Subaru Forester PZEV - Advanced Gasoline

Subaru Forester PZEV - Advanced Gasoline
Subaru Forester PZEV
     Advanced Gasoline
Partial Zero Emission Vehicle
     Test Results Report
           July 2011




                                1
Subaru Forester PZEV - Advanced Gasoline
Disclaimer notice

Transport Canada's ecoTECHNOLOGY for Vehicles program ("eTV") tests emerging vehicle technologies to
assess their performance in accordance with established Canadian motor vehicle standards. The test results
presented herein do not, in themselves, represent an official determination by Transport Canada regarding fuel
consumption or compliance with safety and emission standards of any motor vehicle or motor vehicle
component. Transport Canada does not certify, approve or endorse any motor vehicle product. Technologies
selected for evaluation, and test results, are not intended to convey policy or recommendations on behalf of
Transport Canada or the Government of Canada.

Transport Canada and more generally the Government of Canada make no representation or warranty of any
kind, either express or implied, as to the technologies selected for testing and evaluation by eTV, nor as to their
fitness for any particular use. Transport Canada and more generally the Government of Canada do not assume
nor accept any liability arising from any use of the information and applications contained or provided on or
through these test results. Transport Canada and more generally the Government of Canada do not assume nor
accept any liability arising from any use of third party sourced content.

Any comments concerning its content should be directed to:

Transport Canada
Environmental Initiatives (AHEC)
ecoTECHNOLOGY for Vehicles (eTV) Program
330 Sparks Street
Place de Ville, Tower C
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0N5
E-mail: eTV@tc.gc.ca

© Her Majesty in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Transport, 2011-2012




                                                                                                            2
Subaru Forester PZEV - Advanced Gasoline
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 4
1      INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................... 8
2      TESTING PROGRAM............................................................................................. 9
3      TESTING LOCATIONS .......................................................................................... 9
4      VEHICLE OVERVIEW ........................................................................................ 10
5  PHASE I - LABORATORY FUEL CONSUMPTION, EVAPORATIVE AND
EXHAUST EMISSION TESTING ............................................................................... 11
    5.1     RESULTS ............................................................................................................ 12
       5.1.1 2-Cycle Fuel Consumption Results ............................................................... 14
       5.1.2 5-Cycle Fuel Consumption Results ............................................................... 15
       5.1.3 Emissions Results .......................................................................................... 15
       5.1.4 Evaporative Emission Tests .......................................................................... 17
6      PHASE II – DYNAMIC TESTING....................................................................... 18
    6.1     ACCELERATION EVALUATION ............................................................................ 19
    6.2     MAXIMUM SPEED IN GEAR ................................................................................ 20
    6.3     HANDLING ......................................................................................................... 21
       6.3.1 Lateral Skid Pad ........................................................................................... 21
       6.3.2 Emergency Lane Change Manoeuvre ........................................................... 22
    6.4     NOISE EMISSION TESTS ...................................................................................... 24
    6.5     BRAKING............................................................................................................ 27
    6.6     SUMMARY REMARKS REGARDING DYNAMIC TESTING ...................................... 28
7      PHASE III - ON-ROAD EVALUATIONS ........................................................... 28
    7.1       OPERATION AND PERFORMANCE ........................................................................ 29
    7.2       COMFORT AND CONTROLS ................................................................................. 29
    7.3       PZEV PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................ 29
8      CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................... 31




                                                                                                                                 3
Subaru Forester PZEV - Advanced Gasoline
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Subaru Forester PZEV is a Partial Zero Emission Vehicle (PZEV) and as such is one
of the least polluting vehicles in the Canadian light-duty fleet. PZEV is a designation
under the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Phase Two Low Emission Vehicles
(LEV II) regulations. According to CARB’s regulations, the PZEV designation indicates
a vehicle that:

   •   Satisfies the strictest emission requirements applicable to internal combustion
       engine vehicles;
   •   Achieves near-zero evaporative emissions from the fuel system (hence the name
       “Partial Zero Emission Vehicle”); and
   •   Is defended by a 15 year 150,000 mile (240,000 km) warranty assuring that the
       PZEV emission standard is satisfied within the time and mileage limits.

In Canada, the emission regulations are different from CARB and do not require the 15
year warranty, but all other performance aspects of the PZEV requirement are retained in
the Canadian offering of the Subaru PZEV.

The PZEV emission category is roughly equivalent to the second cleanest category (Tier
2 Bin 2) of the On-Road Vehicle and Engine Emission Regulations, part of the Canadian
Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), 1999. The only cleaner emission category is zero
emissions. The vehicle creates about 90% fewer emissions than the current Canadian
emission requirement limits. The PZEV designation also indicates near-zero evaporative
emissions. “Evaporative emissions" means hydrocarbons emitted into the atmosphere
from a vehicle, other than exhaust emissions and crankcase emissions. These emissions
may escape while the engine is not operating. PZEV vehicles emit significantly less
evaporative emissions than the Canadian requirement limit.

The eTV program selected the Subaru Forester PZEV for testing and evaluation because
of its PZEV designation. Evaporative emissions not only reduce air quality and contribute
to human health hazards in dense urban areas, but also affect the greenhouse gas (GHG)
impact of vehicles from the direct evaporation of unused fuel into the atmosphere. The
global warming potential (GWP) of gasoline (essentially non-methane hydrocarbons)
versus CO2 is 12. This means that for every gram of gasoline that evaporates into the
atmosphere the equivalent mass of CO2 to achieve the same overall warming effect is 12
grams of CO2.

PZEV systems are relatively rare within the Canadian market. There are no regulatory
requirements for them to be available. Also, there is no government supported method to
recognize these lower-emission vehicles Canada, unlike in California, where the PZEV
emblem indicates compliance with stricter emission standards. The Subaru Forester
PZEV was deemed an appropriate vehicle for inclusion in the eTV program. In acquiring
the Subaru Forester PZEV, the eTV program wanted to quantify the reductions in GHG
and air pollution due to cleaner exhaust emissions and evaporative emissions that would
result from such a vehicle, as well as evaluating the performance under a variety of

                                                                                         4
Subaru Forester PZEV - Advanced Gasoline
Canadian climatic conditions, particularly in city driving and in cold weather. The
vehicle was tested and evaluated over three phases: laboratory fuel consumption,
evaporative and exhaust emissions; dynamic track testing; and on-road evaluations. The
following is a summary of the results obtained from these evaluations.

  Criteria                                         Results
Fuel        •    2-cycle testing, the method used to determine fuel consumption according to
consumption      Canadian regulations, relies on two simulated drive patterns, or ‘cycles’,
                 representing city driving and highway driving. The resulting fuel consumption
                 values obtained by eTV testing are:
                          o 11.0 L/100 km for the city
                          o 7.5 L/100 km for the highway
             •   The fuel consumption values published in Natural Resources Canada’s Fuel
                 Consumption Guide are:
                          o 10.4 L/100 km for the city
                          o 7.7 L/100 km for the highway
                 It is not uncommon for tests to achieve results that differ by up to 1.0 L/100km
                 when the same testing is performed by a different lab on the same model of
                 vehicle. So the 2-cycle eTV test results, although not exactly the same as the
                 published fuel consumption values, are not in conflict with the published
                 values.
             •   5-cycle testing, the method used by United States Environmental Protection
                 Agency (EPA) to determine fuel consumption, utilizes cycles that simulate city
                 driving, highway driving, aggressive driving style, city driving in cold
                 temperature (at -7 ºC), and driving with an electrical load due to air
                 conditioning. This test method typically results in fuel consumption values that
                 are 10 to 20% higher than those determined using the 2-cycle method. eTV’s
                 results using this test method are:
                          o 13.0 L/100 km for the city
                          o 9.4 L/100 km for the highway
CO2          In combined city and highway testing, the Subaru PZEV obtained an adjusted
emissions    value of 217 g/km, which is lower than the sales-weighted national average CO2
             emissions of 236 g/km for all AWD and 4x4 special purpose vehicles in Canada
             for the 2010 model year. The CO2 emissions of the Subaru Forester PZEV are an
             8% improvement than the stated average.




                                                                                         5
Exhaust         With regard to non-CO2 exhaust emissions, the 2010 Subaru PZEV surpasses the
Emissions       EPA Tier 2, Bin 5 emission category for which manufacturer’s fleet average NOx
                emissions must comply with. The maximum allowable emission category of Tier
                2, Bin 8 is easily satisfied. eTV’s testing showed that it surpasses all but one of the
                emission criteria needed for a SULEV/PZEV designation.

                                                      Non-Methane Organic Formaldehyde
                     Results/Limits         CO                                                   NOx            CO2
                                                         Gas (NMOG)         (HCHO)
                    Subaru Forester
                                            0.16              0.023               0.001          0.01           349
                         PZEV
                    CARB – PZEV
                                            1.0               0.010               0.008          0.02            -
                       standard
                 Standard – Tier 2 Bin
                                            3.4               0.075               0.015          0.05            -
                           5


                Relative to the CARB PZEV standard for which the Subaru Forester PZEV was
                designed to meet, the results indicate relatively low CO, NOx, and formaldehyde
                emissions but higher non-methane organic gas emissions. It is possible that a
                retesting of the vehicle would result in a lower non-methane organic gas emission
                measurement that would satisfy the CARB standard1.
Evaporative The Subaru PZEV satisfies the CARB evaporative emission test standards of 0.35
Emission    grams per test for the two-day evaporative emission test with a value of 0.20
Results     grams per test. This results in 0.40 grams fewer emissions than conventional non-
            PZEV vehicle emissions of 0.60 grams per test.
Dynamic     Overall, handling and performance were acceptable relative to the special purpose
Performance class.
            • The Subaru PZEV reached an average maximum speed of 144.2 km/h in
               approximately 40 seconds.
            • The maximum lateral acceleration was 0.64 G (6.3 m/s2) for a 200 ft (61 m)
               turning circle.
            • External and internal noise levels were well below the limits set out in the
             Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (CMVSS).
            • Braking is compliant with all aspects of the CMVSS 135 standard.
Driver      Of the 15 evaluations completed on the Subaru Forester PZEV, 100% of
Evaluations respondents did not notice any performance difference between the PZEV and a
            regular gasoline car. This demonstrates how this technology can be implemented
            in vehicles without having an impact on the consumer’s experience of the
            technology. It is also notable that 67% of respondents did not have prior
            knowledge of the more stringent emission standard that PZEVs comply with.
            Dissemination of the valuable benefits of PZEV technology to potential consumers
            is an important part of introducing such a technology into the market.

1
 The tests were conducted on a four wheel drive dynamometer during dyno control system development.
The test cell was in the process of refining upgraded components, and had not yet performed a correlation
program to verify the accuracy of the test results.

                                                                                                            6
Barriers to the Introduction of PZEV Technologies into the Canadian Market

Public opinion research suggests that exhaust emissions have not traditionally been of
primary importance to the Canadian consumer when shopping for a new vehicle2. One of
the principle barriers to the introduction of advanced gasoline technologies, such as
PZEV technologies, is overcoming the consumer’s desire to minimize the initial purchase
price (or ‘sticker shock’) of a new vehicle. In contrast to fuel savings, lower emissions do
not present a savings opportunity for the owner. They are simply less polluting to the
environment.

The kind of testing that eTV has undertaken on PZEV technology provides information
to evaluate the benefits of this technology in Canada. There is no current specific
regulatory standard that requires or provides incentive for the adoption of the technology
in Canada, but there are evident benefits in air pollution reduction attributable to PZEV
technology.




2
 Pollution Probe. 2008. Barriers to Consumer Purchasing of More Highly Fuel-Efficient Vehicles: A
Background Paper.

                                                                                                    7
1   INTRODUCTION
Partial Zero Emission Vehicle (PZEV) is a category within the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) Phase 2 Low Emission Vehicle (LEV II) emission regulations. The PZEV
designation indicates a vehicle that satisfies the strictest emission requirements applicable
to internal combustion engine vehicles, and also achieves near-zero evaporative
emissions from the fuel system and, in addition, requires a 15 year 150,000 mile (240,000
km) warranty assuring that the emission standard is met within these limits. In Canada,
the emission regulations are different from CARB and do not require the 15 year
warranty, but all other performance aspects of the PZEV requirement are retained in the
Canadian offering of the Subaru PZEV. A PZEV vehicle is approximately 90% cleaner
than the Canadian exhaust emission limits for new vehicles.

Evaporative emissions for CARB PZEV vehicles are limited to 0.35 grams per day
(according to standardized testing). Current Canadian evaporative emission standards
allow for up to 0.50 grams per day; however manufacturers need only meet a fleet
average in the Canadian emission standard whereas any vehicle with a PZEV designation
must satisfy the 0.35 gram limit. CARB emission standards have historically been more
stringent than Canadian and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emission
standards and have often been the driver towards lower emissions within North America.

Subaru introduced PZEV models (Legacy PZEV, Forester PZEV, and Outback PZEV)
into Canada in late 2009, as a 2010 model year vehicles. Currently, Subaru models are
sold in Canada and the United States, with both the PZEV and non-PZEV designations.
The Forester is available as a PZEV model in all Canadian provinces as well as the 50 US
states. Typically manufacturers only offer PZEV vehicles in states that adopt CARB
emission requirements.

Working in partnership with Subaru, the eTV program selected the Subaru Forester
PZEV for testing because it meets CARB standards. Evaporative emissions not only
reduce air quality and contribute to human health hazards, particularly in dense urban
areas, but also affect the greenhouse gas (GHG) impact of vehicles from the direct
evaporation of unused fuel into the atmosphere. The global warming potential (GWP) of
gasoline (essentially non-methane hydrocarbons) versus CO2 is 12. This means that for
every gram of gasoline that evaporates into the atmosphere the equivalent mass of CO2 to
achieve the same overall warming effect is 12 grams of CO2.

Specifically, PZEV technology reduces the following criteria air contaminants:
   - Non-methane organic compounds (NMOG), this include hydrocarbons
   - Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
   - Particulate matter (PM)
   - Carbon monoxide (CO)
   - Formaldehyde (HCHO)




                                                                                           8
In the Subaru Forester PZEV, the fuel injectors, air-intake system, catalytic converter and
engine control module have been modified in order to achieve the CARB PZEV
designation.

Any vehicle with a PZEV designation emits significantly lower exhaust emissions and
evaporative emissions than a conventional non-PZEV vehicle. Summed over the entire
Canadian fleet, for a single year of new vehicles sales, PZEV designated vehicles could
reduce evaporative emissions in Canada by over 50,000 litres. When considering the
greenhouse gas effect, this is equivalent to about half a million kilograms of CO2 in
warming potential.


2   TESTING PROGRAM
The testing program was designed to provide a fair assessment of the PZEV technology
found on the Subaru Forester PZEV, in terms of fuel consumption, exhaust and
evaporative emissions, and overall handling. The suggested tests were based on practices
used by the Company Average Fuel Consumption (CAFC), the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of Transportation, the International Organization
for Standardization and the Society of Automotive Engineers (see Subaru Forester PZEV
test plan for details).

The Subaru Forester PZEV was evaluated over three distinct phases:

•   Phase I - Laboratory fuel consumption, evaporative and exhaust emission testing
•   Phase II - Dynamic track testing
•   Phase III - On-road evaluations

Together, these various phases were designed to realistically assess the Subaru PZEV’s
overall performance in Canadian conditions.


3   TESTING LOCATIONS
Phase I testing was performed at Environment Canada’s Emissions Research and
Measurements Section (ERMS) located in Ottawa, Ontario. All testing was performed
in a controlled laboratory, using a vehicle chassis dynamometer. The laboratory
environment ensures that testing was completed to within ± 1 degree Celsius of the
required test temperature. Vehicles are tested according to separate driving cycles and
are maintained to within ± 1.5 km/h of the required speed.

Phase II testing was performed at Transport Canada’s test track facility in Blainville,
Québec. The controlled environment was necessary to ensure that testing was performed
on a gradient of ± 1%. The test track is equipped with over 25 kilometres of road,
including both a high-speed and low-speed circuit, to allow for a variety of tests. Phase II


                                                                                          9
testing was performed between September 15 and October 13, 2009. Tests were carried
out only in weather conditions that were favourable to evaluation and testing standards.

Phase III vehicle evaluations were performed by Transport Canada staff. A total of 15
evaluations were performed, in which participants tried the vehicle on public roads and
filled out a questionnaire.


4    VEHICLE OVERVIEW
The Subaru PZEV is classified as a special purpose vehicle. The PZEV, or Partial Zero
Emission Vehicle, designation was created by the California Air Resources Board
(CARB) as a requirement for their Low Emission Vehicle (LEV II) standards. Although
PZEV vehicles are required to be sold in California and other states which have adopted
the CARB LEV2 standard, Subaru has made PZEV designated vehicles available
throughout the United States and Canada. As of the time of testing, Subaru is the only
major vehicle brand selling PZEV designated vehicles in Canada.

Table 1 lists the specifications of the vehicle tested.

                             Table 1: Specifications for the Subaru PZEV
Weight                1,500 kg                       Drive Type               Symmetrical all-wheel drive
Length                4.56 m                         Engine                   2.5 L SOHC, 16-valve,
                                                                              horizontally opposed 4-
                                                                              cylinder engine
Width                 1.78 m                        Transmission              4-speed automatic
Height                1.70 m                        Torque                    230 Nm / 170 lb-ft @ 4,500
                                                                              rpm
Seating               5                             Power                     127 kW / 170 hp @ 5,800
                                                                              rpm
Fuel Type             Gasoline (regular unleaded)    Fuel Efficiency*
                                                                    City     10.4 L/100 km
                                                                   Highway 7.7 L/100 km
Displacement           2,500 cm3                     Fuel Tank Capacity      64 L
Acceleration           0-100km/h in 10 seconds       Driving Range           700 km
CO2 Emissions          103 g/km                      Brakes (f/r)            Ventilated Discs / Solid Discs
Air Pollution Score 9.5 / 10                         Drag Coefficient        0.36
*Canadian label value, published in Natural Resource Canada’s 2010 Fuel Consumption Guide

The following technologies modifications are what allow Subaru to achieve a PZEV
designation with the Forester:

Fuel Injectors: The fuel injectors on a Subaru PZEVs close tighter than conventional
injectors. This reduces leakage and evaporative emissions into the intake manifold.

Catalytic Converter & Engine Control Module: The catalytic converter in the Subaru
Forester is a large (greater surface area) converter containing a greater amount of
precious metals, resulting in lower emissions than traditional size catalytic converters. In
addition the engine control module retards ignition timing at cold start up in order to

                                                                                                   10
drive up exhaust temperatures and heat the catalytic converter sooner. This allows the
converter to reduce emissions faster than vehicles not employing this technology.

Dual Filtration Air-Intake System: In most conventional vehicles unburnt gas fumes
can escape through the air intake filter and assembly. In a Subaru PZEV the air-intake
system includes a carbon canister that captures these emissions before they make it to the
atmosphere.




                                      Figure 1: Subaru Forester PZEV



5        PHASE I - LABORATORY FUEL CONSUMPTION, EVAPORATIVE AND
         EXHAUST EMISSION TESTING

More than 3,500 kilometres of vehicle and engine use were accumulated on the Subaru
Forester PZEV, in keeping with the On-Road Vehicle and Engine Emission Regulations
of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), 1999. The procedure outlines
the prescribed route that the vehicle must follow, using commercially available gasoline
fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher. Once mileage accumulation was completed,
the vehicle was soaked3 at a laboratory temperature for no less than 8 hours before testing
began. This is to ensure that the vehicle’s test temperature is controlled for comparison
against other test vehicles undergoing the same emission and fuel consumption
evaluations.

Emission and fuel consumption tests were performed as per the regulation procedures.
Evaluations were performed over the six duty cycles listed in Table 2. In addition,

3
 To soak a vehicle means to park it in the test chamber with the engine turned off and allow the entire
vehicle, including engine, fluids, transmission and drive train, to reach the test cell temperature prior to the
beginning of a test.


                                                                                                              11
evaporative emission analysis was performed over both the single hot-soak and two-day
evaporative emission tests.

                          Table 2: Chassis Dynamometer Test Schedule

    Test Parameter          Testing Standard       Number of Tests               Location
                                                  (Cell Temperature)
Urban Driving                 U.S. FTP-75               4 (25°C)           ERMS (Ottawa, ON)
Cold Test                     U.S. FTP-72               2 (-7°C)           ERMS (Ottawa, ON)
Aggressive Driving            US06 (SFTP)               2 (25°C)           ERMS (Ottawa, ON)
Highway Driving               U.S. HWFET                4 (25°C)           ERMS (Ottawa, ON)
Electrical Load                 US SC03                 2 (25°C)           ERMS (Ottawa, ON)
Stop-and-Go Driving            US NYCC                  4 (25°C)           ERMS (Ottawa, ON)

The vehicle was mounted on a chassis dynamometer. A chassis dynamometer allows the
vehicle’s drive wheel to turn while the vehicle is stationary, and provides a resistance that
is equivalent to what the vehicle would experience travelling on actual roads (essentially
a treadmill designed for automobiles).

ERMS collected and analyzed exhaust emissions for each of the duty cycles listed in
Table 2. The emissions data were analyzed for:
   - Non-methane organic compounds (NMOG), this include hydrocarbons
   - Nitrogen oxides (NOx)
   - Carbon monoxide (CO)
   - Formaldehyde (HCHO)


5.1 Results
Two methods were used to estimate the fuel consumption of the Subaru Forester PZEV:
  • The 2-cycle method, which utilizes simulated drive patterns or ‘cycles’
     representing city driving and highway driving, is the method used to determine
     fuel consumption values published by Natural Resources Canada.
  • The 5-cycle method utilizes cycles that simulate city driving, highway driving,
     aggressive driving style, city driving in cold temperature (at -7 ºC), and driving
     with an electrical load due to air conditioning. The United States EPA uses this
     method to determine fuel consumption.

The test cycles are derived from extensive data on real-world driving conditions, such as
driving activity, trip length and stopping frequency, among other factors.

The 2-cycle calculation is the result of the urban driving cycle (U.S. FTP-75) and the
highway duty cycle (U.S. HWFET). Advertised fuel consumption, as published by
Natural Resources Canada in the annual Canadian Fuel Consumption Guide, is obtained
by adjusting the measured fuel consumption upward 10% and 15% respectively for the

                                                                                            12
city and highway cycles to account for “real-world” differences between the way vehicles
are driven on the road and over the test cycles. Combined city and highway fuel
consumption is obtained using a ratio of 55% city and 45% highway.

The 5-cycle test method supplements the Canadian 2-cycle test method by taking into
account additional factors that affect fuel consumption but are not in the current Canadian
2-cycle standard. The U.S. EPA began to implement 5-cycle testing in 2006, and started
publishing fuel consumption results according to the 5-cycle test procedure for model
year 2008 vehicles.

The 5-cycle method includes testing over a wider range of driving patterns and
temperature conditions than those tested under the current Canadian 2-cycle standard. For
example, in the real world, vehicles are often driven more aggressively, at higher speeds
and with greater rates of acceleration. These conditions place a greater demand on the
engine than existing city and highway test cycles account for. The US06 aggressive
driving cycle takes this into account. Furthermore, drivers often use air conditioning in
warm and/or humid conditions. In the 2-cycle calculation, this factor is not taken into
consideration, since the test does not allow the air conditioning system to be turned on.
The US SC03 test cycle reflects the added fuel needed to operate the air conditioning
system. As well, given Canada’s climate, a typical vehicle will be driven below 0°C on a
fairly regular basis. The current 2-cycle testing is conducted between 20°C and 30°C.
The U.S. FTP-72 cold test cycle, conducted at 20°F (-7°C), is used to reflect the effect on
fuel consumption when starting and operating an engine at lower temperatures.

Fuel consumption values derived from either the 2-cycle or 5-cycle method have merit
when used to compare the fuel consumption of one vehicle to that of another. However,
comparisons are only valid when the method for obtaining the fuel consumption value is
consistent. For example, a fuel consumption value derived from the 2-cycle method
should only be compared to other fuel consumption values derived from the 2-cycle
method. Because it takes other factors into account that typically increase fuel
consumption the 5-cycle method usually yields fuel consumption values that are
approximately 10 to 20% higher than the advertised 2-cycle fuel consumption value for
the same make and model. In general, the 5-cycle method may better represent the fuel
consumption that can be expected in real world driving, but accurate forecasting of fuel
consumption is impossible in practice due to the many unpredictable factors that affect
driving efficiency.

Figure 2 shows a schematic of the process that is used to determine the advertised or
‘label’ fuel consumption values for both 2-cycle and 5-cycle testing.




                                                                                        13
Figure 2: Schematic Diagram of the Process for Calculating Fuel Consumption Using the 2-Cycle
                                  Method and the 5-Cycle Method



5.1.1   2-Cycle Fuel Consumption Results

The Subaru Forester PZEV was tested against the FTP-75 city cycle and the HWFET
highway cycle according to current Canadian standards for fuel consumption testing.
The results for the measured fuel consumption and advertised fuel consumption values
determined by eTV, as well as the published Canadian fuel consumption label value are
shown in Table 3.

                             Table 3: 2-Cycle Fuel Consumption Values
                        2- Cycle Fuel Consumption (L/100km)
                                     City            Highway              Combined
    eTV Measured Fuel
       Consumption                   10.0                6.5                 8.4
  eTV-Derived Advertised
 ‘Label’ Fuel Consumption            11.0                7.5                 9.4
   Actual Published Fuel
      Consumption*                   10.4                7.7                 9.2
*As published in Natural Resources Canada’s 2010 Fuel Consumption Guide

It is not uncommon for tests to achieve results that differ by up to 1.0 L/100km when the
same testing is performed by a different lab on the same model of vehicle.

The measured 2-cycle combined fuel consumption value of 8.4 L/100 km is slightly
better than the estimated fleet average for model year 2010 of 8.6 L/100 km, and it is


                                                                                                   14
more than 15% below the Company Average Fuel Consumption (CAFC) standard of 10.0
L/100km.

Currently, CAFC targets are voluntarily met by manufacturers, but Environment Canada
intends to align with the United States’ plans to regulate GHG emissions and, effectively,
fuel consumption. The Canadian GHG emission regulations proposal is the Passenger
Automobile and Light Truck Greenhouse Gas Emission Regulations, published on
October 13, 2010, in Part 2 of the Canada Gazette.


5.1.2    5-Cycle Fuel Consumption Results

Table 4 shows the 5-cycle fuel consumption values determined by eTV compared to the
fuel consumption published by the United States EPA.

                             Table 4: 5-Cycle Fuel Consumption Values
                          5-Cycle Fuel Consumption (L/100km)
                                     City            Highway            Combined
        eTV Test Result              13.0               9.4               11.4
 Published US EPA value              11.8               9.0               10.7
          Difference                 10%                5%                7%

Although these fuel consumption values are higher than those obtained during the 2-cycle
testing, the 5-cycle testing values may provide a more accurate representation of what a
driver can expect in terms of real-world fuel consumption. When compared against the
advertised city and highway values determined by eTV for the 2-cycle calculation, the 5-
cycle fuel consumption values eTV obtained are 18% and 25% higher, respectively. The
values achieved for eTV 5-cycle testing are 10%, 5% and 7% higher than the reported US
5-cycle label values. It is important to note that it is not unusual for test values for an
individual vehicle to be up to 10% higher than the values tested by the EPA or reported
by manufacturers to the EPA.


5.1.3    Emissions Results

The results of the city and highway test cycles offer an advertised combined CO2
emissions value of 217 g/km (349 g/mile). When compared to the sales-weighted national
average CO2 emissions of 236 g/km (380 g/mile) for all AWD and 4x4 special purpose
vehicles in Canada for the 2010 model year, the emissions of the Subaru Forester PZEV
is an 8% improvement. Therefore, for consumers requiring the capabilities of a vehicle in
this category, the Subaru has lower than average GHG emissions, for a vehicle of this
category, as well as low criteria air contaminant emissions as indicated by the PZEV
designation.

Table 5 summarizes the current EPA emission standard for non-CO2 emissions, known as
the Tier 2 emission standard, and the CARB LEV II emission standard. The Canadian
                                                                                        15
emission regulations adopt the EPA set of emission standards, which categorize emission
limits into Bins 1 through 11. Light-Duty Vehicles (LDV) must satisfy Bin 8 or lower.
The Subaru Forester PZEV is actually designated as a special purpose vehicle under
Canadian regulations, which makes it a Light Light-Duty Truck (LLDT) according to the
emission regulations, so it must satisfy Bin 9 or lower. The air pollution score in the
right-most column is used by the EPA to designate vehicles’ emission performance in a
convenient and understandable way, by assigning a numbered ‘grade’ out of 10 (10/10
being ideal).
                                                                           4
                 Table 5: Summary of EPA and CARB Vehicle Emission Standards




4
    Source: http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/Aboutratings.do (obtained 04/03/2011)

                                                                                     16
With regard to non-CO2 exhaust emissions, the 2010 Subaru PZEV surpasses the Tier 2
Bin 5 emission category with which manufacturer’s fleet average NOx emissions must
comply with. The maximum allowable emission requirement that must be satisfied by
light-duty vehicles in Canada, Tier 2 Bin 8, is easily satisfied. Testing showed that it
surpasses all but one of the emission criteria needed for a SULEV/PZEV designation.
Table 6 shows the measured exhaust emissions and the emission limits of standards.

                      Table 6: Measured Exhaust Emissions vs. Standards (g/mile)
                                              Non-Methane
                                                                       Formaldehyde
       Results/Limits            CO           Organic Gas
                                                                         (HCHO)
                                                                                               NOx          CO2
                                                (NMOG)
    Subaru Forester PZEV         0.16              0.023                     0.001              0.01        349

    Standard – Tier 2 Bin 5       3.4              0.075                     0.015              0.05         -

CARB – PZEV standard              1.0              0.010                     0.008              0.02         -


Relative to the CARB PZEV standard for which the Subaru Forester PZEV was designed
to meet, the results indicate relatively low CO, NOx, and formaldehyde emissions but
higher non-methane organic gas emissions. It is possible that a retesting of the vehicle
would result in a lower non-methane organic gas emissions measurement that would
satisfy the CARB standard5.


5.1.4     Evaporative Emission Tests

Evaporative emissions occur when fuel evaporates from a vehicle. This phenomenon
increases as the fuel system increases in temperature either through vehicle operation or
rising external temperatures. Evaporative emission regulations set a limit on the total
amount of fuel that may evaporate from a vehicle over a given length of time.

All evaporative emission tests follow the same basic principles:

      1- A carbon canister, designed to capture any emissions for later analysis, is
         prepped
      2- Test fuel is added to the test vehicle
      3- The vehicle is prepped through a drive cycle
      4- The vehicle is soaked.
      5- A hot soak test and diurnal test are performed

The test is a known as a SHED test for “sealed housings for evaporative determinations”.
The test simulates the temperatures to which a vehicle would be exposed while parked in
typical summer conditions. Testing involved preparing and testing the Subaru PZEV as

5
 The tests were conducted on a four wheel drive dynamometer during dyno control system development.
The test cell was in the process of refining upgraded components, and had not yet performed a correlation
program to verify the accuracy of the test results.

                                                                                                        17
per Title 40 US CFR Section 86, Subpart M6. The SHED measures the total amount of
unburnt fuel that evaporates from the test vehicle during the test period.

The Canadian ‘two-day + hot soak’ test limit allows up to 0.65 grams of evaporative
emissions per test. The CARB ‘two-day test + hot soak limit’ is 0.35 grams per test.
Table 7 shows the evaporative emission results measured for the Subaru Forester.

                    Table 7: Evaporative Emission Results and Limits (grams/test)
      Two Day + hot soak           Hot Soak         Two Day          Total
        Subaru Forester               0.02            0.18            0.20

    Canadian Emission Limit             -               -             0.65

     CARB – PZEV Limit                  -               -             0.35


The Subaru Forester emits 0.45 grams per test less than current Canadian standards of
0.65 grams per test. As a result, a basic estimate of the number of litres of fuel saved with
advanced evaporative emission technologies can be performed.

•     0.40 grams per 2 days (for summer days)
•     Roughly 125 warm day/nights per year
•     Approximately 1.5 million news cars per year sold in Canada

Calculation of total annual fuel savings:

0.40 grams/2 days x 125 days x 1.5 million = 37,500 kilograms or 50,000 litres

Thus, assuming a best-case scenario, where all new cars entering the Canadian market in
a given year meet the PZEV evaporative emission standard, approximately 50,000 litres
less gasoline would evaporate into the atmosphere each year in this basic scenario
(additional study would be required to validate). Summed over the entire Canadian fleet,
for a single year of new vehicles sales, PZEV designated vehicles could reduce
evaporative emissions in Canada by over 50,000 litres. The amount of fuel saved is
insignificant from an economic viewpoint, but considering the greenhouse gas effect, this
is equivalent to about half a million kilograms of CO2 in warming potential. Also,
hydrocarbon emissions are toxic to human health, so there is an air pollution reduction
benefit as well.


6     PHASE II – DYNAMIC TESTING



6
 The EPA and CARB evaporative emissions tests differ somewhat in the temperature at which the tests are
performed. The Subaru Forester PZEV was tested according to the evaporative emission test for Canada,
which is the same as the EPA test as listed in the CFR Section 86 Subpart M.

                                                                                                    18
The Subaru Forester PZEV underwent dynamic and performance testing in September
and October 2009. Most aspects of the tests performed were for general dynamic
assessment purposes and not as a measure of compliance with the Canada Motor Vehicle
Safety Standards (CMVSS). Concerns about fuel-efficient vehicles are not always
limited to exhaust emissions and greenhouse gas reduction. The general dynamic testing
was performed because the eTV program wished to assess how well an advanced fuel-
efficient vehicles function in various road situations, with a view to identifying any
possible issues.

As mentioned previously, the dynamic testing was performed at Transports Canada’s test
facility in Blainville, Québec. Figure 3 shows an aerial view of the test track.




                        Figure 3: Dynamic Test Track Facility Overview



6.1 Acceleration Evaluation
The maximum acceleration was determined by starting the vehicle from a standing start
and following the procedure set out below.

1. The vehicle was evaluated by accelerating to the maximum attainable speed in a
   quarter of a mile (402.3 m).
2. The vehicle was evaluated by accelerating to the maximum attainable speed in a
   kilometre (1000 m).

The Subaru Forester tested was equipped with a 4-speed Sportshift transmission. Shifting
was performed in “manual” mode at what was determined by the driver to be an optimal
shift point. To account for variations in wind, the vehicle was driven in both directions on
the test track, with the results averaged.




                                                                                         19
Table 8: Average Speed Results for Specified Distances
                       Distance                                Speed ( km/hr )
                   1/4 mile ( 402.3 m)                                126
                        1,000 m                                       163

The acceleration compares favourably to typical results in the special purpose class of
vehicles, and allow for the highway merging and overtaking that most Canadians have
come to expect from their vehicles.


6.2 Maximum Speed in Gear
The maximum speed attainable was tested and recorded for each gear. The driver started
from a standing start for first gear only. The vehicle was accelerated, changing gears
only when the vehicle engine speed reached its maximum rpm for at least 3 seconds. The
maximum speed and revolutions per minute was recorded for each gear. Since speed is
affected by wind, tests were performed in both directions and averaged. Tests took place
on October 21, 2009 and the recorded wind speed was 14 km/h.

Table 9 lists the maximum speeds obtained experimentally in two separate trials in
opposite directions for each gear.

                   Table 9: Average Results for Maximum Speed in Each Gear
                                                                       Maximum
                                                                         Speed
                                  Gear selection                        (km/h)
              A. Gear selection no 1                                         59.1
              B. Gear selection no 2                                        111.2
              C. Gear selection no 3                                        169.9
              D. Gear selection no 4                                        174.4

During testing, the Subaru PZEV reached an average maximum speed of 174 km/h in
approximately 40 seconds, while operating in 4th gear. The Subaru PZEV is easily
capable of meeting and exceeding all minimum speed requirements on public roads in
Canada.

Figure 4 presents the maximum speed and speed in each gear in one direction before
being averaged.




                                                                                          20
Figure 4: Maximum Speed in Gear, Single Run



6.3 Handling

6.3.1   Lateral Skid Pad

The skid pad test was used to evaluate the steady-state road holding ability and lateral
stability of the vehicle. The lateral skid pad test determines the maximum lateral
acceleration that the Subaru Forester PZEV can achieve in a cornering situation. The skid
pad is set up by marking out a 200 foot (61 metre) diameter circle on asphalt, using
pylons. The vehicle must then reach the maximum speed possible while driving along the
inside of the perimeter of the circle, without exiting the circle area or striking the pylons.
When a vehicle reaches its cornering limit, it will lose traction on the curve. The vehicle
is driven in circles within a 200 foot (61 metre) diameter while maintaining the maximum
speed possible. The lateral acceleration is measured at the vehicle’s cornering limit, as it
begins losing traction on the curve.

In order to measure vehicle displacement, speed and lateral acceleration, the Subaru
PZEV was equipped with a combined GPS and accelerometer-based data acquisition
system. All measurements refer to the vehicle’s centre of gravity.




                                                                                           21
Tires were warmed up and conditioned by using a sinusoidal steering pattern at a
frequency of 1 Hz, a peak steering-wheel angle amplitude corresponding to a peak lateral
acceleration of 0.5–0.6 g, and a speed of 56 km/h. The vehicle was driven through the
course four times, performing 10 cycles of sinusoidal steering during each pass.

Testing was performed under the following conditions:

   •    The vehicle was equipped with new tires.
   •    Tire pressure was adjusted to conform to the manufacturer’s recommendations.
   •    The vehicle’s weight was adjusted to its lightly loaded condition.
   •    The skid pad was 61 m in diameter.

Figure 5 shows a picture of the vehicle navigating the skid pad in a counter-clockwise
direction.




                       Figure 5: Test Vehicle on Counter-Clockwise Run

The results presented in Table 11 show that the maximum speed that the vehicle can
achieve in a 61m diameter cornering situation is 58 km/h.

                               Table 10: Skid Pad Test Results
                 Clockwise                                       Counter-Clockwise
Speed (km/h)   Stay Inside Corridor? (Yes/No)   Speed (km/h)       Stay Inside Corridor? (Yes/No)
     50                     Yes                      50                         Yes
     55                     Yes                      55                         Yes
     58                      No                      55                         Yes
     56                     Yes                      58                         Yes
     58                     Yes                      60                          No

The maximum speed that the vehicle can achieve in this cornering situation is 58 km/h.
In this case, the measured maximum lateral acceleration is 0.81 G (7.9 m/s2).


6.3.2   Emergency Lane Change Manoeuvre

The emergency lane change manoeuvre with obstacle avoidance test was performed,
based on ISO 3888-2: 2002 Passenger Cars – Test Track for a severe lane change

                                                                                              22
manoeuvre. During this test, the vehicle entered the course at a particular speed and the
throttle was released. The driver then attempted to negotiate the course without striking
the pylons. The test speed was progressively increased until instability occurred or the
course could not be negotiated.

As illustrated in Figure 6, section 4 of the course was shorter than section 2 by one metre
in order to achieve maximum lateral acceleration at this area. Tests were performed in
one direction only. If any pylons were hit, the run was disallowed.




                          Figure 6: Emergency Lane Change Course

Figure 7 shows a picture of the vehicle performing the emergency lane-change
manoeuvre during a run where a pylon was struck.




                 Figure 7: Emergency Lane Change Manoeuvre, Disallowed Run

Several tests were necessary to determine at which speed the Subaru PZEV was able to
negotiate all the way through the prescribed course without hitting a pylon. Table 11 lists
all runs in increasing order, by speed.




                                                                                         23
Table 11: Subaru Forester PZEV Emergency Lane Change Results
                 Initial Speed (km/h)                        Pylon Hit? (Yes/No)
                          50                                          No

                          55                                          No

                          58                                          No

                          60                                          No

                          60                                          Yes

                          60                                          No

                          62                                          No

                          65                                          No

                          68                                          Yes


While there is no pass or fail in terms of speed for emergency lane change manoeuvres, it
is a fair assessment of the lateral stability of a vehicle. The maximum successful entry
speed through the course was recorded as 68 km/h. This result is on par with other
vehicles that the eTV program has tested.

The maximum lateral acceleration recorded on a successful run was 0.97 G (9.5 m/s2).
This, as expected, is higher than the result obtained over the skid pad test. Due to the
rapid onset of lateral acceleration in this scenario, the vehicle manages to peak at higher
lateral acceleration values before the transition into skidding occurs as traction is lost.


6.4 Noise Emission Tests
The Subaru Forester PZEV was tested for noise emissions due to concerns of the
additional noise that PZEV technology creates by retarding ignition timing for faster
engine warm-up when the vehicle is started. The noise testing performed was in
accordance with the CMVSS 1106 Noise Emission Test, SAE Recommended Practice
J986, Sound Level for Passenger Cars and Light Trucks, and SAE Standard J1470,
Measurement of Noise Emitted by Accelerating Highway Vehicles. In order to measure
noise emitted from the engine and exhaust, microphones were set up as shown in Figure
8.




                                                                                          24
Figure 8: Noise Emission Test Setup

Testing was performed under the following conditions:

•   The vehicle test weight, including driver and instrumentation, did not exceed the
    vehicle’s curb weight by more than 125 kg;
•   Before each run, in order to stabilize the transmission and exhaust system
    temperatures, the vehicle was allowed to idle in neutral for a period of one minute.

The test procedure with the vehicle accelerating through the noise measurement zone was
as follows:

•   The vehicle was brought to a speed of 48 km/h ± 1.2 km/h before entering the noise
    measurement zone;
•   At the start of the zone (the acceleration point) the throttle was opened wide,
    accelerating the vehicle;
•   The vehicle continued to accelerate until it had exited the zone;
•   The sound meter was set to fast dB(A).

All noise tests on the Subaru PZEV were performed on October 21, 2009.

The noise emission tests with the vehicle decelerating followed the same procedure as
above, with one modification: at the start of the zone (the deceleration point), the throttle
was released, and the vehicle was allowed to decelerate until its speed had dropped to 24
km/h, or it had exited the zone.

Results from all tests show that the ambient noise levels are within the limits of the
CMVSS 1106 standards. Due to the logarithmic nature of the decibel scale, a level of



                                                                                           25
67.9 dB is significantly lower than the 93.8 decibel limit. Generally 60 dB is considered
to be the level of normal human conversation while 90 dB would be the sound generated
by a typical gas-powered lawn mower.

The levels measured for the Subaru PZEV are typical for a gasoline powered special
purpose vehicle. Most of the noise being generated from the vehicle at these test speeds is
due to tire and wind resistance, which is acceptable and similar across any vehicle power
train platform.

Table 12 and Table 13 show the results of the noise emission test. The results satisfy the
requirements of the CMVSS 1106 Noise Emission Test.

                          Table 12: External Noise, Approaching 48 km/h
Test Side   Approaching    Approaching End Speed RPM max               Noise
    #         Speed            RPM           (km/h)                  Level dB
              (km/h)                                                    (A)
Right – 1       48             2700            67          4000         67.4
Right – 2       48             2700            67          4000         68.0
Right – 3       48             2700            67          4000         68.3
Right – 4       48             2700            67          4000         67.8
                                Average        67                       67.9
Left – 1         48            2700            67          4000         67.6
Left – 2         48            2700            67          4000         67.1
Left – 3         48            2700            67          4000         67.3
Left – 4         48            2700            67          4000         66.8
                                Average        67                       67.2

                          Table 13: External Noise, Approaching 67 km/h
Test Side   Approaching    Approaching End Speed RPM max               Noise
    #         Speed            RPM             (1)          (1)      Level dB
              (km/h)                         (km/h)                     (A)
Right – 1       67             3700            61          3200         65.7
Right – 2       67             3700            61          3200         66.4
Right – 3       67             3700            61          3200         64.9
Right – 4       67             3700            61          3200         65.9
                                Average        61                       65.7
Left – 1         67            3700            61          3200         66.9
Left – 2         67            3700            61          3200         66.1
Left – 3         67            3700            61          3200         67.0
Left – 4         67            3700            61          3200         67.1
                                Average        61                       67.2

Interior noise was evaluated at different constant speeds in order to determine the levels
experienced by the driver of the vehicle. It is interesting to note that, except for idling,
the Subaru PZEV experienced a higher dB within the vehicle than the values recorded
externally. The interior noise levels were well below the legal limit, and typical of the
special purpose class.




                                                                                           26
Table 14: Interior Noise
 Test # and Targeted        Calibration          Noise Level       Transmission Selection
      Test Speed              dB (A)                dB (A)
         Idle                  93.8                  41.5                 Neutral
                          Ambient Noise Level        35.4                Engine Off
 Full Acceleration – 1         93.8                  77.7            25 sec. – 135 km/h
 Full Acceleration – 2         93.8                  78.2            25 sec. – 135 km/h
 Full acceleration – 3         93.8                  78.2            25 sec. – 135 km/h
                                     Average         78.0            25 sec. – 135 km/h
     110 km/h – 1              93.8                  73.5                   Drive
     110 km/h – 2              93.8                  72.6                   Drive
     110 km/h – 3              93.8                  72.3                   Drive
                                     Average         72.8                   Drive
     100 km/h – 1              93.8                  73.0                   Drive
     100 km/h – 2              93.8                  72.8                   Drive
     100 km/h – 3              93.8                  72.9                   Drive
                                     Average         72.9                   Drive
     80 km/h – 1               93.8                  70.0                   Drive
     80 km/h – 2               93.8                  69.7                   Drive
     80 km/h – 3               93.8                  69.0                   Drive
                                     Average         69.6                   Drive
     50 km/h – 1               93.8                  65.4                   Drive
     50 km/h – 2               93.8                  64.9                   Drive
     50 km/h – 3               93.8                  66.5                   Drive
                                     Average         65.6                   Drive



6.5 Braking
In order to comply with the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (CMVSS) and be
eligible for the Canadian market, the Subaru Forester (and the PZEV variant) had to pass
all required braking tests. It was therefore decided that testing according to the strict and
resource-intensive procedures set out in CMVSS 135 - Light Vehicle Brake Systems was
unnecessary. However, a simplified brake testing procedure was performed to determine
the stopping distance for abrupt stops from the following speeds:

        • 50 km/h (30 mph) to 0 km/h / (mph) – 6 stops, averaged
        • 80 km/h (50 mph) to 0 km/h / (mph) – 6 stops, averaged
        • 100 km/h (60 mph) to 0 km/h / (mph) – 6 stops, averaged
        • 110 km/h (70 mph) to 0 km/h / (mph) – 6 stops, averaged

The vehicle’s total braking distance in metres and time in seconds were recorded. Since
the test vehicle was equipped with ABS brakes, the test driver fully depressed the brake
pedal, allowing the computer to modulate the calipers. The braking tests were conducted
under the following conditions:

        •   Vehicle loaded with 180 kg
        •   Transmission position: In neutral (N)
        •   Initial brake temperature: ≤ 100°C
        •   Pedal force: as necessary to activate ABS

                                                                                            27
• Wheel lockup: No lockup of any wheel for longer than 0.1 second allowed at
         speeds greater than 15 km/h
       • Number of runs: 6
       • Test surface: Maximum coefficient of friction of 0.9

Figure 9 summarizes the braking results for the Subaru Forester PZEV. The threshold
values are the limits that determine failure from given initial speeds. The best stopping
distance recorded (out of the six trials) is indicated for each initial speed.




                     Figure 9: Subaru Forester PZEV Braking Performance

The Subaru Forester PZEV is fully compliant with all aspects of the CMVSS 135
standard that were tested against. The braking performance of the Subaru Forester PZEV
at all tested speeds is fully satisfactory, as it falls well within the required braking
thresholds.


6.6 Summary Remarks Regarding Dynamic Testing
All tested aspects of performance, noise emissions, handling and braking were acceptable
relative to special purpose AWD vehicles. The vehicle demonstrates, within the
parameters of the testing performed, that it is in compliance with CMVSS noise and
braking standards.

Overall, the dynamic test results show that the Subaru Forester PZEV performs well and
does not encompass any observable short-comings relative to comparable on-road
vehicles. There is no indication that application of PZEV technology has any noteworthy
affect on the performance of a vehicle.


7   PHASE III - ON-ROAD EVALUATIONS
The eTV program wanted to evaluate whether PZEV technology affected consumers
experience of the vehicle. An effort was coordinated to have individuals test drive the
Subaru Forester PZEV and offer feedback on the experience. There have been 15 of these
on-road evaluations of the Subaru Forester Partial Zero Emission Vehicle (PZEV). The

                                                                                            28
general impression is positive and conformed to drivers’ expectations. This was
expressed through the evaluation forms that the participants had to fill out.


7.1 Operation and Performance
The first series of questions asked dealt with operation and performance of the vehicle.
The majority of these questions yielded a positive response. “Handling/Manoeuvrability”
had a 20% good and 80% very good rating. Other categories that had identical ratings
include, “cargo space”, “occupant space”, “power for general operations/overtaking”, and
“overall ease of operation”. Respondents felt that the vehicle handled well, was easy to
drive, and provided enough room for a family vehicle.

The category that had the highest negative rating was “visibility/blind spots”. This had a
rating of 7% poor, 53% good and 40% very good. The respondents noticed that there
were a number of blind spots in the vehicle.


7.2 Comfort and Controls
The next set of questions of the evaluation asked about the comfort and controls. The
highest rated category was “seat position” with a rating of 13% good and 87% very good.
Respondents liked that the seat was comfortable and was positioned very well in the
vehicle. Other highly rated categories included “ride quality”, “front seat comfort” and
“instrument panels and displays”. The “overall use of comfort and controls” had a 33%
good rating and a 67% very good rating. Respondents felt that the comfort of the vehicle
was very impressive and would be good for long trips.

The category that had the highest negative rating was the “climate control system”. This
had a rating of 7% very poor, 53% good, and 40% very good. Some respondents found
this climate controls confusing and were a distraction during the operation of the vehicle.

 “Overall vehicle rating” had a rating of 13% good and 87% very good. This rating
demonstrates how the respondents felt about the Subaru Forester PZEV overall. They
were impressed with the handling, comfort, acceleration, and the space of the vehicle. In
the eTV program, this is our highest rated vehicle to date. This shows that the
implementation of PZEV technology did not lead evaluators to have a negative
impression of the vehicle.


7.3 PZEV Performance
The final set of questions asked the respondents about the PZEV technology in the
vehicle. 100% of respondents did not notice any performance difference between the
PZEV and a regular gasoline car. This demonstrates how this technology can be
implemented in vehicles without any negative side effects to the consumer.

                                                                                         29
3 questions were asked regarding the respondents knowledge of the PZEV technology.
The first question asked if they knew that the PZEV was the cleanest vehicle designation
in North America applicable to internal combustion engines. 47% knew this, while 53%
did not. The respondents were also asked if they knew about the more stringent emission
standards that a PZEV complies with 33% were aware and 67% were not. With a
majority of respondents for all three questions not knowing basic details regarding the
PZEV, it demonstrates that there may be a need to educate the public becomes aware of
this technology.

The overall impression of the PZEV technology implemented in the Subaru was 7% good
and 93% very good. This shows that consumers have a very positive impression of this
technology and is evidence of potential for positive uptake in the Canadian marketplace.




                                                                                      30
8   CONCLUSIONS
The eTV program selected the Subaru Forester PZEV for testing and evaluation largely
because of its SULEV/PZEV designation. The testing program was designed to assess
the vehicle’s fuel consumption, exhaust and evaporative emissions as well as its overall
performance.

We found that the Subaru Forester PZEV surpasses the PZEV evaporative emission
standard required to achieve the designation. The Subaru Forester emits 0.45 grams per
test less than current Canadian standards of 0.65 grams per test. Therefore, less fuel gets
evaporated in the atmosphere from this vehicle relative to a conventional vehicle.
According to basic calculations, were all the new cars entering the Canadian market in a
given year to meet the PZEV evaporative emission standard approximately 50,000 less
litres of gasoline would evaporate into the Canadian atmosphere each year. The amount
of fuel saved is insignificant from an economic viewpoint, but considering the
greenhouse gas effect, this is equivalent to about half a million kilograms of CO2 in
warming potential. Also, hydrocarbon emissions are toxic to human health, so there is an
air pollution reduction benefit as well.

Additionally, the exhaust emissions for the Subaru Forester PZEV were much cleaner
than the current Canadian standard. The PZEV in effect meets a standard that is three
levels below that which each manufacturer much meet for a fleet average. The PZEV is
Tier 2 – Bin 2 (Generally equivalent to the California SULEV standard), the Canadian
standard emission limit is the less stringent Tier 2 – Bin 8. The Subaru PZEV is roughly
60 to 90% cleaner across all regulated exhaust emissions than is mandated by current
regulations. It is more difficult to quantify these emissions into a single GHG value than
evaporative emissions, but it is clear that a PZEV designated vehicle emits much less
exhaust emissions and than a conventional vehicle.

Widespread use of PZEV would lower air pollution, particularly in dense urban regions,
where the emissions of many vehicles are concentrated. PZEV technology has no notable
effect on the fuel consumption, CO2 emissions, and performance of vehicles. However, it
is possible to implement the technology on practically any gasoline-fueled vehicle, so
that PZEV can be used in synergy with other technologies that improve environmental
performance. Another benefit is the relatively low cost of implementing PZEV
technology. For a cost in the range of a few hundred dollars per vehicle, there is minimal
incremental costs for the environmental benefits achieved.




                                                                                         31
You can also read
Next part ... Cancel