Variability of fuel consumption and CO2 emissions of a gasoline passenger car under multiple in-laboratory and on-road testing conditions

• Published in: Journal of environmental sciences (China) Vol. 125; pp. 266 - 276
• Main Authors: Zhou, Boya, He, Liqiang, Zhang, Shijian, Wang, Rui, Zhang, Luowei, Li, Mengliang, Liu, Yu, Zhang, Shaojun, Wu, Ye, Hao, Jiming
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier B.V 01.03.2023
• Subjects: CO2 emissions; Fuel consumption; Light-duty gasoline vehicle (LDGV); Real driving; Fuel consumption; CO2 emissions; Real driving; Light-duty gasoline vehicle (LDGV)
• ISSN: 1001-0742; 1878-7320
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jes.2021.12.042

An increasing divergence regarding fuel consumption (and/or CO2 emissions) between real-world and type-approval values for light-duty gasoline vehicles (LDGVs) has posed severe challenges to mitigating greenhouse gases (GHGs) and achieving carbon emissions peak and neutrality. To address this divergence issue, laboratory test cycles with more real-featured and transient traffic patterns have been developed recently, for example, the China Light-duty Vehicle Test Cycle for Passenger cars (CLTC-P). We collected fuel consumption and CO2 emissions data of a LDGV under various conditions based on laboratory chassis dynamometer and on-road tests. Laboratory results showed that both standard test cycles and setting methods of road load affected fuel consumption slightly, with variations of less than 4%. Compared to the type-approval value, laboratory and on-road fuel consumption of the tested LDGV over the CLTC-P increased by 9% and 34% under the reference condition (i.e., air conditioning off, automatic stop and start (STT) on and two passengers). On-road measurement results indicated that fuel consumption under the low-speed phase of the CLTC-P increased by 12% due to the STT off, although only a 4% increase on average over the entire cycle. More fuel consumption increases (52%) were attributed to air conditioning usage and full passenger capacity. Strong correlations (R2 > 0.9) between relative fuel consumption and average speed were also identified. Under traffic congestion (average speed below 25 km/hr), fuel consumption was highly sensitive to changes in vehicle speed. Thus, we suggest that real-world driving conditions cannot be ignored when evaluating the fuel economy and GHGs reduction of LDGVs. [Display omitted]