What do you need to consider before investing in alternative powertrains

Karin Haumann, Shell Product Application Specialist for Heavy-Duty Engines in North America explores how lubricant technology is keeping pace with the evolving heavy-duty fuels mosaic.

Karin Haumann: Shell OEM Technical Manager and Product Application Specialist for Heavy-Duty Engines in North America.

She provides technical and engineering support to Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) customers, guides end-user customers with product selection and represents Shell in the heavy-duty engine oil technical committees. Her responsibilities include working with OEMs on new product developments and testing of lubricants and new lubricant specifications. Karin has 12 years of experience in the lubricants industry. Her background includes dynamometer engine test development for API/ILSAC certification of engine oils as well as OEM and product development support for Passenger Car OEMs. She has a BS in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Texas at San Antonio.

Truck drivers and fleet managers make difficult decisions every day, from the route they take, the speed at which they drive, to how they choose to manage and track their vehicles. These decisions can be informed by drawing on operational data and experience. When it comes to investing in new trucks based on alternative fuels, it’s not always possible to draw on this data and experience, especially when you consider the dynamic marketplace and wide range of options available. A range that will certainly be needed given the drive towards decarbonisation coupled with the maturity and availability of the hardware and infrastructure solutions available.

With demand for road-transported goods predicted to triple by 2050¹, potentially leading to there being 80 million heavy-duty trucks on the road opposed to just 45 million today, it’s clear that these alternative-powered, lower-emissions vehicles are likely to play an important role in the industry’s future.²

Piecing together the fuels mosaic

Much of the transition to alternative fuels is helping the industry to meet the decarbonisation challenges and targets head on through the development of new powertrain technologies that offer lower-carbon alternatives to traditional diesel internal combustion engines (ICE).

While Karin Haumann, Shell Product Application Specialist for Heavy-Duty Engines in North America, agrees, she also suggests that the route ahead won’t be entirely straightforward:

“No single truck manufacturer will be placing all their efforts on one technology alone, meaning there will be a mix of options depending on the application. It will then come down to a case-by-case decision by the customer on what to buy, considering the investment required, available infrastructure and the suitability of the technology for individual business operations e.g., those making long vs short-haul journeys.

Here, Haumann touches on one of the most important aspects of the transition facing road transport: infrastructure. As such, to capitalise on the emergence of these new technologies, the whole industry ecosystem must keep pace. Fleet operators must be clear on the benefits and potential blockers of each option available. For example:

Electrification

Significant steps are being made to make electrification more viable for commercial road transport operations. For those travelling on inner-city, short-haul and long-haul routes, techniques such as reducing the electric battery weight to increase the vehicles range and development of green electricity to power vehicles are essential. The development of charging infrastructure and networks are critical to support electric truck adoption.

Hydrogen

Performance wise, hydrogen ticks a lot of boxes, with near-diesel-level range, power, and refuelling speeds thanks to a high energy density. Although infrastructure still requires scaling to meet the needs of more customers.

Natural Gas

A cleaner burning fuel with equivalent engine performance to diesel, natural gas (also referred to as Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) and Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)) can help reduce the well-to-wheel greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-duty trucks by up to 22% compared to conventional diesel.³

Biofuels

Both a lower-carbon and drop-in option for diesel engines, biofuels can be an effective alternative for existing fleets. Provided there is an understanding of how the emissions benefits can vary between different blends and feedstocks, especially in terms of tailpipe emissions.

Though these sustainability benefits understandably play a leading role in the fuel switching decision process, they are not the only consideration.

“One of the most prominent things that is driving the customer at the fleet level is the cost of fuel. It can be their largest expense, so they will always be looking at options available to them through a lens of reducing that expense,” suggests Haumann. “That could be something as drastic as buying an electric vehicle and all of the things that go into that, such as installing charging capabilities, or it could be as simple as exploring the impact of low friction tyres or aerodynamic trailer configurations.”

Fortunately, one way to keep costs under control is to ensure the right lubrication is in place to help unlock the full potential of these fuels.

A fluid approach to lubricant development

However, while industry awareness of the expanding fuels mosaic is increasing, perhaps less well known are the lubricant variations and specifications that must be considered to get the most out of these engines and fuel types, for instance:

Thankfully, the picture is a little clearer in that regard, as Haumann explains: “whatever the application, the right lubricants will be there, so lubrication will not be a blocker to progress.”

What’s more, the technology is developing at a rapid pace. In terms of electrification, for example, the industry is developing new lubricants for the second and even third generation of electric powertrains, which might require new products due to different designs.

“What drives the customer at the OEM level when it comes to lubrication are the regulatory requirements,” Haumann states. “They are under pressure to design more efficient engines, and one of the requirements of that is lower viscosity engine oils. Minimising friction from the engine by utilising the lowest viscosity oil is a huge incentive.”

For instance, when new platforms are developed and a lubricant is needed to meet its specifications, OEMs typically start with what went before and then, as development occurs, modify certain elements. LNG or CNG is a good example, given there is now a different specification for natural gas engines due to the different needs of the lubricant in this case.

There are regional differences that dictate the pace of these developments too. While European fleets are generally used to lower viscosity oils, having recently introduced 0W-20 and 5W-20 grades – thanks in part to regulatory developments like VECTO, the European Commission’s mandatory simulation tool to determine CO₂ emissions and fuel consumption from heavy-duty vehicles with a gross vehicle weight above 3500kg – the US is more likely to use 15W-40 engine oils.

With that being said, the US market is in the midst of an engine oil specification upgrade industry wide, with regulations due to be implemented in 2027 that will require an increase in efficiency from the engine alone.

Why decarbonisation will be a collective effort

Today’s decarbonisation efforts are arguably making the road freight transport sector a more dynamic space than ever before, with the development of a wide-ranging, lower-carbon fuels mosaic having knock-on effects for other important areas like lubrication.

As these developments continue to evolve, while at the same time operational costs and conditions change, it will be increasingly important for fleets to work with trusted experts. Shell Lubricant Solutions, for example, has the breadth, scale, and first-hand experience to recognise specific business needs and provide advice on how to succeed, both today and tomorrow.

“One of the best things about the dynamic nature of the road freight transport sector,” Haumann concludes, “is that we get to work with OEMs throughout these development stages, effectively co-developing the lubricant to ensure that any unique needs of the oil are met.”

And it’s exactly this level of collaboration that will make the decision-making process easier for fleets, as they look to take the next step in their decarbonisation journey.

With dedicated, experienced, and local account managers working alongside technical, cross-market experts, Shell can help you introduce the latest lubricants to your fleet, so you can meet your performance and regulatory requirements. Speak to a Shell expert today.

¹ _{Angie Farrag-Thibault. “Road Freight Zero.” World Economic Forum.}

² _{Shell-based analysis incl: Shell Sky Scenario.}

³ _{Disclaimer: “Well-to-wheel” greenhouse gas emission reductions are based on current ISO 9001 standards for analysis and EPA & GREET emissions values. “Greenhouse gas emissions” includes CO2, methane, and N2O.}

⁴ _{Disclaimer: SAE 0W-20 (2.6 HTHS / R7 Plus AI) & 5W-30 (FA-4) products demonstrated up to 3% fuel economy when compared to 10W-40 product and up to 3.9% fuel economy when compared to a 15W-40 product (both 4.0 mPa·s HTHS) in controlled field testing which produced statistically significant data – field trials carried out in Europe.}

Cautionary Note

The companies in which Shell plc directly and indirectly owns investments are separate legal entities. In this article “Shell”, “Shell Group” and “Group” are sometimes used for convenience where references are made to Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general. Likewise, the words “we”, “us” and “our” are also used to refer to Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general or to those who work for them. These terms are also used where no useful purpose is served by identifying the particular entity or entities. ‘‘Subsidiaries’’, “Shell subsidiaries” and “Shell companies” as used in this article refer to entities over which Shell plc either directly or indirectly has control. Entities and unincorporated arrangements over which Shell has joint control are generally referred to as “joint ventures” and “joint operations”, respectively. “Joint ventures” and “joint operations” are collectively referred to as “joint arrangements”. Entities over which Shell has significant influence but neither control nor joint control are referred to as “associates”. The term “Shell interest” is used for convenience to indicate the direct and/or indirect ownership interest held by Shell in an entity or unincorporated joint arrangement, after exclusion of all third-party interest.

Forward-Looking Statements

This article contains forward-looking statements (within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Shell. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management’s current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Shell to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as “aim”, “ambition”, ‘‘anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘estimate’’, ‘‘expect’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘intend’’, ‘‘may’’, “milestones”, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘outlook’’, ‘‘plan’’, ‘‘probably’’, ‘‘project’’, ‘‘risks’’, “schedule”, ‘‘seek’’, ‘‘should’’, ‘‘target’’, ‘‘will’’ and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors that could affect the future operations of Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this article, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for Shell’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserves estimates; (f) loss of market share and industry competition; (g) environmental and physical risks; (h) risks associated with the identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, judicial, fiscal and regulatory developments including regulatory measures addressing climate change; (k) economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of contracts with governmental entities, delays or advancements in the approval of projects and delays in the reimbursement for shared costs; (m) risks associated with the impact of pandemics, such as the COVID-19 (coronavirus) outbreak; and (n) changes in trading conditions. No assurance is provided that future dividend payments will match or exceed previous dividend payments. All forward-looking statements contained in this article are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Additional risk factors that may affect future results are contained in Shell plc’s Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2022 (available at www.shell.com/investor and www.sec.gov

). These risk factors also expressly qualify all forward-looking statements contained in this article and should be considered by the reader. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this article, 5th April 2024. Neither Shell plc nor any of its subsidiaries undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained in this.

Shell’s net carbon intensity

Also, in this article we may refer to Shell’s “Net Carbon Intensity”, which includes Shell’s carbon emissions from the production of our energy products, our suppliers’ carbon emissions in supplying energy for that production and our customers’ carbon emissions associated with their use of the energy products we sell. Shell only controls its own emissions. The use of the term Shell’s “Net Carbon Intensity” is for convenience only and not intended to suggest these emissions are those of Shell plc or its subsidiaries.

Shell’s net-Zero Emissions Target

Shell’s operating plan, outlook and budgets are forecasted for a ten-year period and are updated every year. They reflect the current economic environment and what we can reasonably expect to see over the next ten years. Accordingly, they reflect our Scope 1, Scope 2 and Net Carbon Intensity (NCI) targets over the next ten years. However, Shell’s operating plans cannot reflect our 2050 net-zero emissions target and 2035 NCI target, as these targets are currently outside our planning period. In the future, as society moves towards net-zero emissions, we expect Shell’s operating plans to reflect this movement. However, if society is not net zero in 2050, as of today, there would be significant risk that Shell may not meet this target.

Forward Looking Non-GAAP measures

This content may contain certain forward-looking non-GAAP measures such as cash capital expenditure and divestments. We are unable to provide a reconciliation of these forward-looking Non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measures because certain information needed to reconcile those Non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measures is dependent on future events some of which are outside the control of Shell, such as oil and gas prices, interest rates and exchange rates. Moreover, estimating such GAAP measures with the required precision necessary to provide a meaningful reconciliation is extremely difficult and could not be accomplished without unreasonable effort. Non-GAAP measures in respect of future periods which cannot be reconciled to the most comparable GAAP financial measure are calculated in a manner which is consistent with the accounting policies applied in Shell plc’s consolidated financial statements.

The contents of websites referred to in this content do not form part of this content.

We may have used certain terms, such as resources, in this content that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) strictly prohibits us from including in our filings with the SEC. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F, File No 1-32575, available on the SEC website www.sec.gov