Transportation Sector (Do Something)
4.8 Conclusions and Recommendations
Several points could be concluded from the energy use in the transportation sector study that has been successfully completed. The conclusions are highlighted as follows: In recent times, the transportation sector accounts for about 40% of the total energy consumed in Malaysia. This phenomenon indicates transportation is the highest sector consuming energy; The motorization levels of motorcars in the past ten years increase with 6.78% annual rate while the population growth is only 2.57%; In terms of number of vehicles, even though the number of public transport vehicles has been increasing, the proportion of the public transport vehicles to
140
all vehicles is decreasing. The proportion of public vehicles is only 2.33% of the total road transport vehicles in year 2002; It is only 0.4% of the total new registered passenger car (1999-2002) using diesel while the rest (99.6%) are petrol cars; The transport modal share in 2002 shows that 85.71% of passengers is served by road transport. The rail passengers is about 14.05% while air transport carries 0.24% of the total passengers; Based on the trip generation model developed in this study which is based on the model from the HNDP Study in 1991, it is forecasted that more than 25.8 million person trips per day may use the transportation modes by year 2020 and around 80% would use the passenger car. The total fuel consumption (petrol + diesel) under Do Nothing scenario is around 91 million liters per day while for Do Something scenario is more than 88.3 million liters per day (decrease up to 3%); If a 40 : 60 modal split between Passenger Car and Public transport (Bus + Rail) is achieved in year 2020, the petrol consumption will reduce significantly (up to 40%) while the increase of diesel consumption would only 27%; Although there is a reduction in petrol and diesel consumption due to the 40 : 60 modal split (if this is achieved), the rail services system would have to cope with more than 3.8 million passengers per day by year 2020;
141
It was forecasted that the total energy use by road, rail and air transport modes would achieve 33,451 ktoe by year 2020 (Do Something Scenario) with the proportion of road transport 80.1%, rail 0.7%, and air transport 19.2%.
Based on the study findings as mentioned, some recommendation regarding to the energy use in transportation sector could be put forward: The study has shown that a shift in the number of passengers from passenger car to public transport would reduce the fuel consumption and as well as the emission levels. Therefore, all the factors that may increase the demand for public transport modes should be taken into consideration. It is essential to stress here that improvement to the public transport system has to be embarked upon on a significant level and comprehensive scale. Besides the socioeconomic variables, there are supply variables that could persuade the people to choose their transport modes. The transport authorities and particularly the rail services operator need to consider these variables in their policy during the planning and operation of rail system. The supply variables involves amongst others: in-vehicle travel time; access, waiting and transfer times; travel cost; qualitative and attitudinal variables such as comfort, reliability, and safety and the wish to have a different mode choice.
142
References
Abdullah, M. S., (2003), Development in Malaysias Rail Transport Sector, Paper Material in Railtech 2003 International Conference and Exhibition, 27-29 May 2003. Banks, J. H., (2002), Introduction to Transportation Engineering, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York. Davis et al, (2002), Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 22, for U.S. Department of Energy. Dept. of Statistics Malaysia, (2002), Malaysian Economic Statistics-Time Series, Putrajaya. Economic Planning Unit-JICA, (1996), The Feasibility Study on Kuala Lumpur Outer Ring Road Project in Malaysia, Final Report. Grava, S. (2003), Urban Transportation System: Choices for Communities, McGrawHill, New York. JICA, (1992), Highway Network Development Plan (HNDP) Study in Malaysia, Interim Report (1), Kuala Lumpur. Kanafani, A. K., (1983), Transportation Demand Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York. Klang Valley Planning Division-JICA, (1999), A Study on Integrated Transportation Strategies for Environmental Improvement in Kuala Lumpur (SMURT-KL), Final Report. Ministry of Transport Malaysia, (2002), Transport Statistics Malaysia 2002, Putrajaya. Montgomery, D. C. and Runger G. C., (2003), Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers, 3rd Edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York. National Energy Balance 2002, (2003), Ministry of Energy, Communications and Multimedia, Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. Ortuzar, J. D. and Willumsen, L. G., (1990), Modelling Transport, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
143
Udomsri R. and Kongboontiam P., (2003), Fuel Consumption Models of Household Vehicles in Chiangmai Urban Area, Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, 2003, Fukuoka Japan. Yusoff, Z. M., (2003), Mobility of People: LRT Experience, Paper Presented in Best Practices Engineering Conference, 8-9 September 2003, Kuala Lumpur.
144
CHAPTER 5 FEASIBILITY AND POTENTIAL OF SWITCHING TO NGV FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN MALAYSIA
SUMMARY
Due to rapid economic growth, the usage of fuel especially petrol and diesel for transportation sector has increased tremendously. This has caused Malaysian oil reserve to decrease rapidly over the past decade. As a result, the government is encouraging the use of alternative fuel in the transportation sector. One of the proposals is the encouragement to use natural gas (NG) as an alternative fuel and proposing a suitable policy for it. Study on natural gas vehicle (NGV) has been undertaken to identify the deficiency and to improve the previous policies. This study involved respondents (consumers) from public transports (taxi driver, taxi and bus companies) and owners of pump station to identify their opinion about the policy. Data collection to identify an overview of the current status of NGV development including market activities and the future prospects of NGV in Malaysia are conducted by interviewing respondents.
145
5.1. Introduction
Natural gas is categorized as a fossil fuel because it was formed from the remains of tiny sea animals and plants from 200-400 million year ago. The pressure combined with the heat of earth transforms this organic mixture into petroleum and natural gas. Its main ingredient is methane, therefore its can be used as an alternative fuel for transport. There are many advantages of natural gas compared to petrol and diesel as a fuel. The primary advantages are the fact that natural gas can improve thermal efficiency and reduce emissions of the engine. It also helps to curb the growing air pollution and the greenhouse effect because it is cleaner and also cheaper than petrol and diesel. Modes of transportation in the USA, United Kingdom, Canada, China, India, Argentina, and Brazil and also in Pakistan are already using natural gas as a fuel. Natural gas used in developed nations is mainly because of the environmental benefits. Meanwhile in developing countries, it is mainly because of the economic factors. Natural gas has been used as a fuel for transport since 1920s. To date, Italy has about 240 compressed natural gas (CNG) refuelling station and about 300,000 NGVs on the road. New Zealand has about 250,000 vehicles converted to natural gas and refuelling network of about 250 stations. Argentina being at the fore front of the NGV league has 700,000 NGVs and has over 800 refuelling stations. Other country like Thailand, Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, USA, Canada, France, United Kingdom, Holland and Australia has only few NGVs (IANGV, 2004). Natural gas in Malaysia can be as considered economically beneficial in future because it will reduce operation cost and reduces foreign exchange of oil import. The
146
economic advantage of using natural gas as a vehicular fuel is more apparent in fleet operations, where a vehicle travels the same or similar route everyday, and returns to the same location for refuelling. Beside that natural gas is also capable of making the environment cleaner because its unleaded and reduces a discharge of emissions than petrol and diesel. The vehicles that have been converted to NGV can also use petrol or diesel as fuel, so its easier for consumer to use this fuel. Usually consumers use any type of fuel that can be obtained easily and priced reasonably. The idea that using natural gas is dangerous is totally unproven as they are safer than petrol at ambient temperature. Over 40 years worldwide experience with NGV has prove that the inherent safety and integrity of compressed natural gas storage tanks and refueling system is save enough if not saver than any other conventional fuel. As Malaysian government attempt to encourage a new environmental friendly fuel, natural gas has been recognized as an alternative fuel for transport instead petrol and diesel. Referred to Kyoto Protocol, this is one of the progressive programs in order to decrease the emissions of greenhouse gas about 5% over the amount in 1999 periodic for the year 2008 to 2012. The transportation is the sector that produces the highest greenhouse gas emission in Malaysia. Therefore, thats one of the main factors why the government encouraging this sector to use natural gas as an alternative fuel. The other reason is Malaysia has large amount of natural gas reserve than oil. Research in Australia shows that vehicles which use compressed natural gas (CNG) could reduce about 1152 kg greenhouse gas for 12,000 km traveled (AGO,
147
2001). However the actual results depend on the size and transport fuel consumption, and distance traveled. Therefore a comprehensive study must be conducted to identify suitable policies to public and private vehicle everyone in Malaysia to use natural gas as fuel. A similar study has been done in other country such as in USA and Europe (e-mail). In Malaysia, natural gas has been used as an alternative fuel for commercial vehicles especially for taxis. Petronas had introduced the NGV Commercial Program (NGVP) in 1991 to encourage the usage of natural gas with the target to convert about 1100 petrol vehicles by the year 1993. However, today there are about 10 000 NGVs many of them taxi and about 40 gas refuelling stations in Malaysia (Petronas NGV, 2004).
5.2. Survey Data
This section discusses about the collected data in this study. The collected data include current policies, world natural gas reserves, number of vehicles in Malaysia and other related data will be discussed extensively in this section. First part of this section is started with a review about the current situation and policies that involve both natural gas and NGV. Meanwhile the second part discusses about the natural gas reserves. World reserve and the importance of natural gas in Malaysia are also elaborated in this section. Furthermore, NGV in Malaysia and other countries will also be presented. Due to many advantages of NGV especially because of energy security of a country, the government of Malaysia encourages the usage of natural gas as an
148
alternative fuel for public transportation in Klang Valley where natural gas refueling stations are easier to find compared to other states. Natural gas is not only cheaper, but it also reduces air pollution in city like Kuala Lumpur, Johor Bahru and Penang. The incentives programs introduced by government to encourage consumers to use natural gas are (Department of Environment, 2002): Exception of import duty and tax for conversion kit. Keeping the price of natural gas is 50% lower than gasoline. Road tax reduction scheme, i. ii. 50% for mono - gas vehicles (only use natural gas). 25% for bi-fuel vehicles (use petrol and natural gas).
Until October 2004, there were more than 11,500 vehicles mostly taxis already converted to NGVs. This data include 1000 mono gas taxis that have been introduced in Klang Valley area and 40 natural gas refuelling station for all these vehicles (Petronas NGV, 2004)1. However, this is still below the expected target from the government policy which is 50% of taxis in Klang Valley use natural gas as fuel in 2004.
5.2.1. Natural Gas Reserves
Before the policies are implemented for natural gas, the most important thing to know is the reserve of natural gas in Malaysia as well as throughout the world. World natural gas demand continues to grow and increase its market share inline with the total world primary energy consumption. According to the International
Data until October 2004 obtained from Petronas NGV Sdn. Bhd.
149
Energy Outlook (2000), natural gas remains the fastest growing fuel component of world energy consumption. From the forecast period from 1997 to 2020, natural gas usage is projected to be more than double which will reach 167 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) in 2020 compared to only 82 Tcf in 1997 in Malaysia. Over the 1997 to 2020 period, the natural gas usage increase tremendously around the world except in Middle East and Africa. Developing countries especially in Asia and South and Central America will set the highest growth of natural gas usage. Large percentage of increment is also projected in industrialized countries, including the United State, European Union and Russia. The world natural gas reserves were estimated at 5,504 Tcf. The former Soviet Union has only about 6% of world oil reserves but they have about 40% of world natural gas reserves. This is mostly (about 30.5%) located in the Russian Federation (Energy Information Administration, 2004). This makes Russia as the largest reserve of natural gas in the world, more than double of the second largest reserve, Iran. Geographically, natural gas reserves are more than oil reserves. In the Middle East, Qatar, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and UAE also have a very large reserve of natural gas. Reserve to production ratio is exceeding 100 years in Middle East and Africa, and 83.4 years in the former Soviet Union. Meanwhile, South and Central America have another 71.5 years but in North America and Europe the ratio are relative low, at 11.4 years and 18.3 years respectively. The reserve to production ratios average for natural gas for the world is 63.4 years compared with only 41 years for oil. Table 5.1 shows world natural gas reserves by countries.
150
Table 5.1. World natural gas reserves by country as January 1, 2003 (EIA2004)
Country World Top 20 Countries Russian Iran Qatar Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates United States Algeria Venezuela Nigeria Iraq Indonesia Malaysia Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Kazakhstan Netherlands Canada Kuwait China Mexico Rest of the world Reserves (Tcf) 5,504 4,778 1,680 812 509 225 212 187 160 148 124 110 93 72 71 66 65 62 60 53 53 9 733 Percentage (%) 100.0 86.8 30.5 14.8 9.2 4.1 3.9 3.4 2.9 2.7 2.3 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.2 13.3
151
5.2.2. Natural Gas Reserve in Malaysia
Malaysia has 72 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of natural gas reserves. Natural gas production has been rising steadily in recent years, reaching 1.9 Tcf in 2001, up sharply from 1.5 Tcf in 2000. Natural gas consumption in 2001 was estimated at 1.1 Tcf, with LNG exports of around 0.8 Tcf (mostly to Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan)2. One of the most active locations in Malaysia for gas exploration and development is the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Development Area (JDA), located in the lower part of the Gulf of Thailand and governed by the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Authority (MTJA). The MTJA was established by the two governments for joint exploration of the once-disputed JDA. A fifty fifty partnerships between Petronas and Amerada Hess is being developed in the location, while the Petroleum Authority of Thailand (PTT) and Petronas also share equal interests in the remaining locations. PTT and Petronas announced an agreement in November 1999 to proceed with the development of a gas pipeline from the JDA to a processing plant in Songkla, Thailand, and a pipeline linking the Thai and Malaysian gas grids as well. Malaysia and Thailand will eventually take half of the gas produced. The rest of initial production will remain to Malaysia. The project had been controversial in Thailand because they are opposed by local residents in Songkla along the pipeline route. In May 2002, the Thai government announced the final decision to commence construction on the project
Data on September 2003

152
later in 2002, through the pipeline route was altered slightly to avoid some populated areas. Construction has begun, and the delivery of natural gas to Malaysia is scheduled to begin by mid-2005. Exxon Mobil announced in March 2002 that they would move forward with the development of the offshore Bintang natural gas field in the South China Sea. The field contains about 1 Tcf of reserves, and it is expected to reach peak output of 335 Mmcf/d. The commercial production at Bintang gas field began in February 2003. Malaysia accounted for approximately 14% of total world LNG exports in 2002. After long delay, Malaysia preceded a long-planned expansion of Bintulu LNG complex in Sarawak. In February 2000, Petronas signed a contract with a consortium headed by Kellogg Brown and Root for construction of the MLNG Tiga facility. This consist two LNG liquefaction trains and a total capacity of 7.6 million metric tons (370 Bcf) per year, which was completed in April 2003. The Bintulu facility is among the largest LNG liquefaction in the world, with the total capacity of 23 million metric tons (1.1 Tcf) per year. Most of the production from the new LNG trains will be sold contracts to Japan. Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO), Tokyo Gas, and Chubu Electric have signed contracts for LNG from the project. A fire at the MLNG Tiga plant in August 2003, has forced a temporary shutdown for reparation and the facility back to normal operation in April 2004. In addition, Malaysia exports 150 million cubic feet of LNG per day (Mmcf/d) to Singapore via pipeline. Surprisingly, Malaysia also is an importer of gas from Indonesia. Petronas signed an agreement in April 2001 with Indonesian oil and gas
153
company Pertamina for the import of gas from Conoco's West Natuna offshore field in Indonesian waters. The move is being seen as part of Malaysias strategy to become a hub for natural gas integration in Southeast Asia. Natural gas delivery from the pipeline commenced in mid-2003. Additionally there also have been preliminary discussions of a project to link gas deposits from Sarawak to the Philippine. As the frontrunner in Malaysian NGV industry development, Petronass primary focus is to convert commercial vehicles, particularly the petrol taxi to NGV taxi. Today there are about 35 NGV refueling station and more than 8,300 vehicles running on natural gas3 (email). In addition, approximately 1,000 mono gas vehicles have been introduced in Malaysia from joint venture between Petronas and Marta Automobile. Furthermore the NGV transit bus program is expected to be
implemented soon be in Putrajaya.
5.2.3. Natural Gas Vehicle in Malaysia and Other Countries
NGV usage throughout the world has increased rapidly in recent years. This situation is mainly due to the following factors: Natural gas is relatively cheap (compared to other fossil fuel like petrol and diesel). The availability of natural gas Growing awareness regarding environmental pollution
Data until January 2004 (International Association for NGV)

154
Today about 0.18% of world transport uses natural gas as fuel. There are approximately 3.5 million NGV (IANGV, 2004) throughout the world out of 650 million vehicles. Subsequently some international markets have made drastic changes to encourage consumers to use natural gas vehicles. Countries like USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, Sweden and Italy have a long established record on the usage of natural gas as an alternative fuel for vehicle. In these countries, natural gas vehicles are increasing rapidly. In other countries although there are move towards this scenario but the development is not so impressive. The reasons are because the NGV markets in these countries are mainly based on economic consideration. Besides that, the high investment cost for converting to NGV is also a problem. Another problem is the huge management cost involved in setting up the infrastructure such as natural gas refuelling station and pipeline. NGV have been introduced in Europe, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Argentina and USA for a long time. Argentina, who is the frontrunner of NGV, has 1,243,024 of NGV and records an average of 3000 vehicles per month converted to NGV. Moreover they have setup about 1,105 natural gas refuelling stations4. Meanwhile, Italy has been using NGV since 1930s and to date they have about 400,800 NGV on the road with 463 natural gas refuelling station5. Venezuela also currently introduced National Program for NGV and constructed 140 natural gas refuelling station all over the country.
4 5
Data on March 2004. Data on July 2003.

155
Canada has more than 20,505 vehicles converted to NGV. Canadian government also introduced many incentives such as the incentive for installing conversion kit to encourage Canadians to use NGV. Meanwhile USA has about 130,000 natural gas vehicles where natural gas has been used as a fuel for transport since 1960s. The development and the use of NGV in Asia are still lower compared to European Union, South and North America. Asian countries like India, China, Japan, Indonesia and Pakistan have recently started using natural gas as a fuel for transportation. For example India already has 159,159 vehicles using natural gas followed by China, where more than 69,300 vehicles use this fuel. While Pakistan has about 540,000 vehicles, Japan has more than 18,463 vehicles and Indonesia about 4,660 NGV. In Malaysia, the consumption of natural gas has also been increasing rapidly in the recent years; the major consumer is oil and gas industry. Small amount of natural gas are also used in transportation sector, following the launch of government campaign to promote its use. Meanwhile in Terengganu, Petronas had introduced a pilot program to promote natural gas involving 21 converted vehicles and one natural gas refuelling station in 1986. Table 5.2 show top countries with number of NGV and refuelling station (IANGV, 2004).
156
Table 5.2. World natural gas vehicles by country Country Argentina Brazil Pakistan Italy India USA China Egypt Venezuela Ukraine Vehicles 1,243,024 600,000 540,000 400,800 159,159 130,000 69,300 52,000 50,000 45,000 Refuelling Station 1,105 600 574 463 166 1,300 270 79 140 130
5.2.4. Number of Vehicles in Malaysia
As a result of rapid income growth per capita in Malaysia, the number of vehicles has increased tremendously. With the increase of oil price, (petrol and diesel) and the decreasing oil reserve in this country, NGV seems to be a better alternative for Malaysia. As the biggest national car manufacturer, Proton and Perodua could play an important role to manufacture vehicles and conversion kit for NGV in the future. The increasing number of vehicles in Malaysia from 1987 till 2002 is inspected in Table 5.3 (JPJ, 2004).
157
Table 5.3. Number of Vehicles in Malaysia (JPJ, 2002)

Type of Vehicle Year Private Motorcycle 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1,929,978 2,030,418 2,182,468 2,388,477 2,595,749 2,762,666 2,970,769 3,297,474 3,608,475 3,951,931 4,328,997 4,692,183 5,082,473 5,356,604 5,609,351 5,842,617 Car Bus Public Vehicle Taxi 24,868 26,161 28,120 30,774 33,444 35,596 38,278 42,204 46,807 49,485 51,293 54,590 55,626 56,152 56,579 58,066 Hire& Drive 3,741 3,937 4,232 4,631 5,033 5,357 5,762 5,308 8,195 9,971 10,826 10,042 10,020 10,433 9,986 10,073 Cargo 233,103 245,232 263,597 288,479 313,514 333,674 358,808 393,833 440,723 512,165 574,622 599,149 642,976 665,284 689,668 713,148 Other 106,677 112,226 120,629 132,016 143,472 152,698 164,199 178,439 203,660 237,631 269,983 286,898 304,135 Total 3,674,484 3,865,709 4,155,196 4,547,414 4,942,038 5,259,834 5,656,040 6,253,334 6,897,434 7,686,684 8,550,469 9,141,357 9,929,951
1,356,678 19,439 1,427,283 20,452 1,534,166 21,984 1,678,980 24,057 1,824,679 26,147 1,942,016 27,827 2,088,300 29,924 2,302,547 33,529 2,553,574 36,000 2,886,536 38,965 3,271,304 43,444 3,452,852 45,643 3,787,047 47,674 4,145,982 48,662 4,557,992 49,771 5,001,273 51,158
315,687 10,598,804 329,198 11,302,545 345,604 12,021,939
The current number of vehicles data have not been published yet by the Department of Road and Transport (JPJ) and Department of Statistic. Table 5.3
158
shows that the total number of vehicles till 2002 in Malaysia are 12,021,939. The percentage of vehicles by type are presented in Figure 5.1.
Other 2,87% Taxi 0,48% Car 41,60% Motorcycle 48,60%
Hire & Drive 0,08% Cargo 5,93%
Bus 0,43%
Figure 5.1. Percentage of Vehicles by Type.
Figure 5.1 shows that 41.60% of vehicles are car and 48.60% are motorcycle that contributed to a larger number of vehicles in Malaysia. Bus and taxi only represents 0.43 % and 0.48 % each respectively, while hire and drive, cargo, other modes of transportation contributes about 8.88 % of Malaysias vehicles. Figure 5.2 below shows the rate of increased number of vehicles in this country starting from 1987 to 2002.
159
12021939
11302545
10598804
14000000 9929951 9141357 12000000 Number of vehicle 7686684 10000000 6253334 5656040 5259834 8000000 4155196 3865709 3674484 1987 6000000 4000000 2000000 0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 4942038 4547414 6897434 8550469
2000
2001
2002
Year
Figure 5.2. Increasing Number of Vehicles in Malaysia (1987 2002) The increasing number of vehicles (bus and taxi) that is involved in the study is shown in Figure 5.3.
70000 Number of Public Transport 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 Year 1997 1999 2001 Bus Taxi
Figure 5.3. Number of Public Transport (Bus and Taxi) from the year 1987 to 2002.
160
5.2.5 Price of Oil and Natural Gas in Malaysia
The price of natural gas at pump station had been steady since 1992 at RM 0.565 per liter, while as 2002, petrol and diesel cost are RM 1.30 and RM 0.701 per liter each respectively. Therefore, there is more advantage for consumers to use NGV especially in long term. However due to the increase in world fuel price, the price of fossil fuel increased again this year. The new price for a liter of petrol, diesel and NGV is presented in Table 5.4.
Table 5.4.Price of Fuels in Malaysia. Fuel Petrol Diesel Natural Gas Price6 RM 1.42 RM 0.831 RM 0.585
5.3. Methodology
Suitable methods had been adapted in order to obtain more information regarding this topic. The reference used for data collection are books, journals, internet, observations, questionnaires, interviews and visiting workshops that installed the spare part for NGV. The secondary data are mostly collected from government body such as Department of Statistic, Department of Road and Transportation and other government agencies that are related to this study.
Prices on October 2004.

161
Site visits have also been done to identify the actual situation on the site and to obtain some technical data. This is necessary to obtain more information and suggestions regarding the usage of natural gas directly from the mechanic and user. Respondents have been picked randomly to gather their suggestion. Generally, there are two types of data collected namely primary data and secondary data that will be discussed in detail in the following sub section.
5.3.1 Primary Data Collection
Two methods are used to get the primary data i.e. by interviews and questionnaires. Interviews are conducted to collect qualitative data from users and suppliers who are involved directly or indirectly with natural gas vehicles. Questionnaires are used to collect the responds especially from those who are already using natural gas vehicles regarding their opinion about natural gas and NGV. There are also other methods used to collect the data, which is discussed below.
Literature Review
Literature review is an important step to start the study. In this stage, a lot of information are collected especially from the internet, journals and reference books about scenario of natural gas vehicles in others country that have already introduced this policy. References from journals provide information about the current development of natural gas around the world. All the information are necessary especially to compare the current scenarios and achievements from the usage of natural gas vehicles in Malaysia.
162
Interviews
Interviews are conducted on respondents that have experience with natural gas vehicles to obtain their views and opinions about natural gas as an alternative fuel. The actual information and other related data can only be collected from these interviews. For example the problems related to natural gas vehicles either from the user or from supplier of natural gas could only be easily collected from interview. It is important to forecast all the data the estimate the situation and problems that will be faced by the user and supplier as well as the policy in the future.
Site Visit
Throughout the whole process of data collection, site visits have played a major role in order to get a clear view regarding the related problems of NGV policies in this country. The information obtained from site visits are used as the supporting data for other presented information.
Questionnaire
Questionnaires are substantial for collecting quantitative data from a large number of respondents. It is compulsory to obtain their opinions and comments to identify the problems faced by the NGV users, determine the prospect of potential users in the future and to propose an appropriate policy for them. As mentioned earlier, there are three types of respondents involved in this process. They are:
163
Public Transports i. Taxis (NGV user). ii. Taxis (non NGV user). iii. Taxi Companies. iv. Bus Companies. Public Transports Companies and Owners of Pump Station i. Natural gas refueling stations. ii. Other pump stations. For obtaining the necessary information from companies and owners of pump stations, conducting interviews seems to be a better way because there are only a small number of them. For taxi drivers, all their comments and suggestions are collected from questionnaires. Therefore two sets of questionnaires and four sets of interview questions that have been prepared for this study. Some explanation about these questionnaires and interview questions are discussed below:
(i) Questionnaire for taxi drivers. Questionnaire for taxi drivers have been divided into two sections. First section is for natural gas vehicle users and the other section for non natural gas vehicle users. It is necessary to have the opinion and comments from both sides because they will become the pioneer NGV user in Malaysia.
(ii) Questionnaire for taxi and bus company managers.
164
Different from the questionnaire for taxi drivers, this part focuses on the problems faced for using NGV. Hopefully the public transportation companies (taxi or bus company) can give their opinion or input in order to find the solution for the problems faced natural gas user or non-user.
(iii) Interview with the owners of pump station. The interview form is also divided into two divisions; first part is the questions for the companies or owners of pump station that sell natural gas. Another set of question is set up for the owners of conventional pump station. The questions allow us to collect a qualitative data on the problems faced at supply and demand as well as the safety of NGV refueling station.
5.3.2 Secondary Data Collection
Unlike primary data collection, the secondary data collection is conducted to collect some information about the current situation and condition related to natural gas policy in the country. These data are necessary for this study because: To recognize the current policies. To identify the agencies that is related to this study. To identify similar policies in other countries. To identify the actual transport data in Malaysia. To analyze the economic aspect from using NGV. The methods to collect the secondary data and defining the entire process above are discussed in the following sub section.
165
Identification of the Current Policy
In identifying all related policies regarding natural gas vehicles and natural gas storage, information from individuals and related government bodies are useful as references. Beside that, to ensure all the information obtained are correct, these information are compared with the data collected from Department of Road and Transport, Department of Statistics and other private agencies like Petronas NGV etc.
Identification of the Related Agencies
Information from Petronas NGV and Gas Malaysia are obtained in order to identify all related agencies and individuals involved in natural gas vehicle programs and natural gas storage. Other related information is referred to individuals that are considered expert in this field and other agencies that are willing to contribute to this study.
Identification of Policies in Other Countries
In order to get some information about similar policies in other countries and the problems faced by these countries from natural gas usage and natural gas vehicle programs, references such as books, journals and magazines are referred. There are also some secondary data collected from the homepage of agencies that have already implemented similar programs on natural gas vehicles.
166
Identification of Quantity of Vehicles
To identify the number of vehicles in this country, relevant data are collected from the Department of Road and Transport and from the annual report published by Department of Statistics. These data are used to estimate the total number of registered vehicles that may be converted to natural gas vehicle in the future. These data are also used to predict the total number of vehicles in Malaysia in the future.
5.3.3 Conducting Economic Analysis
Economic analysis or Cost-Benefit Analysis is used to calculate the economic impact from the usage of natural gas. There are number of factors that will influence the economic analysis for this study. The factors are types of engine used (petrol or diesel), size of vehicles (light, medium or heavy duty) and annual traveled distance. To analyze the economic benefit from using natural gas as an alternative fuel in Malaysia, the life cycle cost formulae have been adapted for this study. The economic analysis for NGV will justify the possibility of using natural gas as an alternative fuel in this country. The cost-benefit analysis conducted in this study is only for taxis, private transports, buses and trucks. The computation of potential savings from NGV is calculated by the following equation.
S = D [Co Po Cg Pg] + [Mo Mg]
(5.1)
167
Potential savings result from conversion of commercial vehicles to NGV will be discussed in following section.
5.4. Results and discussions
This section will discuss the results on NGV based on references and the data collected. This data will be used to predict natural gas and NGV usage in the future. Then, the study analyses the economic aspect and the differences between conventional fuel vehicles and NGV.
5.4.1 Prediction for Number of Public Transport in Malaysia
Forecast for the future can be predicted by referring to the increasing rate of vehicles in the recent year. The total number of public transport that is expected to use NGV until 2020 is presented in Table 5.5.
5.4.2 Public Transportation
As discussed earlier, public transportation involved in this study are only buses and taxis. For taxis, the questionnaires are divided into two section; first section for NGV users and the other is for non NGV users. For buses, the managers or owners of the bus companies are interviewed to obtain qualitative data because commercial bus companies have never used natural gas as a fuel.
168
Public Transport (NGV user)
There are two types of NGV in this country, firstly mono gas and second is bi-fuel vehicle. Table 5.6 below summarizes the results obtained from questionnaire for NGV users in Malaysia.
169
Table 5.5. Prediction of Total Public Transport (bus and taxi) from year 2005 until 2020 Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Bus 60,108 62,472 64,835 67,198 69,562 71,925 74,289 76,652 79,015 81,379 83,742 86,106 88,469 90,832 93,196 95,559 Taxi 69,100 71,586 74,071 76,557 79,042 81,528 84,013 86,499 88,984 91,470 93,955 96,441 98,926 101,412 103,897 106,383
170
Table 5.6.Feedback obtained based on the survey carried out on NGV user (taxi driver). Survey Type of fuel Government policies for NGV Choice & Answers Natural gas only Bi fuel Agree Disagree Not Sure Others Pricing control by government Need No need Not sure Promotion by government Good Poor Not sure Problem faced by NGV users Refueling station Expensive kit Time to refuelling Not sure Reduce air pollution Yes No Not sure Safety aspect Satisfied Dissatisfied Not sure Other Results (%) 47.12 52.88 63.28 29.42 6.86 0.44 97.12 1.33 1.55 5.75 86.28 7.97 84.30 10.61 4.65 0.44 88.72 2.65 8.63 46.68 23.01 29.42 0.89
171
Non NGV user
About 216 respondents (non NGV taxi driver) have been interviewed for this study. Results from this questionnaire are summarized in Table 5.7.
Table 5.7. Feedback obtained based on the survey carried out on non - NGV user (taxi driver). Survey Type of fuel Ready to used NGV in the future Choice & Answers Petrol Diesel Yes No Not sure Other Pricing of natural gas Cheap Expensive Not sure Other Promotion by government Good Poor Not sure Problem faced to used NGV Refueling station Expensive kit Time to refueling Not sure Reduce air pollution Yes No Not sure Results (%) 78.24 21.75 76.85 8.80 13.43 0.92 85.19 4.17 9.26 1.38 12.96 79.17 7.41 60.65 31.02 4.63 3.70 83.80 2.31 13.89
172
Bus Companies
Unlike managers of taxi companies, managers of bus companies did not give much cooperation for this study. This is maybe because they are not involved directly as a natural gas user. Only three companies gave their cooperation in the study. The companies are Transnasional Ekspress Sdn. Bhd. (Respondent 1), Airport Coach Sdn. Bhd. (Respondent 2) and Triton Sdn. Bhd. (Respondent 3). All these companies are agree with the policies introduced by government for public transport. Results from the interview are summarized in Table 5.8
173
Table 5.8. Feedback obtained based on the survey carried out on managers of bus companies. Survey Natural Gas Consumption Results & Opinions Suitable to use natural gas as a fuel because it is environmental friendly. Need subsidy from government and are convinced that operation cost will decrease after converting to NG. Not ready to use natural gas because high capital and do not have enough infrastructures. Policy necessary for bus companies are price subsidy for price of bus and natural gas. Government must control the price of natural gas so it becomes stable. Subsidies are necessary for conversion kit, exemption of tax when purchasing spare parts and importing NGV bus. Improve the entire infrastructure Spare part costs for NGV bus are more expensive. No conscientious study especially on maintenance and capital cost per kilometer. Not enough infrastructures like pipe line and refuelling station. Technical problems i.e. about the efficiency when bus is running natural gas. Price subsidies problems either for conversion kit or natural gas supply. No professional staff, less spare parts in the market and could not afford to construct private refuelling station. Bus companies did not get any information about natural gas either from the government or private bodies. Promotion must be more aggressive i.e. by road shows, campaign and interaction program between government and bus companies. Natural gas vehicles can reduce environmental pollution and greenhouse effect.
Government Policies
Problems that will be faced by Natural Gas users
Promotion
Environment
174
5.4.3. Companies and Managers of Pump Station
Seven managers of Petronas natural gas refuelling station and six non natural gas pump station managers have been interviewed in order to get the necessary information. The important parts of the interview are discussed below.
Managers of Natural Gas Refuelling Station
Out of seven surveys, from which two are from Johor Bahru Petronas refuelling stations, it is found that they have been providing natural gas service from two to four years. This was accomplished from Petronass initiative to prepare this fuel. On average these stations sell about 12,000 to 80,000 litres per month. Sometimes the number totals to 270,000 litres per month. However in terms of economical revenues, these are not a very stimulating amount. Although more taxi drivers use natural gas, which translates to less taxi drivers who buy petrol, thus dropping the sales, however less profit is coming from natural gas retail if compared to the retail of conservative fuels. The NGV station owners also question MotherDaughter system which is used in NGV retailing. Problems arise when natural gas arrives sometimes too late due to the long distance of the mother station. Moreover, sometimes the pumps pressures are too weak which is caused by the compressors. They suggested direct gas system as a solution to these problems. According to them, this system will save time, journey costs and the gas pressure will be sufficient all the time. At the same time there are also benefits gained from NGV retailing, such as owners need not to worry about maintenance and infrastructures. All these are taken
175
care by Petronas. However, there are stations that claimed safety for daughter stations are less strict than mother stations. This was based on past occurrence from few stations that had experienced leakages on nozzles and problems with compressors. It is hoped that the government and Petronas would give more exposure and training to operators and gas station owners before opening new NGV stations. The training should stress on safety because the lack of it will cause problems and disrupt station operation. In addition to that, the devices in use are fairly sensitive and can easily be out of order if handled without proper training. In order to wait for experts from Petronas-NGV for repairs will consume a lot of time. In general, the respondents (station owners of NGV) are satisfied with governments policy to help both the station and consumers. However they believe that the government should reconsider the costly NGV vehicle conversion when drafting the policy. The government should also promote more about the benefits of NGV usage to the public. The national automobile industry should also take the opportunity in joining the government to design a car that is NGV-ready.
Managers of Pump Station (Non Natural Gas)
Six interviews had been conducted on owners of gas stations who did not have NGV service in their premises. There was a lot of information obtained that supports this study. All of the interviewed respondents said that they were interested in selling this fuel. However, a few problems made them suspend their decisions. Among them are lack of infrastructure and the delay waiting for Petronass instructions. This is because the building of an NGV pump station is fully funded by the company. Some
176
of the respondents had already applied and are waiting for the construction process. Another owner was waiting for the final word from Petronas Dagangan Berhad (PDB) whether he could start NGV service. Another problem that prevented them from not getting involved in the NGV distributions is the lack of information from the government and Petronas concerning the profits and losses in fuel preparation. Other problems that should be the concern are the lack of NGV consumers in Malaysia. It seemed that almost all the NGV consumers are exclusively. They hope for more efforts from the government to introduce more consumer-friendly policies that will increase the fuel usage in general. When number of consumers reaches the peak point, there will be no more doubt for station owners to start serving the needs of NGV-modified cars. Economically their profits will rise according to the increase of products they have to offer. Meanwhile, respondents propose to Petronas to avoid disruptions in the supply and instalments when delivering natural gas. In a nutshell, it can be summarised that the station owners are highly interested to be involved in distributing NGV, provided that the problems discussed above can be overcomed by the government and Petronas in effort to increase infrastructure readiness for NGV usage.
5.4.4. Economic Analysis
To conduct economic analysis the first thing that must be known is fuel consumption costs, maintenance costs, engine type and fuel type (petrol or diesel). Thus, it is important to identify the difference between fuel consumption and
177
maintenance requirement before and after converting to NGV. Tables 5.9, 5.10 and 5.11 show the information that have been gathered from various source based on the annual fuel consumption and annual maintenance cost for commercial Proton taxis7. However this information will be changing with respect to location and time.
Table 5.9. Estimated annual consumption between petrol and natural gas8 Fuel Type Distance traveled per year Car model Engine capacity (liter) Fuel consumption Current fuel price per liter Petrol 48,000 km Proton Iswara 1.5 0.071 liters/km RM 1.420 NG 48,000 km Proton Iswara 1.5 0.078 liters/km RM 0.585
Table 5.10. Estimated annual consumption between diesel and natural gas Fuel Type Distance traveled per year Car model Engine capacity (liter) Fuel consumption Current fuel price per liter Diesel 48,000 km Proton Wira 2.0 0.078 liters/km RM 0.831 NG 48,000 km Proton Wira 2.0 0.078 liters/km RM 0.585
7 8
Majority taxis in Malaysia using Proton. Qualitative data in table obtained from various sources like references, interviews and prediction.
178
Table 5.11. Estimated annual maintenance cost (RM) for different fuels Components Engine oil (15W to 45W) Engine oil filter Spark plug Air filter Battery water Labour charges Estimated Total Cost Petrol 152 56 72 60 8 100 448 Bi - fuel 114 42 90 60 8 100 414 Diesel 152 56 60 8 100 376 Dual - fuel 114 42 60 8 100 324
By using equation (5.1) the estimated annual saving per year based upon the data presented in table 5.9, 5.10 and table 5.11 above is as follows:
For conversion of petrol to NGV (bi fuel), the estimated annual saving is: S = 48,000 x ([0.071 x 1.42] [0.078 x 0.585]) + (448 414) S = RM 2023
For conversion of diesel to NGV (dual fuel), the estimated annual saving is: S = 48,000 x ([0.078 x 0.831] [0.078 x 0.585]) + (376 324) S = RM 973
179
Economic analysis is required to estimate the direct saving achieved by using natural gas as an alternative fuel. The result clearly indicated that there is a significant annual savings and if this program is implemented at national scale for both types of petrol or diesel engine. Comparison of total running cost for different types of vehicles is presented in Table 5.12.
Table 5.12. Comparison of total operation cost for public transport with different fuel consumption. Components Petrol (RM) Fuel consumption cost per year Maintenance cost per year Total cost 4,839 448 5,287 Bi fuel (RM) 2,190 414 2,604 Diesel (RM) 3,111 376 3,617 Dual fuel (RM) 2,190 324 2,514
From Table 5.12, the annual expenditure from using natural gas as fuel is approximately 51% less compared to petrol and approximately 28 % less compared to diesel. Further savings can be achieved if the usage of natural gas could prolong the life span of the engine due to the clean combustion process in the engine.
5.5. Conclusions and Suggestions 5.5.1. Conclusions
There are two parts of this section. In the first part, summary of the research will be discussed. This covers the conclusions gained from the study conducted.
180
Meanwhile, the second part consists of suggestions for future implementations. These suggestions are presented according to results of the study to promote the usage of NGV in this country. Some of the suggestions and conclusions are based on following: Survey of NGV usage was conducted in some parts of Peninsular Malaysia, such as Johor Bahru, Penang, Kuala Lumpur and Selangor. This survey involved selected taxi drivers, both NGV users and non-users, gas station owners, and both taxi and public bus companies owners as respondents. This study discusses the respondents views about NGV. Interviews with managers of both taxi and public bus are also included. Many conclusions can be drawn from this research, however only the most important aspect will be taken into consideration and discussed in detail in this section. The conclusions are: A survey for taxi drivers, conducted on 452 respondents, shows that the usage of NGV was very helpful, because of the fact that NGV is relatively cheap. It is more economical than petrol or diesel and produces less environmental impact. The governments policy to introduce NGV in Malaysia has not been very successful so far, which was to control the price of NGV to remain 50% cheaper than petrol. Other policies include road tax exemptions. Such policies will stimulate more users and periodically more gas stations to provide to NG. The problems for the taxi drivers who use NGV are the lack of NGV refuelling stations. The drivers have to queue up, sometimes over an hour in order to refill in the certain places. The distance between two gas stations that provide NGV
181
pumps is also quite far, where 84% respondents who claimed that the lack of NGV pumps in gas stations is their main problem of using NGV. NGV users agree with government policy to control the fuel price, but they are happy that the government will continue promoting the benefits and the safety of NGV to a broader audience via premier mass media. A survey on taxi drivers that did not use NGV was conducted on 216 respondents. Two main problems that caused them not to change to NGV are the fact that the price of conversion kit (31%) which is required to modify their cars is quite expensive and the lack of gas stations (61%) that provide NGV pumps is another problem. Air pollution has become a global problem today and Malaysia, as one of Asias unwitting contributor to the environmental woe. However using NGV will reduce and ultimately solve this dilemma. In addition, natural gas as fuel for the transportation sector in the future will help the countrys economy by using our very own fuel, since Malaysia ranks twelfth for natural gas reserves. Calculations show that a huge savings can be gained by NGV users, which is 51.75% and 40.67% for switching from diesel and petrol by taxi drivers. This fact should motivate consumers to use natural gas as fuel.
5.5.2 Suggestions
Only the important suggestions that have higher possibility than others will be discussed in depth in this section. Those are:
182
To increase NGV usage in Malaysia, the advantages of using this fuel should be further promoted in prime mass media. Campaigns and seminars are also necessary to achieve this goal. Additional incentives provided by the government to NGV users will also encourage more users and suppliers. For example, tax cuts for both users and gas station owners and other benefits. This should also be applied to oil companies who market natural gas as their main product. The cost for converting a car to NGV is approximately RM 2800. Although this is considered reasonable, there are not many users converting to NGV because the lack of NGV refuelling station around the country. Therefore the number of NGV refuelling station must be increased to adapt with future demands. Failure to do so will a slow down or even will contribute to no growth of NGV users. Further R&D on NGV must be conducted by providing grants for researcher to conduct studies in new areas, such as natural gas usage for motorcycles. Both the government and the private sectors should increase their investments in adding infrastructures, and also to conduct more awareness campaigns regarding NGV benefits.
Public Transport
This part is an action plan for every category of public transports, such as taxi drivers who use natural gas, non-users, taxi and bus companies. The government expectantly will provide more facilities or a more effective policy in order to attract more people to use natural gas as the main fuel in the
183
future. Infrastructure such as refuelling stations that provide NGV should be built more especially in the urban and the surrounding areas. These parts are known as the focus point of public transport operations. The price to modify a conventional car to NGV should be reduced. This policy will surely do well to the public and taxi drivers who have not converted their cars yet. This can raise the total NGV users to a desired level. Government through related bodies can organise workshops and trainings for technicians and mechanics so they can understand how an NGV engine works and how to repair it. This will also enable them to open workshops for fixing NGV. Another important aspect is to cut the price tag of conversion kit and to have sufficient stocks of the kits. It can be done by attracting several national and multinational companies to work together with local companies to produce this kit. Argentina did it in the 90s; they invited 20 multinational companies to produce and assemble these components according to the countrys specifications. Set up a target plan that predicts the number of cars to be converted and the number of related infrastructures has to be added for the convenience of the growing natural gas users. For NGV cars, the obvious problem is the tank size. It takes up the boot space, and also increases the weight of the car. This surely creates problems for certain vehicles that have a weight limit such as buses, lorries or vans. These tanks can
184
be installed underneath the vehicle. This will also allow the tanks capacity to be increased. Subsidy is needed by bus companies, some countries offer up to 50% subsidy for companies who want to buy NGV buses and provide loan rates up to 50%. Another option to promote natural gas usage is to raise the price margin between conventional fuel and natural gas. This can be done in two ways: either to withdraw the subsidy for diesel or to offer subsidy for the natural gas in such a way that the difference will become apparent. This is caused by the fact that natural gas and diesel are tagged at almost the same price, and for major companies that have their own depot, diesel might be cheaper than natural gas. Exemptions or reductions of any sort of taxes for buses might motivate bus companies to buy NGV buses. This will also cause prices of NGV buses to drop lower than conventional buses. Pilot projects are necessary for promotion of natural gas.
Oil Companies and Gas Station Managers
As the supplier, oil companies are the final stop before natural gas becomes available to the public. Thus, it is important to convince them regarding the profits available from natural gas distribution. That is why an action plan for suppliers should be included. These are elaborated below: The most important issue that leads the list is the need for more NGV pumps in every gas station. This issue is most prevalent especially in the urban areas where NGV stations are inadequate and is situated far causing difficulty for
185
NGV users to refill conveniently. Long queues seen in the NGV pumps create an impression that natural gas is an uncommon fuel and difficult to find. It is hoped that Gas Malaysia Sdn. Bhd will develop a network of pipes that will meet demands and Petronas as the nations oil company can provide NGV services in each refuelling station throughout the nation. By hook or by crook, the government has to force all the oil companies in Malaysia to be involved in providing NGV in their gas stations, especially which located close to the natural gas pipe line network. It is vital to focus on the refuelling station system at first. Soft loan and incentives from the government is really important as a starting point. NGV stations are more expensive than the conventional ones in terms of construction, operation and maintenance because it requires more advanced technology. When it is developed for consumer use, the cost will be more expensive because consumers require a technology that is quick and easy to use. Initiatives from the natural gas suppliers are needed to manage the logistic networking of natural gas. Financial assistants may be needed by Petronas to solve this problem due to the huge investment cost involved. NGV acceptance in the future is dependant on market transformation, which is through tax results, interests from motor and car industries and suppliers involvement. Therefore, a taxation policy is necessary for conventional fuel so that NGV price will be more competitive and will draw the interest of new users.
186
Throughout this research, the lack of refilling infrastructure (NGV pumps) has been recognised as the critical issue. If this is not solved soon, it will become the major obstacle to attract more users in the future. This will also affect the long term policy to encourage the use of natural gas as fuel in Malaysia. This classic problem is often referred as Chicken and Egg Syndrome and must be rectified as soon as possible by installing more NGV pumps in gas stations by any possible. Consumers will not use NGV if there are insufficient natural gas stations. This suggestion has been considered alongside the fact that building natural gas pumps stations is very expensive (1.5 million for daughter and 5 million for mother). Lack of these stations will retard the growth of NGV and natural gas users. If the problem can be solved, it will bring the desired results because of the benefits from using this fuel.
References
IANGV,
(2004).
International
Association
for
Natural
Gas
Vehicles.
http://www.iangv.org/ Petronas NGV, (2004). Personal Communication with Operation and Services Department of Pertonas NGV. Department of Environment, (2002). Urban Air Quality Management: Motor Vehicle Emission Control in Malaysia. Department of Environment, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
187
Energy Information Administration, (2004). International Energy Outlook. Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC USA.
188
CHAPTER 6 STUDY ON VEHICLE EFFICIENCY STANDARDS

SUMMARY
Malaysia has been experiencing a dramatic increase in the number of vehicles used, and this is projected to be higher in the future due to increasing income per capita. This study focuses on the potential implementation of fuel economy standards for motor vehicles in Malaysia. The fuel economy standard is developed based on the fuel consumption data that is obtained from manufacturers and other related sources. With the increasing number of vehicles, fuel economy standards are one of the highly effective policies for decreasing energy use in the transportation sector. Fuel economy standards are also capable of reducing air pollution and contribute towards a positive environmental impact. In this study, the potential efficiency improvements of vehicles are analyzed by using the engineering-economic analysis. Meanwhile the possible efficiency improvement of motor vehicle in reducing the fuel consumption of Malaysias transportation sector in the future are examined by predicting the energy, economical and environmental impacts due to its implementation.
189
6.1. Introduction
Air pollution is one of the environmental concerns in Malaysia. The major contributor to air pollution in this country is road vehicles. As a result, the adoption of fuel economy standards for vehicles is one of the options to reduce the emission. The fuel economy standard could also play an important role in helping Malaysia to meet overall greenhouse gas and emissions reduction target and at the same time improve the competitiveness of the vehicle in the international arena. Buying a fuel efficient vehicle enables thousands of ringgit to be saved on fuel bills and reduces up to tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions over its life-time. Choosing an efficient vehicle is a good start to fuel-efficient driving and riding. However, the driving and riding habits and the type of vehicles driven will determine the fuel consumption of the vehicle. In order to reduce fuel consumption of vehicles, consumers should be educated to select the most fuel-efficient vehicle from the market. This objective could only be achieved by setting a fuel economy standard.
6.1.1. Background
The tremendous growth of private vehicles is caused by an increase in standards of living as well as lack of efficient public transportation system. As a result, the Department of Environment (DOE) have undertaken several measures to regulate and control emission from vehicles in Malaysia. These are: The Environmental Quality (Clean Air) Regulations 1978 The Environmental Quality (Control of lead concentration in automobile gasoline) Regulations 1985
190
The Environmental Quality (Control of emission from petrol engines) Regulations 1996 The Environmental Quality (Control of emission from diesel engines) Regulations 1996 The Environmental Quality (Control of Emission from Petrol Engines) Regulations of 1996 Part II stated that petrol engine vehicles having a specified capacity shall comply with the prescribed emission standards. In addition, emission test for a petrol engine shall be conducted in accordance with the methods as specified in the regulation and in an approved facility. Due to the low awareness among policy makers in implementing fuel economy standards and lack of enforcement for certification of standards, vehicle manufacturers are ignoring fuel economy as one of the main criteria during production. If high efficiency vehicles are not required, it probably does not pay to invest in the development. However with an appropriate policy, the manufacturers will have time to retool and invest in designing the vehicles that are more economic and efficient. As a result, the manufacturers will develop more efficient vehicle, which will benefit them as well as the consumers through the increase in demand and competitiveness of the product in the international market. From the implementation of both fuel economy standards and labels, Malaysia will be able to promote more efficient vehicle and will begin an important market transformation for efficient vehicle in this country. The fuel economy standards and labels could also contribute towards monetary savings as well as reducing the environmental impact such as greenhouse gasses.
191
6.2. Survey data
The data necessary for this study is the total number of vehicles in the country year by year which is presented in Table 6.1(JPJ, 2004). Fuel consumption data for vehicle is also necessary in order to calculate the fuel economy. These data is presented in Table 6.2 (Australian Greenhouse Office, 2003) and 6.3 (Berjaya Motor, 2004). Table 6.1. Total number of vehicles in Malaysia
Type of transport Year Personal transport Motorcycle 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1,929,978 2,030,418 2,182,468 2,388,477 2,595,749 2,762,666 2,970,769 3,297,474 3,608,475 3,951,931 4,328,997 4,692,183 5,082,473 5,356,604 5,609,351 5,842,617 Car 1,356,678 1,427,283 1,534,166 1,678,980 1,824,679 1,942,016 2,088,300 2,302,547 2,553,574 2,886,536 3,271,304 3,452,852 3,787,047 4,145,982 4,557,992 5,001,273 Bus 19,439 20,452 21,984 24,057 26,147 27,827 29,924 33,529 36,000 38,965 43,444 45,643 47,674 48,662 49,771 51,158 Public transport Taxi 24,868 26,161 28,120 30,774 33,444 35,596 38,278 42,204 46,807 49,485 51,293 54,590 55,626 56,152 56,579 58,066 Hire& Drive 3,741 3,937 4,232 4,631 5,033 5,357 5,762 5,308 8,195 9,971 10,826 10,042 10,020 10,433 9,986 10,073 233,103 245,232 263,597 288,479 313,514 333,674 358,808 393,833 440,723 512,165 574,622 599,149 642,976 665,284 689,668 713,148 106,677 112,226 120,629 132,016 143,472 152,698 164,199 178,439 203,660 237,631 269,983 286,898 304,135 315,687 329,198 345,604 3,674,484 3,865,709 4,155,196 4,547,414 4,942,038 5,259,834 5,656,040 6,253,334 6,897,434 7,686,684 8,550,469 9,141,357 9,929,951 10,598,804 11,302,545 12,021,939 Freight Other Total
192
Table.6.2. Fuel consumption data (CAR) Engine Displacement (liter) 1 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0(medium) 2.0(large) 2.2(medium) 2.2(large) 2.3(medium) 2.3(large) 2.4(medium) 2.4(large) 2.5(medium) 2.5(large) 2.6 2.7 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.3 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.4 5.0 5.6 5.7 6.75 City (liter/100km) (average) 7.1 7.4 7.6 7.7 8.3 7.9 8.9 9.3 9.8 10.7 9.6 10.4 10.8 10.3 10.7 10.1 10.1 11.1 10.5 11.4 10.8 11.1 11.7 13.3 11.6 12.3 14.5 11.7 12.5 14.0 15.6 13.3 19.6 Highway (liter/100km) (average) 5.8 5.8 5.4 5.6 5.9 6.4 6.1 6.2 6.7 7.8 6.5 6.6 6.8 7.6 6.6 6.3 7.8 7.0 6.8 7.2 6.6 7.1 7.6 8.3 7.1 7.6 8.3 7.8 7.9 8.6 9.3 8.1 12.0
193
Table 6.3 List of motorcycle model and price Manufacturer Honda Model DREAM C1003-MA DREAM C100M3-MA WAVE NF1004-MA WAVE NF100M4-MA Suzuki FD110KS FD110MS RU110 RU110U RGV120 FXR150 AG100 AN125 UE125TAM VR125 Yamaha RXZ CATALYZER NOUVO AT115 LAGENDA 110(K) LAGENDA 110(E) Y110 SS2 Y125 Y125 ZR YAMAHA EGO 115cc SR-V Price 4247.65 4550.52 4194.03 4530.53 4927.09 5267.43 5921.31 6165.09 6417.24 8412.95 5718.93 7629.40 6677.28 7528.33 6017.63 5044.63 5452.50 6228.76 6830.89 7161.82 4872.00 4403.00
194
6.3. Methodology
In order to evaluate the performance and improvement for the vehicles fuel economy standard in the study, there are several methods that have been considered and the most important approach is to include the fuel consumption effect, engineering economy analysis and motorcycle emission (GHG). These methods have been also used by many countries around the world.
6.3.1. Fuel consumption
Basic Calculation
As there is a rapid vehicle penetration in most Asian countries, the situation in Malaysia is no exception. Rapid industrialization, high economic and population growth has accelerated the use of vehicle tremendously. This can be shown through the increase in the number of road vehicle ownership. In our study, to calculate the average of each and every data that is collected, the arithmetic mean method is used. If each of the data is assigned as yi and the quantity of the data is n, therefore, arithmetic mean is as follow:
ym = 1 n yi n i =1 (6.1)
The driving habits, the type of vehicle and the conditions which it is driven under determines the vehicles fuel consumption and fuel cost. The annual fuel cost can be estimated using the following equation:
195
AFC (RM) =
[R F D]
100
(6.2)
Vehicle Growth The polynomial method can be used to predict the total number and the growth of vehicles in the future. The method is attempted to describe the relationship between variable x as the function of available data and response y. It seeks to find a smooth curve that the best fits the data, but does not necessarily pass through all data points. Mathematically, a polynomial of order k in x is an expression in the following form: y = c0 + c1 x + c 2 x 2 + ... + c k x k (6.3)
Fuel consumption units There are 2 types of units that represent the fuel consumption or the fuel economy standards. Miles per gallon is the unit that is in use in the United States of America. Most of the European countries use liter per 100 kilometer as the unit for fuel consumption and FES indication. In order to convert from one unit to the other, it is calculated with the following equation:
a (L / km) = 100 4.5192 (miles / gallon ) 100 a 1.614
(6.4)
6.3.2 Engineering Economy Analysis
In order to conduct the engineering economic analysis, the data on types and specification of vehicles are collected. Besides that, the fuel consumption data from other countries are also collected for reference. In this study, the
196
engineering/economic approach is adopted for proposing the standards. Engineering economy analysis is a method used for estimating the potential vehicle fuel economy improvement by enumerating specific technologies as well as estimating its cumulative impact on fuel economy and its cost. Substituting more efficient but more expensive technology or technological innovation is not the only way to improve fuel economy. Higher miles per gallon (mpg) could also be achieved by reducing vehicles size and performance as well as by cutting back on accessories and luxury features. However these strategies sometimes require trading off attributes that consumers value. Attributes such as acceleration, can be translated into dollar values only with a great uncertainty. Thus, if many attributes are significantly changed to increase mpg, the proof of minimal adverse consequences is lost. For this reason, most studies estimate the costs of increased fuel economy while attempting to hold all other vehicle attributes at least approximately constant. The following seven steps are the basis for conducting an engineering economic analysis: 1. Select vehicle classes 2. Select baseline values 3. Select design options for each classes 4. Calculate fuel consumption improvement for each design option 5. Combine design options and calculate the fuel consumption improvement 6. Develop cost estimates for each design option 7. Generate cost-fuel consumption curve Once these steps are completed, it is possible to analyze the economic impact of the potential fuel consumption improvement on the consumers by carrying out a
197
life cycle cost and payback period analysis. As the standard is in place, the fuel consumption levels are able to develop because the standard is a minimum value target. The baseline level for the fuel consumption is selected based on the average fuel consumption in each class of the vehicle.
Selection of vehicle classes. All vehicles are classified according to their classes. For this purpose, the vehicle classification is obtained from the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries VFACTS Report. The classes are differentiated according to the engine displacement and are adopted in the analysis. The broad classes are light, small, medium, large, people movers, sports, prestige and luxury vehicles. Only 4 main classes will be considered in this study. These are: (i) Light (Class I) 3 or 4 cylinder passenger cars, hatch or sedan, up to 1.5 liters. (ii) Small (Class II) 4 cylinder passenger cars, hatch, sedan or wagon, 1.6-1.9 liters. (iii) Medium (Class III) 4 cylinder passenger cars, hatch, sedan or wagon, over 1.9 liters. (iv) Large (Class IV) 6 or 8 cylinder passenger cars, hatch, sedan or wagon.
198
For motorcycle, the classes are: (i) 2-stroke The engine displacement ranging from 80 cc to 150 cc. Examples: Suzuki RGV 120, Yamaha RX-Z 135, Yamaha 125z. (ii) 4-stroke The engine displacement ranging from 80 cc to 150 cc. Examples: Honda EX-5, Suzuki FX-R 150, Yamaha E-Go 115.
For lorry the classes are: (i) (ii) Class 2 and 3: Light duty lorries. Class 4 6: Medium duty lorries.
(iii) Class 7 and 8: Heavy duty lorries.
Selection of baseline unit. The baseline unit is selected to provide basic design features during the analysis. For products without any additional design option for improvement, the baseline models are the one that has fuel consumption value equal to the minimum or the average of the existing models. Selecting the least efficient model as the baseline model is recommended since this permits analysis of trial at all possible levels of efficiency starting from the least efficient models. Therefore, the least efficient model from the market of each class is selected as the baseline model for engineering/economic analysis.
199
Selection of design option for each class. Design options are changes to the design of a baseline model that improve its fuel consumption value. The potential design options are selected based on the substitution of more efficient component to the baseline product. The data for the potential design improvement is collected from the database developed in other countries.
Fuel consumption improvement for each design option Fuel consumption improvement of each design option is determined by calculating potential improvement from component substitutions to the baseline models. For the entire vehicle, the fuel consumption improvement is calculated based on the potential design options (component substitution) for improving the fuel economy standard (FES).
Fuel consumption improvement of combination design options. Fuel consumption calculations are performed for the various components substitution for the baseline product in accordance to the input from manufacturers of the baseline models. For combination design options, fuel economy standard (FES) is determined through cumulative improvement of each design option.
Cost estimates for each design option The cost estimates for each design option is the cost of producing the vehicle with the improved design options. The expected cost of manufacturing each design
200
option is obtained from vehicle manufacturers. However, when manufacturing costs are unavailable, the expected costs is estimated based on retail price, or from the design options that already exists in the market place. If the data is still unavailable from these sources, the necessary data will be collected from published reference materials.
Cost efficiency curves The cost efficiency curve is determined by calculating life cycle cost (LCC) for the vehicle due to the fuel consumption or fuel economy standard improvement based on each design option, and combination design options. The LCC is the sum of investment cost and the annual operating cost discounted over the lifetime of the appliance. LCC is calculated by the following equation:
LCC = PC +
1 N
OCt (1 r )t
(6.5)
If operating expenses are constant over time, the LCC is simplified to the following equation: LCC = PC + (PWF)(OC) (6.6)
To calculate the life cycle cost, the annual operating cost for the baseline unit should be identified. The annual operating cost (OC) of vehicle is the sum of annual fuel cost (A) and annual maintenance cost (C). It can be calculated as follows: OC = A + C (6.7)
The annual fuel cost of a vehicle is given in Eq. (6.2), meanwhile the annual maintenance cost is the total cost of the components being replaced and the labor
201
cost when the vehicle is being serviced. The components are lubricant, oil filter, spark plug and gasket. Meanwhile, to determine the present worth factor, it is calculated by the following equation:
PWF =
1 N
(1 + r )
1 1 1 r (1 + r )N
(6.8)
The payback period (PAY) measures the amount of time needed to recover the additional investment (increment cost) as a result of increased fuel consumption through lower operating cost. PAY is calculated by solving the following equation: PC + OCt = 0
1 PAY
(6.9)
In general, PAY is found by interpolating the results between two years when the above expression changes sign. If OC is constant, the equation has the solution as given below: PAY = PC OC (6.10)
The PAY is the ratio of incremental cost (from the baseline to the more efficient vehicle) to the decrease in annual operating expenses. If PAY is greater than the lifetime of the vehicle, it means that the increment in purchase price is not recovered by the reduced operating expenses.
202
6.3.3 Potential fuel savings
Baseline fuel consumption The baseline fuel consumption is usually based on the test data. To obtain the baseline fuel consumption in the future, predictions are made using the annual fuel efficiency improvement. The baseline fuel consumption in a particular year can be calculated by the following equation:
v BFC sv = BFCYsc 1 + AEI iv
)(
Ypd Ysc )
(6.11)
Initial unit fuel savings The initial unit fuel savings is the difference between the annual unit fuel consumption of a unit meeting the standard and the unit fuel consumption of the average unit that would have been shipped in the absence of standard. Initial unit fuel savings can be calculated by the following equation:
UFS sv = BFC sv SFC sv
(6.12)
Shipment Shipment data comprise the number of registered vehicle in predicting year minus the number of registered vehicle in the previous year. The shipment for vehicle can be expressed by the following equation:
Shiv = Naiv Naiv1
(6.13)
203
Total efficiency improvement Total efficiency improvement is a percentage ratio of initial unit fuel savings and baseline fuel consumption of vehicle while the standards are enacted. Thus, total efficiency improvement can be calculated using the following equation:
TEI sv = Scaling Factor
UFS sv 100% BFC sv
(6.14)
The scaling factor would linearly scale down the unit fuel savings of vehicle and the incremental cost to zero over the effective lifetime of the fuel economy standards. The scaling factor can be expressed by the following equation: SFi v = 1 Yshiv Yseiv
AEI sv TEI sv
(6.15)
Unit fuel savings The unit fuel savings were adjusted downward in the years after the standards are implemented using the efficiency trend scaling factor. This factor accounts for the natural progress in efficiency that is expected in the baseline case. The unit fuel savings for vehicle can be calculated by the following equation:
UFS iv = SFi v UFS sv
(6.16)
204
Shipment survival factor The shipment survival factor is a function of the annual retirement rate and the retirement function. The shipment survival factor for motorcycles can be calculated using the following equation:
v YtcT Yshiv 2 / 3Lv SSFi v = 1 v (4 / 3 2 / 3) L
(6.17)
Applicable stock The applicable stock is the shipments in a particular year plus the number of vehicles affected by standards in previous year multiplied by shipment survival factor. The applicable stock can be calculated using the following equation: AS iv = Shiv SSFi v + AS iv1
(6.18)
Fuel savings To determine the unit fuel savings in a particular year, the fuel savings for vehicle associated with the standard is multiplied by the scaling factor and the number of vehicles purchased in that year. The fuel savings can be calculated by the following equation: FS iv = AS iv UES iv SFi v
i=s T
(6.19)
Economic impact of the standards The economic impact consists of potential bill savings, net savings and cumulative present value. The economic impact is actually a function of fuel savings
205
and the investment for more efficient vehicle due to the fuel economy standards. The description of each variable is explained in the following section.
Initial incremental cost Initial incremental cost per unit of motor vehicle is a function of unit fuel savings and incremental cost which can be calculated using the following equation: IIC sv = UES sv IC v (6.20)
Capital recovery factor. Capital recovery factor is the correlation between the real discount rate and the lifespan of the motor vehicle. This correlation can be expressed by the following mathematical equation : CRF =
(1 (1 + d ) )
Lr
(6.21)
Bill savings The bill savings is the fuel savings multiplied by the average fuel price and can be expressed as follows: BS iv = FS iv PFi n (6.22)
Net savings There are two ways to estimate economic impact; annualized costs and cash flow. In the first method, the incremental cost is spread over the lifetime of the
206
vehicle so that the pattern of expenditures matches the flow of bill savings. This method smoothes the net saving over time. The annualized net RM savings in a particular year, which is the main economic indicator used in this analysis, is calculated using the following equation: ANS iv = FS iv PFi n AS iv CRF SFi v IIC v
i=s T
(6.23)
The second method considers the cash flow over the lifetime of the investment assuming that the vehicle is paid for in full when it is purchased. Purchasers incur the incremental cost when the appliance is purchased, but benefits of higher energy efficiency are spread over the lifetime of the vehicle. To calculate the net savings in a certain year in terms of actual cash flows, the following equation is used: NS iv = ES iv PFi n Shiv SFi v IIC v (6.24)
Cumulative present value The cumulative present value can be calculated using the percentage of real discount rate. The cumulative present value of annualized net savings can be expressed in the mathematical form as follows: PV (ANS iv ) =
T i=s
(1 + d )(i Ydr )
ANS iv
(6.25)
207
6.4. Results and discussions
6.4.1 Introduction
This chapter contains results on fuel economy standards for motor vehicles and their impact at national level. The engineering/economic approach is applied to examine potential fuel economy improvement of the least efficient model of motor vehicles in Malaysia. Fuel consumption calculation is modified based on the theory that is in use in several countries. Predicted economic and energy impact due to the implementation of fuel economy standards is also discussed. Finally, the potential recommendations related to fuel economy standards are presented.
6.4.2 Fuel Consumption
In order to calculate the annual fuel cost, the petrol cost is considered at RM1.42 per liter. For a vehicle achieving 8 liter/100 km and traveling 15000 km per year, the annual fuel cost is estimated to be: FC = 8 liter RM1.42 15000 km 100 km
= RM1704
Based on this simple calculation, the lifetime vehicle traveling cost can be estimated consequently and the effect of even small differences in fuel consumption can be predicted. For example, if a vehicle achieving 8 liter/100 km is compared with the one achieving 10 liter/100 km, the annual fuel cost will be RM1704 and RM2130 each
208
respectively. Over the lifetime of the vehicle which is 10 years, the estimated cost of fuel is presented in Table 6.4.
Table 6.4 Fuel cost over the vehicles 10 years lifetime Fuel consumption 2 liter / 100 km 3 liter / 100 km 4 liter / 100km 5 liter / 100 km 6 liter / 100 km 8 liter / 100 km 10 liter / 100km 12 liter / 100 km Fuel cost RM 4260 RM 6390 RM 8520 RM10650 RM 12780 RM 17040 RM 21300 RM25560
6.4.3 Vehicle growth
The total vehicles are predicted based on the data collected from Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan (JPJ) Malaysia and using Eq. (3.3). The results are presented in Appendix A. Meanwhile, the potential vehicle growth in Malaysia in the future is predicted using the following equation:
Car
y = 12826 x 2 + 49435 x + 1E + 06 , R 2 = 0.9986

Motorcycle
(6.26)
209
y = 7761.6 x 2 + 163192 x + 2E + 06 , R 2 = 0.9951

Lorry
(6.27)
y = 747.13 x 2 + 24526 x + 212400 , R 2 = 0.9824

Bus
(6.28)
y = 4.4618 x 2 + 2296.4 x + 17723 , R 2 = 0.9855
(6.29)
6.4.4 Engineering/economic analysis
Engineering/economic analysis is conducted to evaluate the fuel economy standards for vehicles in Malaysia. The first step for this analysis is the selection of vehicles classes. The baseline unit selected for analysis is the average or the least efficient models obtained from the market through data collection. The design options for baseline units in each class are selected and the potential fuel economy improvement is determined through this analysis. In order to analyze the life cycle cost and payback period the incremental cost for each design option is identified. Each step of the procedure is discussed in the following section.
Selection of vehicle classes The first step in the engineering/economic analysis is the grouping of vehicles types into separate classes. The classes are selected according to the engine displacement whereby different fuel economy standards are applicable. The classes are shown in Table 6.5, 6.6 and 6.7.
210
Table 6.5 Types/Classes of cars. Class Type Engine Displacement Light (Class I) 3 or 4 cylinder passenger cars, hatch or sedan. Small (Class II) 4 cylinder passenger cars, hatch, sedan or wagon. Medium (Class III) 4 cylinder passenger cars, hatch, sedan or wagon. Large (Class IV) 6 or 8 cylinder cars, hatch, sedan or wagon. over 1.9 liters over 1.9 liters 1.5-1.9 liters above 1.5 liters
Table 6.6 Types/Classes of motorcycles Types of motorcycles 2 Stroke - engine displacement from 80cc to 150cc 4 Stroke - engine displacement from 80cc to 150cc Model Yamaha RX-Z 135, Yamaha110SS2, Yamaha 125Z, Suzuki RGV120, Suzuki RU110 Suzuki FXR150, Suzuki FD110MS, Yamaha Lagenda 110, Honda Dream C100, Honda Wave NF100
211
Table 6.7 Types/Classes of lorry Class 2 and 3 Type Minivan, Utility van, Step van, Conventional van, Full-size pickup, Walk-in truck, City delivery truck 4-6 Conventional van, City delivery truck, Large walk-in truck, Bucket, Beverage truck, Singleaxle truck, Rack truck, School bus 7-8 Refuse truck, Furniture truck, Medium conventional truck, Dump truck, Cement truck, Heavy conventional truck, COE sleeper truck, City transit bus 26001Ib and above 14001Ib to 26000Ib GVW 6001Ib to 14000Ib
Selection of baseline unit The design options are changes made to the design of the baseline model that will improve fuel economy of the vehicle. Selection of design options are made based on substitution of the present components used by vehicle to a more efficient one. Some of the options are already adopted by existing vehicle and others are being developed in Malaysia or in other countries such as Japan, United States, Europe and other car manufacturers. The potential improvement for design options from each class are determined based on input and suggestion from manufacturers and references for the least efficient model. The lists of potential design options proposed in this study for the least efficient model are tabulated in table 6.8, 6.9, 6.10, 6.11 and 6.12.
212
Table 6.8 Potential increase in fuel economy and related price increase for cars No. Technology A Potential fuel efficiency improvement (%) 1- 5 Potential average retail price increase (RM) 133-532
Engine technologies productionintent engine technologies A.1 Engine friction and other
mechanical/hydrodynamic loss reduction A.2 Application of advanced low friction lubricants A.3 Multi-valve, overhead camshaft valve trains A.4 Variable valve timing A.5 Variable valve lift and timing A.6 Cylinder deactivation A.7 Engine accessory improvement A.8 Engine downsizing and supercharging B
Transmission technologies production-intent transmission technologies B.1 Continuous variable transmission
1 2-5 2-3 1-2 5-7 5-10 2-6
30-42 399-532 133-532 266-798 426-958 319-426 1330-2128
4-8 2-3
532-1330 266-585
(CVT) B.2 Five speed automatic transmission C

Vehicle technologies productionintent vehicle technologies C.1 Aerodynamic drag reduction on
1-2 1-1 1 2 3-4
0-532 53-213 798-1330
vehicle designs C.2 Improved rolling resistance C.3 Vehicle weight reduction (5%)
213
Table 6.9 Potential increase in fuel economy and cost for motorcycles No Technology Potential fuel efficiency improvement (%) 30 35 12 - 15 5 - 10 4 1 1 Potential average retail price increase (RM) 1005 1005 201 350 250 20
Fuel Injection Direct injection (2 stroke) Port injection (4 stroke)
B C D E
Petrol saver Motorcycle weight reduction (5%) Aerodynamic drag reduction on motorcycles design Application of advanced low friction lubricant
214
Table 6.10 Potential increase in fuel economy and related price increase for Medium Duty Lorry (class 2 & 3) No Technology Potential fuel efficiency improvement (%) 2.5 Potential average retail price increase (RM) 2280
A AERODYNAMICS A1 Lower coefficient of drag through hood and cab configuration, bumper and underside baffles B ROLLING RESISTANCE B1 Low rolling resistance tires C TRANSMISSION C1 Advance transmission with lock-up, electronic controls and reduced friction. D DIESEL ENGINE D1 Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management D2 Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking E E1 E2
GASOLINE ENGINE Electronic fuel injection, DOHC and multiple valves Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking VEHICLE MASS Mass reduction through high strength, lightweight material
2.5 2.0
684 2750
5.0
2660
5.0
4560
5.0 5.0
2660 3800
F F1
5.0
4600
215
Table 6.11 Potential increase in fuel economy and related price increase for Medium Duty Lorry (class 4-6) No Technology Potential fuel efficiency improvement (%) A A1 A2
AERODYNAMICS
Potential average retail price increase (RM) 2850 3040
A3 B B1 C C1
Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer, aerodynamic bumper, underside air baffles, wheel well covers Van leading and trailing edge curvatures
ROLLING RESISTANCE
2.5 4.0
1.0
1520
Low rolling resistance tires

TRANSMISSION
2.5 2.0
1064 3420
Advance transmission with lockup, electronic controls and reduced friction.

DIESEL ENGINE Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking GASOLINE ENGINE Electronic fuel injection, DOHC and multiple valves Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking
D D1 D2
8.0 5.0
3800 4560
E E1 E2
5.0 8.0
3800 4560
216
Table 6.12 Potential increase in fuel economy and related price increase for Heavy Duty Lorry (class 7 & 8) No Technology Potential fuel efficiency improvement (%) A A1 A2
AERODYNAMICS Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer, aerodynamic bumper, underside air baffles, wheel well covers Trailer leading and trailing edge curvatures ROLLING RESISTANCE Low rolling resistance tires TRANSMISSION Advance transmission with lockup, electronic controls and reduced friction. AUXILIARIES Electrical auxiliaries (air compressor, hydraulic pump, radiator fan) DIESEL ENGINE Internal friction reduction through better lubricants and improved bearings Increased peak cylinder pressure VEHICLE MASS (TARE) Mass reduction through highstrength, lightweight material
Potential average retail price increase (RM) 2850 5700
2.0 2.5
A3 B B1 C C1
1.3
1900
3.0 2.0
2090 7600
D D1
1.5
1900
E E1 E2 F F1
2.0 4.0 10.0
1900 3800 7600
217
Fuel consumption improvement for each design option Fuel consumption improvement is calculated based on the selection of design options for each class. This analysis takes into account the potential fuel consumption improvement for each design options independently. The incremental cost estimates for using these options were obtained from manufacturers and other references. The incremental costs are the investment cost to produce vehicle with the new design option. The results of design options improvement for baseline design (no design change) for class I, II, III and IV motor vehicles are presented in Table 6.13, 6.14, 6.15 and 6.16. For the 2 stroke and 4 stroke motorcycles, the results are presented in Table 6.25, 6.26 and 6.27. Table 6.31, 6.32, 6.33 and 6.34 shows the results of the design option improvements for lorries and busses.
Fuel consumption improvement for combination design options The fuel consumption improvement for combined design options are started from the baseline design. The design changes are then accumulated together with fuel economy standard improvements. The incremental cost for design options are calculated cumulatively and based on priority of the highest fuel economy standard improvement and the lowest incremental cost. The calculation results of are tabulated in Table 6.17 - Table 6.25. For the 2 stroke and 4 stroke motorcycles, the results are presented in Table 6.28, 6.29 and 6.30. Meanwhile, Table 6.35, 6.36 and 6.38 shows the results for the improvement of combination design option for lorries and busses.
218
Baseline Least efficient
- 6.9 (city) & 5.4 (highway) - 7.6 (city) & 5.8 (highway)
Table 6.13 FES and incremental cost of design options for class I car
Design Options 0 A.2 Technological Improvements Least efficient design Application of advanced low friction lubricant A.3 B.2 C.2 Multi-valve, overhead camshaft valve trains Five speed automatic transmission Improved rolling resistance 7.49 5.71 1.5 213 0.50 7.37 5.63 3 585 1.36 7.22 5.51 5 532 1.24 City 7.60 7.52 FES Highway 5.80 5.74 FES -( % ) 0 1 Cost ( RM ) 0 42 %Price (%) 0 0.10
219
Table 6.14 FES and incremental cost of design options for class II
Design Options 0 A.1 A.2 A.4 A.7 C.2 Technological Improvements Least efficient design Engine friction and other losses reduction Application of advanced low friction lubricant Variable valve timing Engine accessory improvement Improved rolling resistance 9.16 6.30 1 53 0.08 9.02 8.84 6.21 6.08 3 5 532 319 0.76 0.46 9.21 6.34 1 42 0.06 City 9.30 9.21 FES Highway 6.40 6.34 FES -( % ) 0 1 Cost ( RM ) 0 133 % Price (%) 0 0.19
Table 6.15 FES and incremental cost of design options for class III
Design Options 0 A.2 A.7 B.1 C.2 Technological Improvements Least efficient design Applications of advanced, low friction lubricants Engine accessory improvement Continuously variable transmission (CVT) Improved rolling resistance 11.0 7.72 1 53 0.06 10.66 7.49 4 532 0.56 10.55 7.41 5 319 0.34 11.1 11.0 FES City Highway 7.8 7.72 0 1 0 42 0 0.04 FES -( % ) Cost ( RM ) % Price (%)
220
Table 6.16 FES and incremental cost of design options for class IV
Design Options 0 A.1 Technological Improvements Least efficient design Engine friction and other mechanical/ hydrodynamic losses A.2 A.4 A.7 C.2 Application of advanced low friction lubricant Variable valve timing Engine accessory improvement Improved rolling resistance 13.17 8.22 1 53 0.05 12.90 12.64 8.05 7.89 3 5 532 319 0.48 0.29 13.17 8.22 1 42 0.04 City 13.3 12.64 FES Highway 8.3 7.89 FES -( % ) 0 5 Cost ( RM ) 0 532 Price (%) 0 0.48
Table 6.17 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class I (CITY)
No 0 1 2 3 4 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+Multi-valve,overhead camshaft valve trains 2+Improved rolling resistance 3+Five speed automatic transmission 7.04 6.83 7.4 10.1 43213 43585 1.83 3.19 7.15 5.9 43532 1.33 FES Imp. 7.60 7.52 Cum. FES imp (%) 0 1.0 Price (RM) 43000 43042 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.10
221
Table 6.18 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class I (HIGHWAY)
No 0 1 2 3 4 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+Multi-valve, overhead camshaft valve trains 2+Improved rolling resistance 3+Five speed automatic transmission 5.37 5.21 7.4 10.1 43213 43585 1.83 3.19 5.45 5.9 43532 1.33 FES Imp. 5.80 5.74 Cum. FES imp (%) 0 1.0 Price (RM) 43000 43042 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.10
Table 6.19 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class II (CITY)
No 0 1 2 3 4 5 Design options Least efficient design 0+Applications of advanced , low friction lubricants 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Engine friction and other loss reduction 4+Variable valve timing 8.32 10.6 71079 1.54 9.11 8.66 8.57 2.0 6.9 7.8 70095 70414 70547 0.14 0.59 0.78 FES Imp. 9.30 9.21 Cum. FES imp (%) 0.0 1.0 70000 70042 Price (RM) Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.06
222
Table 6.20 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class II (HIGHWAY)
No Design options FES Imp. Cum. FES imp (%) 0 1 2 3 4 5 Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Engine friction and other losses reduction 4+Variable valve timing 5.63 10.6 71079 1.54 6.17 5.87 5.81 2.0 6.9 7.8 70095 70414 70547 0.14 0.59 0.78 6.30 6.24 0.0 1.0 Price (RM) 70000 70042 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.06
Table 6.21 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class III (CITY)
No Design options FES Imp. Cum. FES imp (%) 0 1 2 3 4 Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Continuous variable transmission (CVT) 10.88 10.34 9.92 2.0 6.9 10.6 95095 95414 95946 0.10 0.44 1.00 11.10 10.99 0.0 1.0 Price (RM) 95000 95042 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.04
223
Table 6.22 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class III (HIGHWAY)
No Design options FES Imp. Cum. FES imp (%) 0 1 2 3 4 Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Continuous variable transmission (CVT) 7.64 7.26 6.97 2.0 6.9 10.6 95095 95414 95946 0.10 0.44 1.00 7.80 7.72 0.0 1.0 95000 95042 Price (RM) Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.04
Table 6.23 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class IV (CITY)
No 0 1 2 3 4 5 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Engine friction and other losses reduction 4+Variable valve timing 11.41 14.2 111478 1.34 13.17 13.04 12.38 11.76 2.0 6.9 11.5 FES Imp. 13.30 Cum. FES imp (%) 0.0 1.0 110042 110095 110414 110946 0.09 0.38 0.86 Price (RM) 110000 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.04
224
Table 6.24 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for class IV (HIGHWAY)
No 0 1 2 3 4 5 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Engine friction and other losses reduction 4+Variable valve timing 7.12 14.2 111478 1.34 8.13 7.73 7.34 2.0 6.9 11.5 FES Imp. 8.30 8.22 Cum. FES imp (%) 0.0 1.0 110042 110095 110414 110946 0.09 0.38 0.86 110000 Price (RM) Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.04
2 STROKE MOTORCYCLE Baseline = 2.9 liter/100km Least efficient = 3.65 liter/100km
Table 6.25 FES and incremental cost of design option for 2 stroke motorcycle (METHOD I)
Design Options 0 A.1 Least efficient design Fuel Injection Direct -injection (2 stroke) Technological Improvements FES (liter/100k m) 3.65 2.56 0 30 0 1005 0 16 FES (%) Cost (RM) % Price (RM)
225
Table 6.26 FES and incremental cost of design options for 2 stroke motorcycle (METHOD II)
Design Options 0 E B C D Technological Improvements Least efficient design Application of advanced low friction lubricant Petrol saver Motorcycle weight reduction (5%) Aerodynamic drag reduction on design 3.61 1 250 3.8 3.29 3.5 10 4 201 350 3 5.3 FES (liter/100k m) 3.65 3.61 0 1 0 20 0 0.3 FES (%) Cost (RM) % Price (RM)
4 STROKE MOTORCYCLE Baseline = 2.30 liter/100km Least efficient = 2.92 liter/100km
Table 6.27 FES and incremental cost of design options for 4 stroke motorcycle
Design Options 0 E B A.2 Technological Improvements Least efficient design Application of advanced low friction lubricant Petrol saver Fuel injection Port injection 2.63 2.57 10 12 201 1005 3.9 19.5 FES (liter/100km) 2.92 2.89 FES (%) 0 1 Cost (RM) 0 20 % Price (RM) 0 0.4
226
2 STROKE MOTORCYCLE
Table 6.28 FES and incremental cost of combined design option for 2 stroke motorcycle (METHOD I)
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Fuel Injection Direct -injection (2 stroke) FES Imp. 3.65 2.56 Cum. FES imp (%) 0 30 Price (RM) 6634.06 7639.06 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 15.0
Table 6.29 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for 2 stroke motorcycle (METHOD II)
No 0 1 2 3 4 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+ Petrol saver 2+ Motorcycle weight reduction (5%) Aerodynamic drag reduction on design 3.09 15 7455.06 12.0 3.25 3.12 11 14 6855.06 7205.06 3.0 9.0 FES Imp. 3.65 3.61 Cum. FES imp (%) 0 1 Price (RM) 6634.06 6654.06 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.3
227
Table 6.30 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for 4 stroke motorcycle
No Design options FES Imp. Cum. FES imp (%) 0 1 2 3 Least efficient design 0+ Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+ Petrol saver 2+ Fuel injection Port injection 2.63 2.29 11 22 2.92 2.89 0 1 5183.72 5384.72 6389.72 4 24 5163.72 Price (RM) Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.4
LORRIES Medium Duty lorry (class 2 and 3) Least efficient design = 20.59 liter/100km Baseline = 16.45 liter/100km
228
Table 6.31 FES and incremental cost of combined design for Medium Duty lorry (class 2 and 3)
Design Options 0 B1 D1 Technological Improvements Least efficient design Low rolling resistance tires Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management A1 Lower coefficient of drag through hood and cab configuration D2 Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking F1 Mass reduction through high strength, lightweight material C1 Advance transmission with lock-up, electronic controls 20.18 2.0 2750 2.12 19.56 5.0 4600 3.54 19.56 5.0 4560 3.51 20.08 2.5 2280 1.75 FES (liter/100k m) 20.59 20.08 19.56 0 2.5 5.0 0 684 2660 0 0.53 2.05 FES (%) Cost (RM) % Price (RM)
Medium Duty lorry (class 4-6) Least efficient design = 28 liter/100km Baseline = 22 liter/100km
229
Table 6.32 FES and incremental cost of combined design for Medium Duty lorry (class 4 - 6)
Design Options 0 Technological Improvements Least efficient design FES (liter/100k m) 28.00 0 0 0 FES (%) Cost (RM) % Price (RM)
B1
Low rolling resistance tires
27.3
2.5
1064
0.38
D1
Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management
25.76
8.0
3800
1.36
A2 D2
Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking
26.88 26.60
4.0 5.0
3040 4560
1.09 1.63
A1
Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares
27.30
2.5
2850
1.02
A3
Van leading and trailing edge curvatures
27.72
1.0
1520
0.54
C1
Advance transmission with lock-up, electronic controls and reduced friction.
27.44
2.0
3420
1.22
Heavy Duty lorry (class 7 & 8) Least efficient design = 42.42 liter/100km Baseline = 32.85 liter/100km
230
Table 6.33 FES and incremental cost of combined design for Heavy Duty lorry (class 7 & 8)
Design Options 0 B1 F1 Technological Improvements Least efficient design Low rolling resistance tires Mass reduction through high-strength, lightweight material E1 Internal friction reduction through better lubricant and improved bearings E2 Increased peak cylinder pressure D1 A1 Electrical auxiliaries Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares A2 Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer, aerodynamic bumper 41.36 2.5 5700 1.16 41.78 41.57 1.5 2.0 1900 2850 0.39 0.58 40.72 4.0 3800 0.77 41.57 2.0 1900 0.39 FES (liter/100k m) 42.42 41.15 38.18 0 3.0 10.0 0 2090 7600 0 0.42 1.54 FES (%) Cost (RM) % Price (RM)
Bus Least efficient design = 40.58 liter/100km Baseline = 32.00 liter/100km
231
Table 6.34 FES and incremental cost of combined design for busses
Design Options 0 B1 F1 Technological Improvements Least efficient design Low rolling resistance tires Mass reduction through high-strength, lightweight material E1 Internal friction reduction through better lubricant and improved bearings E2 D1 A1 Increased peak cylinder pressure Electrical auxiliaries Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares A2 Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer, aerodynamic bumper 39.57 2.5 5700 1.19 39.97 39.77 1.5 2.0 1900 2850 0.40 0.59 38.96 4.0 3800 0.79 39.77 2.0 1900 0.40 FES (liter/100km) 40.58 39.36 36.52 FES (%) 0 3.0 10.0 Cost (RM) 0 2090 7600 % Price (RM) 0 0.43 1.58
232
Table 6.35 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for Medium Duty lorry (class 2 and 3)
No 0 1 2 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Low rolling resistance tires 1+ Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management 3 2+ Lower coefficient of drag through hood and cab configuration 4 3+ Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking 5 4+ Mass reduction through high strength, lightweight material 6 5+ Advance transmission with lockup, electronic control 16.45 20.1 147534 13.50 16.78 18.5 144784 11.40 17.66 14.2 140184 7.80 18.59 9.7 135624 4.30 FES Imp. 20.59 20.08 19.07 Cum. FES imp (%) 0 2.5 7.4 Price (RM) 130000 130684 133344 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.50 2.60
233
Table 6.36 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for Medium Duty lorry (class 4-6)
No 0 1 2 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Low rolling resistance tires 1+ Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management 3 4 2+ Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer 3+ Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking 5 6 7 4+ Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares 5+ Van leading and trailing edge curvatures 6+ Advance transmission with lockup, electronic controls and reduced friction. 21.67 22.6 300254 7.20 22.11 21.0 296834 6.00 22.33 20.2 295314 5.50 22.91 18.2 292464 4.50 24.11 13.9 287904 2.80 FES Imp. 28.00 27.30 25.12 Cum. FES imp (%) 0 2.5 10.3 Price (RM) 280000 281064 284864 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.40 1.70
234
Table 6.37 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for Heavy Duty lorry (class 7 and 8)
No 0 1 2 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Low rolling resistance tires 1+ Mass reduction through highstrength, lightweight material 3 2+ Internal friction reduction through better lubricant and improved bearings 4 5 6 7 3+ Increased peak cylinder pressure 4+ Electrical auxiliaries 5+ Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares 6+ Closing/covering of gap between tractor bumper and trailer, aerodynamic 32.79 22.7 517840 5.30 34.84 34.32 33.63 17.9 19.1 20.7 507390 509290 512140 3.10 3.50 4.10 36.29 14.4 503590 2.40 FES Imp. 42.42 41.15 37.03 Cum. FES imp (%) 0 3.0 12.7 Price (RM) 492000 494090 501690 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.40 2.00
235
Table 6.38 FES and incremental cost of combined design options for Bus
No 0 1 2 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Low rolling resistance tires 1+ Mass reduction through highstrength, lightweight material 3 2+ Internal friction reduction through better lubricant and improved bearings 4 5 6 7 3+ Increased peak cylinder pressure 4+ Electrical auxiliaries 5+ Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares 6+ Closing/covering of gap between tractor bumper and trailer, aerodynamic 31.37 22.7 506540 5.40 33.33 32.83 32.17 17.9 19.1 20.7 496090 497990 500840 3.20 3.60 4.20 34.72 14.4 492290 2.40 FES Imp. 40.58 39.36 35.43 Cum. FES imp (%) 0 3.0 12.7 Price (RM) 480700 482790 490390 Cum. Price imp.(%) 0.00 0.40 2.00
Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation The life cycle cost and payback period are calculated using equations 6.5 to 6.11 and input data discussed in the previous section. At the same time, some input values such as discount rate, fuel price, vehicle lifespan, average mileage, baseline data and least efficient model for each class are required. The input data are tabulated in Table 6.39 and Table 6.40 for motor vehicles. Table 6.41 displays input data for the motorcycle and Table 6.42 for lorries and busses.
236
Table 6.39 The input value of baseline models for each class of car (City Driving).
Variable Engine Displacement (liters) Baseline FES (litres/100km) Least efficient FES (litres/100km) Fuel price (RM/liter) Discount rate (%) Vehicle lifespan (years) Average mileage use (km/year) Class I 1.0-1.4 6.9 7.6 1.42 7 10 15000 Class II 1.5-1.9 8.4 9.3 1.42 7 10 15000 Class III 2.0-2.5 10.4 11.1 1.42 7 10 15000 Class IV 2.0-6.75 11.5 13.3 1.42 7 10 15000
Table 6.40 The input value of baseline models for each class of car (Highway Driving).
Variable Engine Displacement (liters) Baseline FES (litres/100km) Least efficient FES (litres/100km) Fuel price (RM/liter) Discount rate (%) Vehicle lifespan (years) Average mileage use (km/year) Class I 1.0-1.4 5.4 5.8 1.42 7 10 15000 Class II 1.5-1.9 6.04 6.4 1.42 7 10 15000 Class III 2.0-2.5 7.0 7.8 1.42 7 10 15000 Class IV 2.6-6.75 7.3 8.3 1.42 7 10 15000
237
Table 6.41 The input value of baseline models for each class of motorcycles Variable Engine Displacement (cc) Baseline FES (litres/100km) Least efficient FES (litres/100km) Fuel price (RM/liter) Discount rate (%) Vehicle lifespan (years) Average mileage use (km/year) 2 Strokes (Method I) 80-150 2.90 3.65 1.42 7 10 15000 2 Strokes (Method 2) 80-150 2.90 3.65 1.37 7 10 15000 80-150 2.30 2.92 1.37 7 10 15000 4 Strokes
Table 6.42 The input value of baseline models for each class of lorries and busses
Variable GVW Baseline FES (litres/100km) Least efficient FES (litres/100km) Fuel price (RM/liter) Discount rate (%) Vehicle lifespan (years) Average mileage use (km/year) 1.42 7 15 20000 1.42 7 15 20000 1.42 7 15 20000 1.42 7 15 25000 20.59 28.00 42.42 40.58 Class 2 & 3 6001Ib to 14000Ib 16.45 Class 4-6 14001Ib to 26000Ib 22.00 Class 7 & 8 26001 and over 32.85 Bus 26001 and over 32.00
The cumulative impact due to design changes on all type of vehicles for FES and prices are presented in Figures 6.1, 6.3, 6.5, 6.7, 4.9, 6.11, 6.13, 6.15, 6.17, 6.19,
238
6.21, 6.23, 6.25, 6.27 and 6.29. Meanwhile, the cumulative payback period and life cycle cost due to motor vehicle usage are shown in Table 6.44 - 6.58. It is also shown in Figures 6.2, 6.4, 6.6, 6.8, 6.10, 6.12, 6.14, 6.16, 6.18, 6.20, 6.22, 6.24, 6.26, 6.28 and 6.30.
Table 6.43 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Class I car (CITY)
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 2 3 4 1+Multi-valve,overhead camshaft valve trains 2+Improved rolling resistance 3+Five speed automatic transmission 6.83 43585 1,641 55,895 8.36 7.04 43213 1,686 55,626 6.60 7.15 43532 1,708 55,574 5.96 FES Imp. 7.60 7.52 Price (RM) 43000 43042 OC (RM) 1,805 1,789 LCC (RM) 55,676 55,604 PAY (Year) 0.00 2.59
Least efficient design
0+Applications of advanced, low friction lubricants
44,500 Vehicle Prices(RM) 44,000 43,500 43,000 42,500 42,000
7.6
7.52
7.15 FES (liter/100km)
1+Multi-valve, overhead camshaft valve trains
7.04
2+Improved rolling resistance
6.83
Figure 6.1 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for Class I (City)
239
3+Five speed automatic transmission
56,000 55,900 LCC (RM) 6.60 55,800 55,700 55,600 0.00 55,500 55,400 7.60 7.52 7.15 7.04 2.59 55,676 55,604 5.96
8.36
LCC
PAY
55,626 55,574
6.83
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.2 Payback period and life cycle cost for Class I (City)
Table 6.44 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Class I car (Highway)
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 2 1+Multi-valve, overhead camshaft valve trains 3 4 2+Improved rolling resistance 3+Five speed automatic transmission 5.21 43585 1296 53475 10.95 5.37 43213 1330 53132 8.65 5.45 43532 1348 53041 7.81 FES Imp. 5.80 5.74 Price (RM) 43000 43042 OC (RM) 1421 1409 LCC (RM) 52983 52939 PAY (Year) 0.00 3.40
240
PAY (Yrs)
55,895
9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00
44,500 Vehicle Prices (RM) 44,000 43,500 43,000 42,500 42,000
5.80
5.74
1+Multi-valve, overhead camshaft valve trains
5.37
2+Improve rolling resistance
5.21
Figure 6.3 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for Class I (Highway)
LCC 53,600 53,400 LCC (RM) 53,200 53,000 52,800 52,600 5.80 0.00 52,983 3.40 7.81
PAY 12.00 53,475 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 PAY (Yrs) 8.65
53,041 52,939
53,132
5.74
5.45
5.37
5.21
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.4 Payback period and life cycle cost for Class I (Highway)
241
10.95
3+Five speed automatic transmission
Table 6.45 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Class II car (City)
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 2 3 4 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Engine friction and other losses reduction 5 4+Variable valve timing 8.32 71079 1957 84825 5.15 8.57 70547 2012 84671 3.53 8.66 70414 2030 84675 3.03 9.11 70095 2127 85038 2.41 FES Imp. 9.30 9.21 Price (RM) 70000 70042 OC (RM) 2167 2147 LCC (RM) 85219 85122 PAY (Year) 0.00 2.12
0+Application of advanced, low lubricants
71,200 71,000 Vehicle prices (RM) 70,800 70,600 70,400 70,200 70,000 69,800 69,600 69,400 9.30
2+Engine accessory improvement
9.21
9.11
8.66
8.57
3+Engine friction and other reduction losses
8.32
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.5 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for Class II (City)
242
4+Variable valve timing
LCC 85,300 85,200 85,100 85,000 84,900 84,800 84,700 84,600 84,500 84,400 84,300 85,038
PAY 6.00 84,825 5.155.00 PAY (Yrs) 4.00 3.00 84,671 2.00 1.00 0.00
85,219
LCC (RM)
85,122
3.53 3.03 2.12 2.41 84,675
0.00 9.30 9.21
9.11
8.66
8.57
8.32
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.6 Payback period and life cycle cost for Class II (City)
Table 6.46 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Class II car (Highway)
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 2 3 4 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Engine friction and other loss reduction 5 4+Variable valve timing 5.72 71079 1405 80946 7.48 5.90 70547 1443 80674 5.13 5.96 70414 1455 80635 4.41 6.27 70095 1522 80785 3.50 FES Imp. 6.40 6.34 Price (RM) 70000 70042 OC (RM) 1549 1536 LCC (RM) 80881 80827 PAY (Year) 0.00 3.08
243
Vehicle Prices (RM)
70,800 70,600 70,400 70,200 70,000 69,800 69,600 69,400
6.40
6.34
6.27
5.96
5.90
3+Engine friction and other loss reduction
5.72
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.7 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for Class II (Highway)
80,881
80,827
80,946
LCC 80,785 81,000 80,900 LCC (RM) 80,800 80,700 80,600 80,500 80,400 0.00 6.40 6.34 3.08
PAY
8.00 7.48 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 PAY (RM)
5.13 4.41 3.50 80,635 80,674
6.27
5.96
5.90
5.72
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.8 Payback period and life cycle cost for Class II (Highway)
244
71,000
0+Applications of advanced, low lubricants
71,200
Table 6.47 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Class III car (City)
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 2 3 4 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Continuous variable transmission (CVT) 9.92 95946 2299 112096 3.77 10.34 95414 2387 112182 2.54 10.88 95095 2503 112677 2.02 FES Imp. 11.10 10.99 Price (RM) 95000 95042 OC (RM) 2550 2527 LCC (RM) 112912 112788 PAY (Year) 0.00 1.78
96,000 95,800 Vehicle price (RM) 95,600 95,400 95,200 95,000 94,800 94,600 94,400 11.1
96,200
10.99
10.34
2+Engine accessories improvement
9.92
Figure 6.9 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for Class III (City)
245
3+Continuously variable transmission (CVT)
112,912
112,788
LCC 112,677
PAY 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00
113,000 112,800 LCC (RM) 112,600 112,400 112,200 112,000 111,800 111,600
3.77
2.54 1.78 2.02 112,182 112,096
0.00 11.10 10.99
10.88
10.34
9.92
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.10 Payback period and life cycle cost for Class III (City)
Table 6.48 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Class III car (Highway)
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 2 3 4 1+Improved rolling resistance 2+Engine accessory improvement 3+Continuous variable transmission (CVT) 6.97 95946 1671 107683 5.36 7.26 95414 1733 107585 3.62 7.64 95095 1814 107838 2.87 FES Imp. 7.80 7.72 Price (RM) 95000 95042 OC (RM) 1847 1831 LCC (RM) 107975 107901 PAY (Year) 0.00 2.53
246
PAY (RM)
96,200
Least efficient design 1+Improved rolling resistance
96,000 Vehicle Prices (RM) 95,800 95,600 95,400 95,200 95,000 94,800 94,600 94,400
7.80
7.72
7.26
6.97
Figure 6.11 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for Class III (Highway)
LCC 107,838 108,100 108,000 107,975 107,900 LCC (RM) 107,800 107,700 107,600 107,500 107,400 107,300 0.00 7.80 7.72 7.64 107,901
PAY 6.00 5.36 5.00 PAY (RM) 4.00 3.00 107,683 2.00 1.00 0.00 6.97 107,585
3.62 2.53 2.87
7.26
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.12 Payback period and life cycle cost for Class III (Highway)
247
3+Continuously variable transmission(CVT)
Table 6.49 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Class IV car (City)
111500 Vehicle price (RM) 111000 110500 110000 109500 109000
112000
13.3
13.17
13.04
12.38
11.76
11.41
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.13 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for Class IV (City)
248
LCC 130,903 131,500 131,203 131,000 130,500 130,000 129,500 0.00 129,000 13.30 13.17 13.04
PAY 3.67 2.89 3.00 129,843 129,856 2.12 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 12.38 11.76 11.41 4.00 3.50 Payback Period (Yrs)
Life Cycle Cost (RM)
131,047
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.14 Payback period and life cycle cost for Class IV (City)
Table 6.50 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Class IV car (Highway)
249
130,246
1.48
1.69
Vehicle Prices (RM)
111500 111000 110500 110000 109500 109000
112000
8.30
8.22
8.13
7.73
7.34
7.12
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.15 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for Class IV (Highway)
LCC 123,571 123,800 123,700 123,641 123,600 LCC (RM) 123,500 123,400 123,300 123,200 123,100 123,000 122,900 0.00 8.30 8.22 8.13 2.38 123,723
PAY 7.00 5.896.00 4.63 3.40 123,282 123,438 5.00 4.00 PAY (Yrs)
2.70
3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00
7.73
7.34
123,229
7.12
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.16 Payback period and life cycle cost for Class IV (Highway)
250
Table 6.51 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 1)
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Direct injection FES Imp. 3.65 2.56 Price (RM) 6634.06 7639.06 OC (RM) 894.5 661.2 LCC (RM) 12916 12283 PAY (Year) 0 4.31
7800 Motorcycle prices(RM) 0+Direct injected 2.56 FES (liter/100km) 7600 7400 7200 7000 6800 6600 6400 6200 6000 3.65 Least efficient design
Figure 6.17 Impact of design option changes on price and FES for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 1)
251
12916
4.31
LCC PAY
Life cycle cost (RM)
13000 12800 12600 12400 12200 11800 12000
5 4
3 2 1
0 3.65 2.56 Fuel consumption(liter/100km)
Figure 6.18 Payback period and life cycle cost for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 1)
Table 6.52 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 2)
No 0 1 2 3 4 Design options Least efficient design 0+Application of advanced low friction lubricant 1+Petrol saver 2+Motorcycle weight reduction (5%) 3+Aerodynamic drag reduction on design 3.09 7455.06 775.3 12901 6.89 3.12 7205.06 782.0 12697 5.08 3.25 6855.06 809.7 12542 2.61 FES Imp. 3.65 3.61 Price (RM) 6634.06 6654.06 OC (RM) 894.5 886.7 LCC (RM) 12916 12882 PAY (Year) 0 2.57
252
Payback period (years)
12283
1+Petrol saver
Motorcycle prices (RM)
7200 7000 6800 6600 6400 6200
3.65
3.61
2+Motorcycles weight reduction
3.12
Figure 6.19 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 2)
LCC (RM) PAY (years) 6.89 13000 Life cycle cost (RM) 12900 12800 12700 12600 12500 12400 12300 3.65 3.61 3.25 3.12 3.09 Fuel consumption (liter/100km) 0 2.57 2.61 12542 12916 5.08 12882 8 PAyback period (years) 12901 7 6 12697 5 4 3 2 1 0
Figure 6.20 Payback period and life cycle cost for 2 stroke motorcycle (method 2)
253
3+Aerodynamic drag reduction on designs 3.09
7400
0+Application of advanced, low friction lubricants
7600
Table 6.53 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for 4 stroke motorcycle
No 0 1 Design options Least efficient design 0+Applications of advanced low friction lubricant 2 3 1+Petrol saver 2+Port-injection 2.60 2.29 5384.72 6389.72 683.2 616.7 10181 10719 3.26 9.13 FES Imp. 2.92 2.89 Price (RM) 5163.72 5183.72 OC (RM) 751.0 744.7 LCC (RM) 10435 10412 PAY (Year) 0 3.22
7000 2+Port-injected 2.29 6000 Motorcycle prices (RM) 0+Applications of advanced, low friction lubricants Least efficient design 1+Petrol saver 2.6 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 2.92 2.89 FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.21 Impact of design options changes on prices and FES for 4 stroke motorcycle
254
LCC 10800 10700 Life cycle cost (RM) 10600 10500 10435 10400 10300 10200 10100 10000 9900 2.92 2.89 10412
PAY 9.13 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
2.60
10181
2.29
Fuel consumption (liter/100km)
Figure 6.22 Payback period and life cycle cost for motorcycles 4 strokes
Table 6.54 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Medium Duty Lorry (class 2 & 3)
No 0 1 2 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Low rolling resistance tires 1+ Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management 2+ Lower coefficient of drag through hood and cab configuration 3+ Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking 4+ Mass reduction through high strength, lightweight material 5+ Advance transmission with lock-up, electronic controls FES Imp. 20.59 20.08 19.07 Price (RM) 130000 130684 133344 OC (RM) 6197.56 6051.37 5766.30 LCC (RM) 186460 185812 185875 PAY (Year) 0.00 4.7 7.8
3 4
18.59 17.66
135624 140184
5630.89 5366.85
186921 189076
12.3
5 6
7.12 16.45
144784 147534
5116.01 5020.69
191391 193272
13.7 14.9
255
3.22
3.26
10719
9.9
2+Lower coefficient of drag through hood and cab configuration
150000 145000 Lorry price (RM) 140000 135000 130000 125000 120000 20.59
0+Low rolling resistance tires
20.08
19.07
18.59
3+Integrated starter with idle off and limited regenarative braking
17.66
4+Mass reduction through high strength, lightweight material
16.78
16.45
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.23 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3)
LCC 194000 192000 Life cycle cost 9.9 7.8 190000 188000 185812 4.7 186460 186921 186000 184000 182000 20.59 0.0 185875
PAY 13.7 14.9 12.3 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 17.66 16.78 16.45 Payback periods
20.08
19.07
18.59
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.24 Payback period and life cycle cost for medium duty lorry (class 2&3)
256
189076
191391
193272
5+Advance transmission with lock-up, electronic controls
1+Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management
Table 6.55 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Medium Duty Lorry (class 4 - 6)
No 0 1 2 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Low rolling resistance tires 1+ Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management 3 2+ Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer 4 3+ Integrated starter/alternator with idle off and limited regenerative braking 5 4+ Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares 6 7 5+ Van leading and trailing edge curvatures 6+ Advance transmission with lock-up, electronic controls and reduced friction 21.67 300254 6653.6 360868 11.26 22.11 296834 6779.2 358592 13.7 22.33 295314 6842.6 357650 12.3 22.91 292464 7005.2 356282 9.9 24.11 287904 7347.6 354841 5.94 25.12 284864 7632.9 354400 5.94 FES Imp. 28.00 27.30 Price (RM) 280000 281064 OC (RM) 8452.0 8253.2 LCC (RM) 356998 356251 PAY (Year) 0.00 5.35
257
Life cycle cost (RM) 350000 352000 354000 356000 358000 360000 362000
Lorry prices (RM) 265000 270000 275000 280000 285000 290000 295000 300000 305000
356998
28.00
5.35
356251
27.30
354400 5.94 LCC 7.16 8.62 PAY 9.52 10.06 11.26 12 354841 356282 357650 358592 360868 0 2 4 6 8 10
25.12
1+Turbocharged, direct injection engine with better thermal management
medium duty lorry (class 4-6)
Figure 6.25 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for
28.00 27.30 25.12 24.11 22.91 22.33 22.11 21.67
FES (liter/100km)
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.26 Payback period and life cycle cost for medium duty lorry (class 4-6)
258
24.11 22.91 22.33 22.11 21.67
2+Closing gap between tractor and trailer 3+Integrated starter with idle off and limited regenarative braking 4+Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares
5+Van leading and trailing edge curvatures 6+Advance transmission with lock-up, electronic controls, reduced friction
Table 6.56 Life-cycle costs and payback period calculation for Heavy Duty Lorry (class 7 & 8)
No 0 1 2 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Low rolling resistance tires 1+ Mass reduction through high-strength, lightweight material 3 2+ Internal friction reduction through better lubricant and improved bearings 4 5 6 3+ Increased peak cylinder pressure 4+ Electrical auxiliaries 5+ Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares 7 6+ Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer, aerodynamic bumper 32.79 517840 10062.5 609488.6 9.45 34.32 33.63 509290 512140 10496.2 10301.3 604888.8 605963.4 7.51 8.07 34.84 507390 10644.7 604340.6 7.15 36.29 503590 11056.9 604295.6 6.66 37.03 501690 11267.3 604311.4 6.33 FES Imp. 42.42 41.15 Price (RM) 492000 494090 OC (RM) 12797.3 12435.9 LCC (RM) 608556.5 607354.8 PAY (Year) 0.00 5.78
259
520000
500000 495000 490000 485000 480000 475000
42.42
41.15
1+Mass reduction through high-strength, lightweight material
37.03
36.29
34.84
3+Increased peak cylinder pressure
505000
2+Internal friction reduction through better lubricants and improved bearings
34.32
33.63
5+Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares
Lorry price (RM)
510000
4+Electrical auxiliaries
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.27 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for heavy duty lorry (class 7 & 8)
LCC 610000.0 609000.0 Payback periods (RM) 608000.0 607000.0 606000.0 605000.0 604000.0 603000.0 602000.0 601000.0 0 42.42 41.15 37.03 36.29 34.84 34.32 33.63 32.79 FES (liter/100km) 5.78 608556.5 PAY 609488.6 9.45 605963.4 8.07 6.33 604888.8 6.66 604311.4 604295.6 7.15 604340.6 7.51
607354.8
6+Closing of gap between tractor and trailer,aerodynamic bumper
515000
32.79
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Life Cycle Cost (years)
Figure 6.28 Payback period and life cycle cost for medium duty lorry (class 7-8)
260
Table 6.57 Life-cycle cost and payback period calculation for Busses
No 0 1 2 Design options Least efficient design 0+ Low rolling resistance tires 1+ Mass reduction through high-strength, lightweight material 3 2+ Internal friction reduction through better lubricant and improved bearings 4 5 6 7 3+ Increased peak cylinder pressure 4+ Electrical auxiliaries 5+ Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares 6+ Closing/covering of gap between tractor and trailer, aerodynamic bumper 31.37 506540 11535.7 611630.5 9.45 32.83 32.17 497990 500840 12054.4 11821.3 607805.2 608531.7 7.51 8.07 33.33 496090 12231.8 607522.0 7.15 34.72 492290 12724.8 608213.1 5.57 35.43 490390 12976.4 608604.6 5.30 FES Imp. 40.58 39.36 Price (RM) 480700 482790 OC (RM) 14805.9 14373.7 LCC (RM) 615581.7 613734.6 PAY (Year) 0.00 4.84
261
Life cycle cost (RM)

Bus price (RM) 465000 470000 475000 480000 485000 490000 495000
500000
505000
510000
602000.0
40.58
604000.0 615581.7
39.36
606000.0
608000.0
610000.0
612000.0
614000.0
616000.0
618000.0
0 40.58 39.36 4.84 613734.6
35.43 608604.6 5.30 608213.1 5.57
35.43
1+Mass reduction through high-strength, lightweight material
34.72
FES (liter/100km)
FES (liter/100km)
Figure 6.29 Impact of design option changes on prices and FES for busses
Figure 6.30 Payback period and life cycle cost for busses
262
LCC 33.33 607522.0 5.98 PAY 32.83
607805.2
34.72 33.33
2+Internal friction reduction through better lubricants and improved bearings 3+Increased peak cylinder pressure
6.28
32.83
4+Electrical auxiliaries
32.17 608531.7 6.75 31.37 611630.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Payback periods (years) 7.90 9
32.17 31.37
5+Cab top deflector, sloping hood, cab side flares 6+Closing gap between tractor and trailer, aerodynamic bumper
6.4.5 Potential Fuel Saving
Like any other developing countries, it is difficult to get a complete data in this country because lack of planning. The calculation for potential saving is conducted only for class I car, 2 stroke and 4 stroke motorcycles with engine displacement range between 80cc-150cc, medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) and for busses. It is because these types of vehicles are the most popular in Malaysia and is assumed as an average case study. The calculation results from implementing potential fuel savings for motor vehicles and motorcycles in Malaysia are tabulated in Tables 6.59, 6.61, 6.63 and 6.65. To derive the results, some of input data are necessary. The input data are shown in Tables 6.58, 6.60, 6.62 and 6.64.
Table 6.58 Input data for potential fuel saving of cars Description Year standard enacted Discount rate Incremental cost Life span Baseline Fuel Consumption Current average fuel price Standards fuel consumption Annual efficiency improvement Values 2006 7% RM1372 10 year 1035 liter/year RM 1.42 per liter 780 liter/year 3%
263
Table 6.59 The calculation of fuel savings for cars Year Shipment Applicable stock 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 3410533 3820953 4028153 4388000 4772587 5210249 3410533 7231486 11259639 15647639 20420226 25630475 Scaling factor 1.00 0.818 0.636 0.455 0.273 0.091 Unit fuel savings 154.09 126.07 98.06 70.04 42.02 14.01 Fuel savings (liter) 525520504 911684945 1104071579 1095957079 858136793 359030529
1200000000 1000000000 Fuel saving (liter) 800000000 600000000 400000000 200000000 0 2006 2007 2008 Year 2009 2010 2011
Figure 6.31 Projected fuel savings for cars
264
BAU 30000000000 25000000000 20000000000 15000000000 10000000000 5000000000 0 2006 2007 2008
STD
2009
2010
2011
Figure 6.32 Fuel consumption with and without standards (STD vs BAU) for cars
Table 6.60 Input data for potential fuel saving of motorcycles Description Year standard enacted Discount rate Incremental cost Life span Baseline Fuel Consumption Current average fuel price Standards fuel consumption Annual efficiency improvement Values 2006 7% RM1024 10 year 408 liter/year RM 1.42 per liter 330 liter/year 3%
265
Table 6.61 The calculation of fuel savings for motorcycles Year Shipment Applicable stock 2006 2007 2008 2009 4402302 4794891 5173601 5579414 4402302 9197194 14370794 19950208 Scaling factor 1.000 0.712 0.423 0.135 Unit fuel savings 53.89 38.34 22.80 7.25 Fuel savings (liter) 237227739 352646296 327631557 144719730
400000000 350000000 300000000 Fuel saving (liter) 250000000 200000000 150000000 100000000 50000000 0 2006 2007 Year 2008 2009
Figure 6.33 Projected fuel savings for motorcycles
266
BAU 9000000000 8000000000 7000000000 6000000000 5000000000 4000000000 3000000000 2000000000 1000000000 0 2005
STD
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Figure 6.34 Fuel consumption with and without standards (STD vs BAU) for motorcycles Table 6.62 Input data for potential fuel saving of medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) Description Year standard enacted Discount rate Incremental cost Life span Baseline Fuel Consumption Current average fuel price Standards energy consumption Annual efficiency improvement Values 2006 7% RM17534 15 year 3290 liter/year RM 1.42 per liter 2600 liter/year 3%
267
Table 6.63 The calculation of fuel savings for medium duty lorry (class2 & 3) Year Shipment Applicable stock 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 564335 628286 654307 699629 723431 749309 564335 1192621 1846928 2546557 3269988 4019297 Scaling factor 1.00 0.81 0.63 0.44 0.25 0.06 Unit fuel savings 495.56 402.70 309.84 216.98 124.12 31.26 Fuel savings (liter) 279662323 480270038 572255376 552557113 405878712 125654265
700000000 600000000 Fuel saving (liter) 500000000 400000000 300000000 200000000 100000000 0 2006 2007 2008 Year 2009 2010 2011
Figure 6.35 Projected fuel savings for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3)
268
BAU 14000000000 12000000000 10000000000 8000000000 6000000000 4000000000 2000000000 0 2006 2007 2008
STD
2009
2010
2011
Figure 6.36 Fuel consumption with and without standards (STD vs BAU) for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3)
Table 6.64 Input data for potential fuel saving of busses Description Year standard enacted Discount rate Incremental cost Life span Baseline Fuel Consumption Current average fuel price Standards energy consumption Annual efficiency improvement Values 2006 7% RM25840 15 year 8750 liter/year RM 1.42 per liter 7500 liter/year 3%
269
Table 6.65 The calculation of fuel savings for busses Year Shipment Applicable stock 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 41426 45914 48122 50162 51159 41426 87341 135463 185625 236785 Scaling factor 1.000 0.779 0.559 0.338 0118 Unit fuel savings 1027.20 800.61 574.02 347.44 120.85 Fuel savings (liter) 42553287 69926150 77759082 64492846 28614731
90000000 80000000 70000000 Fuel saving (liter) 60000000 50000000 40000000 30000000 20000000 10000000 0 2006 2007 2008 Year 2009 2010
Figure 6.37 Projected fuel savings for busses
270
BAU 2500000000
STD
2000000000
1500000000
1000000000
500000000
0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Figure 6.38 Fuel consumption with and without standards (STD vs BAU) for busses
It has been noted that the fuel economy standards for vehicles are only effective for a certain period because annual efficiency of the vehicles are still improving 3% per year even without the standard. Figure 6.31, 6.33, 6.35, 6.37 shows that the annual savings for the fuel consumption increase sharply in the beginning of the analysis period. Over time, the projected technological improvement in the baseline begins to catch up with the standard. Referring to Table 6.59, 6.61, 6.63 and 6.65, the standard for cars is only effective for about 6 years from 2006 to 2011, for motorcycles it is effective for 4 years from 2006 to 2009. Meanwhile for lorry, the standard is effective for about 6 years from 2006 to 2009 and for busses it is effective for 5 years from 2006 to 2010. Table 6.59, 6.61, 6.63 and 6.65 also shows that minimum fuel economy standards or fuel consumption program starting in 2006 will save approximately 359 GL (Giga-Liter) of fuel at the
271
end of 2011 for cars, 145 GL of fuel at the end of 2009 for motorcycles, 126 GL of fuel at the end of 2011 for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) and 286 GL of fuel at the end of 2010 for busses
6.4.6 Economic impact of the standards
The calculation result from cost-benefit analysis is tabulated in Table 6.66 to 6.69. This study has proved that the introduction of fuel economy standard for motor vehicle offer great benefits in some aspect for consumers, governments as well as the environment, which is not considered in this study.
Table 6.66 The calculation result from the cost-benefit analysis for cars Year Bill savings (Mil. RM) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 938.7 1628.5 1972.2 1957.7 1532.9 641.3 Annualized net savings (Mil. RM) -128196 -222397 -269328 -267348 -209334 -87582 -906048 -829752 -679722 -528465 -344614 -125322 Net savings (Mil. RM) Present value of ANS (Mil. RM) -97800 -158566 -179464 -166491 -121834 -47639
272
Table 6.67 The calculation result from the cost-benefit analysis for motorcycle Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 Bill savings (Mil. RM) 336 501 465 206 Annualized net savings (Mil. RM) -34249 -50913 -47302 -20894 Net savings (Mil. RM) -242584 -187761 -120316 -41239 Present value of ANS (Mil. RM) -26129 -36300 -31519 -13011
Table 6.68 The calculation result from the cost-benefit analysis for medium duty lorry Year Bill savings (Mil. RM) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 397.1 681.9 812.6 784.6 576.3 178.4 Annualized net savings (Mil. RM) -537992 -923905 -1100860 -1062960 -780797 -241723 -4903200 -4435620 -3553880 -2661000 -1573870 -410564 Net savings (Mil. RM) Present value of ANS (Mil. RM) -410431 -658731 -733549 -661961 -454431 -131482
273
Table 6.69 The calculation result from the cost-benefit analysis for busses Year Bill savings (Mil. RM) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 60.4 99.3 110.4 91.6 40.6 Annualized net savings (Mil. RM) -120667 -198288 -220499 -182881 -81142 -1099520 -949769 -713677 -450252 -159714 Net savings (Mil. RM) Present value of ANS (Mil. RM) -92056 -141376 -146928 -113889 -47225
6.5. Conclusions and recommendations 6.5.1 Conclusion
Due to the increasing number of vehicles in Malaysia, the fuel consumption will grow rapidly in the future if there is no government intervention. In order to reduce the growth, fuel economy standards should be implemented in Malaysia. Apart from reducing fuel consumption, the program also indirectly reduces emissions. The present study has demonstrated that implementation of fuel economy standards for motor vehicle will lead to the following conclusions: The result of the study has proven that the consumer, manufacturers, government and the environment will receive tremendous benefit from implementing the fuel economy standards. It is possible to save fuel approximately 115.5 liter for cars, 84 liter for 2 stroke motorcycle, 94.5 liter for 4 stroke motorcycle, 828 liter for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) and 2302.5 liter for busses. Although now the consumers have to pay a higher price for
274
purchasing vehicle, they will save from the lower annual fuel cost; which is RM164.01 for cars, RM119.28 for 2 stroke motorcycle, RM134.19 for 4 stroke motorcycle, RM1175.76 for medium duty lorry (class 2 & 3) and RM3269.55 for busses. By calculating the impact of the fuel economy standards, approximately 916 GL of fuel could be saved at the end of 2011. In brief, this study presents the importance to propose the fuel economy standards in Malaysia and shows that the fuel consumption improvement is an effective method to reduce fuel energy consumption growth in the transportation sector.
6.5.2 Recommendation
The study proposes several recommendations to gain an optimum impact from possible fuel economy standards implementation for vehicles in Malaysia. The recommendations are: The government needs to establish a framework to continually collect data from the dealers who sell their vehicles in the Malaysian market. From these data, fuel economy label should be developed that meets the fuel economy standards in order to enable the consumers to select and purchase the best fuel efficient vehicle. Implementation of the fuel economy standard is the responsibility of the government. However cooperation between relevant institutions such as SIRIM, PTM and also the manufacturers should be reinforced to increase the synergy in
275
order to produce a successful test procedure, fuel economy standards and label program. An independent laboratory for testing purposes owned by the Malaysian government or an independent body should be developed as one of the main step to implement the fuel economy standards. This includes the facility to predict traffic behavior, vehicle maintenance and the type of road. Malaysian government should conduct awareness campaign on how to drive efficiently. In order to drive more efficiently, these are the recommended guidelines:
Driving Habits There are infinite variations of possibilities that can affect driving style. Some factors that influence the driving techniques of the driver are Types of road Weather condition Traffic flow The type of roads and weather conditions are the two things beyond the control of the driver. However, traffic flow can be improved and streamlined by proper road management and improved driving skills. Meanwhile, fuel can also be saved by strictly avoiding unnecessary of these following driving habits:
Throttling
276
Frequent acceleration and braking consumes up to 50% extra fuel required to reach a particular destination if diving at a cruising speed of 45 km/hr. It causes excessive tire wear and also reduces life of brake pads. Always accelerate gently and anticipate stops to avoid sudden braking.
Idling
Switch off vehicles engine when not in use and avoid excessive throttling when waiting at the traffic light. Do not leave vehicles unattended with engine idling, as this wastes fuel.
Use of clutch
Using the clutch unnecessarily reduces a lot of useful power generated by engine and results in wasted fuel. Always use the clutch smoothly and only when necessary. Maintenance Schedule By following the manufacturer's instructions on maintenance will not only reduce the fuel bill but also increase the life of the engine. An energy conscious motorist can save as much as 10% of fuel bill and help the nation to save valuable amount of fuel. In the following section information is provided on checks of various components that need to be thoroughly monitored at the time of tune-up. Tune Up Regular tuning can save up to 10% fuel. Black smoke from exhaust is due to incomplete combustion of fuel. A proper fuel consumption record needs to be
277
maintained. If it drops more than 10%, the motorcycle needs to be tuned by a competent mechanic. Tyre Pressure Under inflated tires not only reduce the tire life by as much as 25%, but due to increased rolling resistance, it also increases the fuel consumption. Tests have shown that a 25% under inflation increases fuel consumption by 5%. Spark Plugs The spark plug is ensured to be properly inspected and cleaned. The following are also checked: Spark plug gap Wear or erosion of electrode Fouling Carbon deposits Cracks Deformation
It is advisable that the spark plug is cleaned in a spark plug cleaner for these following engines: 2 stroke motorcycle engine: spark plugs needs to be cleaned every 300km and replaced after every 5,000 km.
278
4 stroke motorcycle engine: spark plugs needs to be cleaned every 3,000 km and replaced after every 15,000 km Air Cleaner
Filter needs to be cleaned using compressed air every 1,000 km and replaced after every 3,000 km Battery Proper maintenance of battery will ensure easy starts. To maintain the battery is in top condition, battery electrolyte needs to be checked with a hydrometer and ensured that the specific gravity of battery electrolyte is between 1.260 -1.280 (at 20C/68F). The battery is recharged if the hydrometer shows specific gravity less than 1.220. Battery electrolyte level also needs to be checked. This should be between the upper and lower limits indicated on the battery. If required, distilled water is added to raise the level to the upper mark. Exhaust System The performance of a two stroke engine is dependent upon the condition of the diffuser pipe in the exhaust muffler. Over a short period of time it gets choked due to carbon deposits. The diffuser pipe requires monthly cleaning to remove the deposited carbon. This should be done by using a wire brush. Note: Engine Lubricants The usage of a multiviscosity engine oil is encouraged.
279
New modified or slippery oils are designed to improve fuel efficiency by 3 to 8%. Dirty engine oil causes added friction and engine wear. Engine oil should be changed after the engine has properly warmed up. Always drain oil thoroughly by removing the drain bolt. Remember to reinstall the drain bolt before filling up the recommended oil up to the proper level. To check the engine oil level, support the motorcycle on the main stand with the engine stopped. Wait for 2-3 minutes after shutting off the engine and then check the oil level. Engine lubricant when added in right proportion on two stroke engine reduces engine wear and increases engine life. It also reduces formation of deposits in the combustion chamber and minimizes spark plug fouling.
References
Aprilia DiTech Information. [2004].www.speed-sports.com Bleviss D. 1988. The new Oil Crisis and Fuel Economy Technologies: Preparing the Light Transportation Industry for the 1990s. New York. Australian Greenhouse Office, Fuel Consumption label [2003] Fuel Consumption Guide, 22nd Edition [2001-2002]; Australian Greenhouse Office
280
Fuel Economy Guide [2004], U.S Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. www.fueleconomy.gov Berjaya Motor Sdn. Bhd. Klang, Selangor. C.Difiglio, L.Fulton [1999]; How to reduce US automobile greenhouse gas emissions; Paris, France. Energy and Environ. Anal., Inc. 1979. Technological/Cost Relations to Update. DOE. Energy and Environ. Anal., Inc. 1990. An assessement of Potential Passenger Car Fuel Economy Objectives for 2010, Arlington. Energy and Environ. Anal., Inc.1990. Analysis of The Fuel Economy Boundry for 2010 and Compirason to Prototypes. U.S Ford A, Sutherland RJ. 1982. The Outlook for Improved Automobile Fuel Efficiency. Los Alamos Fuel Catalyst Technical Buletin.www.protecusa.com Gray CL, von Hippel F. 1981. The Fuel Economy of Light Vehicles. Sci. Am. Greene D.L and DeCicco,J [2000]; Engineering-Economic Analyses of Automotive Fuel Economy Potential in the United States. Heavenrich RM and Hellman KH. 1999. Light Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends Through 1999. EPA.
281
Hittman Assoc., Inc. 1976. Fuel Economy Cost Relationship for Future Automobiles. Federal Energy Administration, Columbia Honda Worlwide Technology Close-up.www.world.honda.com John M. DeCicco [1995]; Projected Fuel Savings and Emissions reductions from light Vehicles Fuel Economy Standards Mahlia, T.M.I., Masjuki, H.H. & Choudhury, I.A. [2002a]. Theory of energy efficiency standards and labels, Energy Conversion and Management. Mahlia, T.M.I., Masjuki, H.H. & Choudhury, I.A. [2002b]. Development of energy labels for room air conditioner in Malaysia: methodology and results, Energy Conversion and Management. Mahlia, T.M.I., Masjuki, H.H. , Choudhury, I.A. & Amalina, M.A. [2003]. CostBenefit Analysis of Implementing Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards for Household Refrigerator-Freeezers in Malaysia. Mahlia, T.M.I., Masjuki, H.H., Choudhury, I.A. & Norleha, A.R. [2002]. Projected Electricity Savings from Implementing Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard for Household Refrigerators in Malaysia Malaysia Motor Trader.[2004]. The Car Listed Prices in Ringgit Malaysia. www.motortrader.com.my Mark Archer, Greg Bell. [2001]. Advanced Electronic Fuel Injection System An Emissions Solution for Both 2- and 4-stroke Small Vehicle Engines. Synerjet System Integration, Balcatta, Australia.
282
Pakistan Energy and Management Centre. Improve Fuel Efficiency of Motorcycle. www.peemac.sdnpk.org Petrol saver.[2003] Advance Magnetic Device.www.petrolsaver.org.uk Sam Leighton, Steven Ahern [2003]. Fuel Economy Advantages on Indian 2 Strokes and 4 Strokes Motorcycles Fitted With Direct Fuel Injection. SAE Paper. Orbital Engine Company, Australia. Stephane Barbusse [2001]. Motorcycles, Mopeds :Polluting Emissions and Energy Consumption. Initial Observations. ADEME, Transport Technology Department, France. Stacy C. Davis, Susan W. Diegel [2003].Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 23. Center for Transportation Analysis Engineering Science and Technology Division. Technology Roadmap for The 21st Century Truck Program.[2000].www.gov.doe/bridge
283
APPENDIX A
18000000 16000000 14000000 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0 0 5 10 15 Year 20 25 30 35
Cars
Figure 6.A1 Car growth in Malaysia
18000000 16000000 14000000 Motorcycles 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0 0 5 10 15 Year 20 25 30 35
Figure 6.A2 Motorcycle growth in Malaysia
284
2,000,000 1,800,000 1,600,000 Lorries 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 0 0 5 10 15 Year 20 25 30 35
Figure 6.A3 Lorry growth in Malaysia
120000 100000 80000 Busses 60000 40000 20000 0 0 5 10 15 Year 20 25 30 35
Figure 6.A4 Bus growth in Malaysia
285

Energy Use in The Transportation Sector of Malaysia

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Energy Use in The Transportation Sector of Malaysia

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

ENERGY USE IN THE TRANSPORTATION SECTOR OF MALAYSIA

A DANIDA-FUNDED PROJECT ON RENEWABLE ENERGY & ENERGY EFFICIENCY

2.4 Transportation Regulation ..

4.2 Type of Data Collected ..

4.3 Review of HNDP and SMURT KL Study .

4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.5

5.4 Results and Discussions .

5.5 Conclusions and Suggestions .

6.4 Results and Discussions .

6.5 Conclusions and Recommendations ...

252 252 253 254 255 255

156 157 160 169 170 171

6.67 6.68 6.69

ANS iv AS iv AS iv1 BFC sv BS iv C C,k

(RM) (RM) (RM)

(km) (%) (ktoe)

(kg/GJ) (liter) (RM) (RM)

(RM) (RM/year) (RM/year) (1/km) (1/km) (year)

MPG0 MPGTOT N Naiv Naiv1

(RM) (RM) (RM) (RM/liter) (RM/liter) (year) (RM) (RM)

PAY PC PV ANS iv PWF R r

(RM) (%) (RM/year) (liter/yr)

SFCsv Shiv SSFi v TEI sv

(%) (kg, Ton)

(year) (year) (year)

LRT I&M Mbd MPG Mt NG NGV OECD PJ SO2 SULEV SUV