In the wake of the Volkswagen scandal, the future of transport is high on the agenda of government and industry alike.
Dan Nicholson is vice-president of powertrain at General Motors and the president-elect of FISITA, the International Federation of Automotive Engineering Societies. In his role at GM, Nicholson has been researching long-term solutions for today’s pollution issues through engine and transmission development.
The next FISITA president explains how he will use this GM experience to push for changes in the global harmonisation of emissions standards.
What are your predictions for the electrification pathway?
The industry thinks electrification will play an increasing role in future, but the extent to which it happens depends on the regulations and the incentives country by country. In the case of the US, this varies state by state.
We haven’t yet reached a place where electrification is economically sustainable or viable. Everyone is appreciative of the environmental benefits, but we don’t yet have a cost structure that allows for sustainability. It is an area where everyone is working hard, and there is a spectrum of electrification going on from start-stop engines through to fully electric vehicles. I think this spectrum will continue, and everyone is continuing to advance that.
You mentioned that legislation will have an impact on electrification and how it rolls in. Do you think that hybrid powertrains are just a stepping-stone towards full electrification?
I wouldn’t say that, but I’m sure many people in the industry would. History teaches us that trying to legislate technical solutions is not always the best economically viable proposition.
Things work best when regulators lay out the goals and leave room for different technical solutions. That’s where engineers bring innovation and viability, through their creativity on how to solve these problems in the most economically viable way. There’s a bit of a risk if you dictate too much what the rules of the games are, and you don’t always end up with the most optimum situation.
How will the industry overcome the obstacles to electrification?
For GM, EVs are a long-term solution to today’s pollution issues all around the world. Developing technology is allowing EVs to become ideal for the majority of trips. However, infrastructure is a huge issue, and one of the biggest obstacles to battery EVs taking over from so-called conventional engines. Many companies have tried to solve this and there was a trend toward battery swapping, but it’s technically and economically challenging.
Fast recharging is important, and how people are going to charge and use their vehicles will have a significant impact on the increase in usage of this technology.
In the meantime, there are other solutions. At GM, we are introducing the second generation of the Chevrolet Volt. Customers are using electricity day in, day out, but if they didn’t get to charge or are doing a longer trip, there is a gasoline generator onboard so they’re not stranded.
What areas of powertrain technology excite you at the moment, and are you working on any projects you can talk about?
I’ve been in the industry for 30 years and now is the most exciting time, because everything is on the table and people are innovating in all kinds of ways. Fuel cells have a more traditional refuelling, in the sense that you can get 500km of range and fill up your tank in about three minutes. With electricity, you cannot get 500km of range, and it takes way longer to recharge.
We at GM believe fuel cells are part of the solution, and have announced a cooperation with Honda in Japan. I was recently there, and the country has been proactive in promoting a hydrogen society. There are publicly announced plans with regard to the Tokyo Olympics that are upcoming, and what they would like to demonstrate to the world as part of that.
There is a lot going on in Silicon Valley in the electrification space, and new players are changing the industry. There is nothing conventional about so-called ‘conventional powertrains’ any more. We are innovating continually, and what people think of as being conventional is technically amazing. What diesel and gasoline engines today are doing, from a controls and technology perspective, is exciting.
What implications do you think the situation VW has found itself in will have on worldwide emissions testing?
All of engineering is built on a foundation of integrity, transparency and sound engineering principles, and trust is core to what it means to be an engineer. This situation points to the importance of organisations such as FISITA, which is the only global automotive technology society.
There is a huge opportunity for standards harmonisation in emissions testing, and some of the nuances of these tailpipe regulations between the US, Europe and Japan were not optimal. If we can bring regulators, engineers and industry together in academia, there’s a real opportunity to make a more harmonised set of rules that accomplishes the goals we’re trying to reach.
I hope that something good can come from this. It may not be easy, but the benefits will outweigh the difficulties.
How will working with OEMs such as GM allow FISITA to reach its 2020 vision?
GM is proud to be one of the honorary committee members for FISITA. We are interested in global standards, harmonisation and how we can bring the whole global industry together. I see alignment with what GM wants to do and the goals of FISITA. I have played a part in the leadership of FISITA, and it has great alignment with GM in terms of promoting sustainable mobility throughout the globe.
Working with OEMs will strengthen the value for FISITA on an international stage, and good relationships with members strengthen that. FISITA is not an industry-driven organisation – it’s an engineering-driven organisation. Many companies support that because they see the value in coordination.
This industry has always had what I call a competition dynamic. OEMs are fierce competitors but I see value in cooperation in terms of non-competitive areas such as standards optimisation. My company sees the value in doing that because a lot of cooperation is required to bring complicated products to market.
You will take up your role as FISITA president in 2016. How will you ensure it supports young people embarking upon careers within automotive?
There are already academic institutions ensuring the education of engineers, and I don’t see a gap here, but engineering is a job where you have to constantly update your skills. What FISITA is trying to do is get more students who are already in engineering to think about automotive careers. It is also promoting Stem education to get more college graduate engineers in the first place. Many countries, including the US, don’t have a high enough percentage of people going into engineering. There’s a lot written that young people don’t care about cars, but they do care about mobility. We just need to learn how to tell the story better. We will do this through bridging the gap between traditional automotive and mobility, and will then convey this message to younger people.
You have been encouraging software engineers into FISITA. How will you continue this vision?
We are hiring more and more as an industry. We just need to get electrical and software engineers to be more involved. I lead a large organisation of powertrain controls software engineers and they have a lot in common with this. We have to make sure we’re making room at the table for people bringing the new skills to bear, find new leaders and give them a voice, making them feel as though these organisations are home for them.
What main skills will you take forward from your experience at GM to FISITA?
I will likely leverage some of the propulsion background that I have from my time at GM. Even before the past few months’ events, I was energised around standards harmonisation when it comes to CO2 and tailpipe emissions. We have a many great engineers spending time in the US and European test cycles, with these differences that aren’t helping to drive society forward. In different areas of automotive, such as safety-critical testing, we have the standard of ISO 26262 which is globally recognised. Yet in the realm of emissions and tailpipe testing, it’s a regional approach that is sub-operable.
Standards aren’t converging for emissions. They’re moving in the same direction, but
not together.
If we can all play by the same rule book, we will be much better off.