Under the auspices of the US EPA, FEV North America, Inc. conducted an extensive literature review on the subject of EV battery durability for the EVE Informal Working Group. The review examines the electrochemical basis for the deterioration of batteries used in BEV, HEV, and PHEV applications along with testing activities performed on such electrified vehicles and automotive grade cells, battery packs, etc.

FEV North America, Inc. has been tasked by the US Environmental Protection Agency with conducting an extensive literature review on the subject of EV battery durability to inform the EVE informal group deliberations. This is the second (final) draft version of the FEV study.

FEV report “Battery Durability in Electrified Vehicle Applications: A Review of Degradation Mechanisms and Durability Testing” prepared in response to the request to conduct a literature review on the subject of EV battery durability.

Battery performance and Durability (EVE-14-04e, EVE-14-08e)
Mr. Olechiw and Ms. Marchington introduced EVE-14-08e, which reviewed the status of the USA and Canada’s work. Mr. Tom Casciani, the FEV consultant who is leading the literature review on battery durability was introduced to the group, presented EVE-14-08e and discussed the project timeline, structure of the literature review, resources, some literature examples, a preliminary list of factors effecting EV durability, test methodologies for EV batteries, and next steps. The review should be completed in mid-July 2015. A request was made to the group to provide additional international sources of literature on this topic, as the consultant is US-based (Action 9). Discussion focused on whether or not test programs were part of this research; Mr. Olechiw clarified that FEV will be offering recommendations that could include i.e. a specific test to be further developed, but right now were just conducting a literature review. Mr. Olechiw also clarified that this work was vehicle-level. Several comments were made about long-term aging factors, changing battery technology in the future, battery recyclability and concern over limiting technology. Mr. Olechiw noted that these were important considerations and that there would be no recommendations on introducing abuse criteria; rather, the purpose of the study was to inform the development of a standardized procedure to evaluate EV battery durability that reflects normal operation of vehicle, because this would ensure the vehicle would provide environmental benefits over a lifetime of operation.

Draft of the Electric Vehicle Regulatory Reference Guide concerning worldwide environmental regulations submitted to the GRPE by the EVE informal working group chair.

55. The secretary of the informal group on EVE introduced GRPE-68-22, reporting on recent meetings and providing information on the draft regulatory reference guide (GRPE-68-13). He focused on the recommendations that are contained in the guide, explaining that they concern the vehicle range and energy consumption testing, the method of calculation for energy consumption and CO₂ emissions (including the impact of upstream losses), battery performance and durability, battery recycling. He acknowledged that the recommendation on the method estimating upstream energy use and CO₂ emissions is currently the most controversial subject. Reporting on the meeting between EVE and WLTP leadership groups, he mentioned that the expert from the EC offered to suggest solution aiming to ensure that the EVE and the WLTP activities will not lead to the duplication of work. He concluded by summarizing the schedule of forthcoming meetings and requested the secretariat to reserve a room for a meeting during the June 2014 GRPE session.

56. The Chair of GRPE suggested some alternatives concerning the development of the regulatory work with an impact for electric vehicles: i) maintaining the existing structure, with two informal working groups: ii) combine the WLTP and EVE groups; or iii) restructure the reporting hierarchy of the groups, with the EVE reporting to WLTP for issues related with the WLTP UN GTR and to GRPE directly for all other issues. He considered also that future regulatory instruments may need to be developed under the current WLTP regulatory framework or as part of other UN Regulations and UN GTRs.

57. Having expressed concerns about the controversies regarding the method of stating upstream energy use and CO₂ emissions, the Chair of GRPE invited Contracting Parties to seek an agreement on this topic. He recalled that, should these controversies remain unsolved at the EVE and GRPE levels, they will need to be considered by WP.29 and AC.3.

1. Mr. Michael Olechiw, Chair of the informal working group, welcomed participants to the meeting. Mr. Olechiw outlined the primary goal for the meeting, which was to continue discussing the recommendations included in draft 3 of the EV Reference Guide (EVE-08-03). He clarified that the intent was not to finalize the Guide during the 8th EVE meeting, but to agree on draft 3 (with some minor revisions) to be submitted as an informal document to the GRPE’s 68th session (GRPE-68-13). Contracting parties and industry would then have until February 3rd, 2014 to submit comments. The objective is to finalize the Guide during the 9th EVE meeting on February 17-18th in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Review of the background research and current draft of the reference guide to worldwide electric vehicle environmental regulatory requirements.

6 Mr. Olechiw initiated the discussion of Agenda item 3 the Guide with the presentation of document EVE-08-05 by Mr. Mark Subramaniam of FEV Consulting. The presentation covered three items: 1) Summary of changes made to the Guide, 2) Current findings, activity levels, and recommendations in draft 3 of the Guide, and, 3) Open discussion items. During this discussion, draft 3 of the Guide (EVE-08-03) was also presented for discussion. The four main recommendations from Chapter 5 of draft 3 of the Guide were reviewed, including: 1) vehicle range and energy efficiency testing, 2) method of stating energy efficiency, 3) battery performance and durability, and 4) battery recyclability. Both documents elicited many questions and comments, which are briefly summarized below China clarified that an adjustment to the traffic light chart for market deployment attributes for China should be changed from two green and two red attributes to all green attributes. Also, OICA clarified that there should not be a tick under Driver-user information for the WLTP group in the vehicle attributes traffic light chart.

ACTION 1: The EVE Secretariat will make the two minor revisions requested by China and OICA to draft 3 of the Guide prior to the submission of the document to the GRPE.

Concerning recommendation 1 (vehicle range and energy efficiency testing), under Section 5.1, and the second paragraph above the bullets, it was agreed that the wording “the following” and “at minimum” in the first sentence should be deleted.

ACTION 2: The EVE Secretariat will adjust wording in Section 5.1, paragraph 2, by deleting “the following” and “at minimum” in the first sentence.

Most discussion concerned recommendation 2 (method of stating energy efficiency). OICA questioned whether pursuing the recommendation was valuable, considering there was no proposal to develop a comparable methodology for conventional vehicles. OICA also emphasized that for vehicle classification, the fuel type does not matter. Mr. Olechiw clarified there are established metrics for CO2 performance of conventional vehicles in operation, while EVs do not have such a metric; this is misleading because while EVs do not produce emissions during operation, there is still a CO2 penalty, it is just displaced upstream. China emphasized that the methodology proposed in recommendation 2 would be very useful for governments and decision-making in the future and indicated they have some related research information that could be shared with the EVE group. The GRPE Chair agreed, indicating that work on recommendation 2 would be useful for political decision-making, however he was unsure about three things: 1) Does the work under recommendation 2 fall under the scope of WP.29, 2) Are the experts available within the WP.29 forum to conduct this work? Or, Are there other more appropriate groups at the United Nations who could do this work?, and 3) Where would the boundaries be established for the development of a such a methodology? To resolve these issues, the GRPE Chair recommended that if it is not possible to agree on the complete text, text which is not agreed upon should be indicated with square brackets in the Guide when it is submitted formally to the GRPE in March 2014. Also, with respect to recommendation 2, the WP.29 forum should be consulted concerning the three items listed above.

ACTION 3: China will share research information related to recommendation 2 (method of stating energy efficiency) in draft 3 of the Guide with the EVE group via email or during a presentation at the next EVE meeting.

ACTION 4: The EVE Secretariat will consult the WP.29 forum for advice on recommendation 2. Japan also provided comments on the recommendations in draft 3 of the Guide via document EVE-08-06. Japan’s position is that WLTP IWG could take responsibility for recommendation 1 and 3, that recommendation 2 is outside the scope of WP.29 and recommendation 4 needs clarification. Mr. Olechiw clarified that the recommendations in the Guide could be considered by other groups, like WLTP, and that the intention is not to duplicate future work. The GRPE Chair indicated that in the WLTP group, there is a boundary made between energy consumption related to the propulsion of the vehicle and the energy used for auxiliaries; Mr. Olechiw indicated that for EVs, this separation is more difficult.

A general comment from OICA was made concerning Driver-user information and how it is not part of the GRPE mandate. Mr. Olechiw clarified that the mandate of the EVE group was broad, to share information on EVs; Mr. Couroux also clarified that it was not in the interest of the EVE IWG to make recommendations outside the scope of the GRPE, which is outlined in section 1.2.2. of draft 3 of the Guide.

The GRPE Chair made a general comment concerning the need to conduct research and gather information prior to developing a GTR. Following from this, it was suggested that the EVE group look at EV utility factors as a potential area of future work.

ACTION 5: The EVE leadership will consider EV utility factors as a potential area of future work.

A brief discussion was held on the EV terminology that should be used in the Guide. The GRPE Chair clarified that the Guide should use VPSD terminology and the FEV consultant agreed to make this change for draft 4 of the Guide.

ACTION 6: The FEV consultant will work with the EVE Secretariat to adjust the EV terminology in the Guide to reflect definitions developed by the VPSD working group. Comments on draft 3 of the Guide can be submitted until February 3rd, 2014 to the attention of Erin Marchington (Erin.Marchington@ec.gc.ca). The Guide is targeted to be finalized during the 9th EVE meeting on February 17-18th in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

ACTION 7: All interested parties should submit comments on draft 3 of the Guide by February 3rd, 2014 to the attention of Erin Marchington Erin.Marchington@ec.gc.ca).

1. Mr. Michael Olechiw, Chair of the informal working group, welcomed participants to the meeting. Mr. Olechiw outlined the primary goal for the meeting, which was to continue discussing the recommendations included in draft 3 of the EV Reference Guide (EVE-08-03). He clarified that the intent was not to finalize the Guide during the 8th EVE meeting, but to agree on draft 3 (with some minor revisions) to be submitted as an informal document to the GRPE’s 68th session (GRPE-68-13). Contracting parties and industry would then have until February 3rd, 2014 to submit comments. The objective is to finalize the Guide during the 9th EVE meeting on February 17-18th in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

5. Mr. Couroux reviewed document EVE-07-17e covering Agenda item 2 with a focus on action items. Mr. Couroux detailed which action items were completed or ongoing, including:

• EVE-7 Action 1, completed: Participants will continue to be invited to present on EV related topics and standardization at EVE IWG meetings.
• EVE-7 Action 2, completed: The EVE Secretariat continues to coordinate input to the VPSD document from EVE IWG membership. More specifically, the Secretariat will request an update on status of next draft of VPSD and the Chair will share the next version of the EV Reference Guide to seek further input from VPSD.
  • The Chair of the VPSD provided input prior to the 8th EVE meeting on how the Guide should include EV-related definitions being developed by the VPSD working group, and draft 3 of the Guide will be revised accordingly.
• EVE-7 Action 3, completed: The EVE Secretariat informed EVE of upcoming EV2013 meeting in Ottawa and for which data will be made available as soon as possible.
  • An email containing this information was sent by the EVE Secretariat to the EVE group on January 2nd, 2014.
• EVE-7 Action 4, completed: Mr. Olechiw has provided updates on the contracting process for Reference Guide drafting. Mr. Olechiw confirmed the consultant retained by the US EPA (FEV consulting) will continue to assist in the drafting of the Guide until the 9th EVE meeting.
• EVE-7 Action 5, completed: The EVE Secretariat will continue to follow-up with Mr. Wiaux concerning cold temperature data and will report back to EVE membership once it is available.
  • Mr. Couroux has contacted Mr. Wiaux for data and will report back to the EVE group once the data is available.
• EVE-7 Action 6, completed: The EVE Secretariat will update Section 5 (draft 1 of Guide) to reflect comments and circulate to EVE membership for review by October 31st, 2013.
• EVE-7 Action 7, completed: In parallel to Action 6, contracting parties will provide further input to Section 3 (draft 1 of Guide) to the EVE Secretariat by October 31st, 2013.
• EVE-7 Action 8, completed: Contracting parties will review and submit comments to Section 5 to Secretariat one week after it is distributed as per item 1) above (~November 7).
• EVE-7 Action 9, completed: The EVE Secretariat will develop new draft of the Guide (draft 2) and circulate to EVE membership one week after receiving comments on section 5 (~November 14).
  • Draft 2 of the Guide was circulated to the EVE group for comment on December 6th, 2013. Comments from various contracting parties, industry, and other GRPE working groups were received and integrated into the Guide to produce draft 3 (EVE-08-03).
• EVE-7 Action 10, completed: Mr. Olechiw will seek guidance from the GRPE Chair on obtaining input from WLTP IWG on EV Reference Guide and particularly on recommendations included in Section 5.
  • There is a meeting directly after the 8th EVE meeting between the EVE leadership and WLTP secretary, EV sub-group, WLTP sponsors (European Commission and Japan) and OICA to discuss how the EVE and WLTP can work together in the future on EV-related issues.
• EVE-7 Action 11, completed: The EVE Secretariat will distribute an invitation and the revised agenda ahead of the EVE-08 meeting.
  • The revised and final Agenda for the 8th EVE meeting is document EVE-08-02-Rev2.
• EVE-7 Action 12, completed: Once finalized, the EVE Secretariat will distribute an invitation noting the location and timing of the EVE-09 meeting to the EVE group. The agenda for the meeting will be circulated by the EVE Secretariat after being finalized at the EVE-08 meeting.
  • The EVE-09 meeting invitation is document EVE-09-01 and the draft agenda for the EVE-09 meeting is document EVE-08-04.

6 Mr. Olechiw initiated the discussion of Agenda item 3 the Guide with the presentation of document EVE-08-05 by Mr. Mark Subramaniam of FEV Consulting. The presentation covered three items: 1) Summary of changes made to the Guide, 2) Current findings, activity levels, and recommendations in draft 3 of the Guide, and, 3) Open discussion items. During this discussion, draft 3 of the Guide (EVE-08-03) was also presented for discussion. The four main recommendations from Chapter 5 of draft 3 of the Guide were reviewed, including: 1) vehicle range and energy efficiency testing, 2) method of stating energy efficiency, 3) battery performance and durability, and 4) battery recyclability. Both documents elicited many questions and comments, which are briefly summarized below China clarified that an adjustment to the traffic light chart for market deployment attributes for China should be changed from two green and two red attributes to all green attributes. Also, OICA clarified that there should not be a tick under Driver-user information for the WLTP group in the vehicle attributes traffic light chart.

ACTION 1: The EVE Secretariat will make the two minor revisions requested by China and OICA to draft 3 of the Guide prior to the submission of the document to the GRPE.

Concerning recommendation 1 (vehicle range and energy efficiency testing), under Section 5.1, and the second paragraph above the bullets, it was agreed that the wording “the following” and “at minimum” in the first sentence should be deleted.

ACTION 2: The EVE Secretariat will adjust wording in Section 5.1, paragraph 2, by deleting “the following” and “at minimum” in the first sentence.

Most discussion concerned recommendation 2 (method of stating energy efficiency). OICA questioned whether pursuing the recommendation was valuable, considering there was no proposal to develop a comparable methodology for conventional vehicles. OICA also emphasized that for vehicle classification, the fuel type does not matter. Mr. Olechiw clarified there are established metrics for CO2 performance of conventional vehicles in operation, while EVs do not have such a metric; this is misleading because while EVs do not produce emissions during operation, there is still a CO2 penalty, it is just displaced upstream. China emphasized that the methodology proposed in recommendation 2 would be very useful for governments and decision-making in the future and indicated they have some related research information that could be shared with the EVE group. The GRPE Chair agreed, indicating that work on recommendation 2 would be useful for political decision-making, however he was unsure about three things: 1) Does the work under recommendation 2 fall under the scope of WP.29, 2) Are the experts available within the WP.29 forum to conduct this work? Or, Are there other more appropriate groups at the United Nations who could do this work?, and 3) Where would the boundaries be established for the development of a such a methodology? To resolve these issues, the GRPE Chair recommended that if it is not possible to agree on the complete text, text which is not agreed upon should be indicated with square brackets in the Guide when it is submitted formally to the GRPE in March 2014. Also, with respect to recommendation 2, the WP.29 forum should be consulted concerning the three items listed above.

ACTION 3: China will share research information related to recommendation 2 (method of stating energy efficiency) in draft 3 of the Guide with the EVE group via email or during a presentation at the next EVE meeting.

ACTION 4: The EVE Secretariat will consult the WP.29 forum for advice on recommendation 2. Japan also provided comments on the recommendations in draft 3 of the Guide via document EVE-08-06. Japan’s position is that WLTP IWG could take responsibility for recommendation 1 and 3, that recommendation 2 is outside the scope of WP.29 and recommendation 4 needs clarification. Mr. Olechiw clarified that the recommendations in the Guide could be considered by other groups, like WLTP, and that the intention is not to duplicate future work. The GRPE Chair indicated that in the WLTP group, there is a boundary made between energy consumption related to the propulsion of the vehicle and the energy used for auxiliaries; Mr. Olechiw indicated that for EVs, this separation is more difficult.

A general comment from OICA was made concerning Driver-user information and how it is not part of the GRPE mandate. Mr. Olechiw clarified that the mandate of the EVE group was broad, to share information on EVs; Mr. Couroux also clarified that it was not in the interest of the EVE IWG to make recommendations outside the scope of the GRPE, which is outlined in section 1.2.2. of draft 3 of the Guide.

The GRPE Chair made a general comment concerning the need to conduct research and gather information prior to developing a GTR. Following from this, it was suggested that the EVE group look at EV utility factors as a potential area of future work.

ACTION 5: The EVE leadership will consider EV utility factors as a potential area of future work.

A brief discussion was held on the EV terminology that should be used in the Guide. The GRPE Chair clarified that the Guide should use VPSD terminology and the FEV consultant agreed to make this change for draft 4 of the Guide.

ACTION 6: The FEV consultant will work with the EVE Secretariat to adjust the EV terminology in the Guide to reflect definitions developed by the VPSD working group. Comments on draft 3 of the Guide can be submitted until February 3rd, 2014 to the attention of Erin Marchington (Erin.Marchington@ec.gc.ca). The Guide is targeted to be finalized during the 9th EVE meeting on February 17-18th in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

ACTION 7: All interested parties should submit comments on draft 3 of the Guide by February 3rd, 2014 to the attention of Erin Marchington Erin.Marchington@ec.gc.ca).