Selda GunselShell Global Solutions, USA

Lubricant Design – Impacts on Energy Efficiency

RSC Additive 2009: Fuels and Lubricants for Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Transport

April 27-30, 2009, York, UK

Outline

• World Energy Outlook

• Trends in Transportation Industry

• Impacts on Lubricant Technology

• Design Options for Improving Energy Efficiency

• Design Tools and Application Examples

• Summary & Recommendations

Disclaimer statementThis presentation contains forward-looking statements concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Royal Dutch 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 Royal Dutch 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 ‘‘anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘estimate’’, ‘‘expect’’, ‘‘intend’’, ‘‘may’’, ‘‘plan’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘outlook’’, ‘‘probably’’, ‘‘project’’, ‘‘will’’, ‘‘seek’’, ‘‘target’’, ‘‘risks’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘should’’ and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors that could affect the future operations of Royal Dutch Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this presentations, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for the Group’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserve estimates; (f) loss of market 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, fiscal and regulatory developments including potential litigation and regulatory effects arising from recategorisation of reserves; (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; and (m) changes in trading conditions. All forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance onforward-looking statements. Additional factors that may affect future results are contained in Royal Dutch Shell’s 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2008 (available at www.shell.com/investor and www.sec.gov). These factors also should be considered by the reader. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this presentation, 27 April 2009. Neither Royal Dutch Shell 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 presentation.

• Surging energy demand

• Supply will struggle to keep pace: end of “easy oil”

• Environmental stressesare increasing: CO2, water, resource constraints

These three hard truths These three hard truths will shape the future of will shape the future of the energy systemthe energy system

World energy outlook

Energy demand driven by the population & prosperity of rapidly growing economies

Source: Shell International BV, Oxford Economics and Energy Balances of OECD and Non-OECD Countries © OECD/IEA 2006

bill ion people

North America & Europe Latin AmericaChina & India Asia & OceaniaMiddle East & Africa

0

2

4

6

8

10

1975 2000 2025 2050

Population

0

100

200

300

400

0 10 20 30 40

GDP per capita (PPP, '000 2000 USD)

Energy demand per person -History

gigajouleper capita (primary energy)

USA

Europe (EU15)

SouthKorea

China

Japan

India

1971-2005

Brazil

Heavy industryServicesResidential

Agriculture & other industryTransportNon energy use (e.g. petrochemicals)

World energy demand is on track to double by 2050

“Business as usual” energy consumption by sector

Source: Shell International BV and Energy Balances of OECD and Non-OECD Countries©OECD/IEA 2006

0

200

400

600

800

1975 2000 2025 2050

exajouleper year

Shell’s Energy Scenarios for 2050

0

250

500

750

1000

2000 2050 2050

Oil GasCoal NuclearBiomass SolarWind Other Renewables

0

20

40

2000 2050 2050

Scramble

Blueprints

Direct CO2 emission from energyTotal primary energy

gigatonneCO2 per year

exajouleper year

Source: Shell International BV and Energy Balances of OECD and Non-OECD Countries�OECD/IEA 2006

Scramble Blueprints

• Scramble – supply focus & late response• Blueprints – energy sustainability and early action

1. Increase the efficiency of operations

2. Establish substantial capability in CO2 capture and storage

3. Develop aggressively low-CO2 sources of energy

4. Help manage demand by growing market for products and services

5. Work with governments and advocate need for more effective CO2 regulation

6. Continue research to develop technologies that increase energy efficiency and reduce emissions

Potential pathways for sustainable energy

9

Benefits of energy efficient lubricants

• Energy loss due to friction & wear ~ 10% GNP ; use of good tribological principles ~ 1-2 % GNP (Jost, 1966)

• $ 20 B/yr spent in the US overcoming friction in internal combustion engines (Rabinowicz, 1986)

• For heavy duty vehicles, total energy lost due to friction ~ 160 M barrels diesel fuel/yr (US DoE 1999)

• In the UK, benefit of reducing fuel consumption by 5% would result in 4 M tons of CO2 reduction & € 2 B /yr (R I Taylor, 2005)

Emissions & fuel economy legislations

• For the first time CO2 / FE legislation is being introduced across the world with very challenging targets

Ricardo 2008

•Emission legislations continue to tighten worldwide

Power Train Technology Advancements

Driven by improved fuel efficiency and reduced emissions targets

• Engine Designs– Downsizing & Boosting, GDI,

advanced valve trains – Exhaust Gas Recirculation

• Aftertreatment Devices – Particulate Filters, NOx Traps,

Selective Catalytic Reduction….

• Transmissions – CVT & increased number of forward

gears

• Advanced electronics • Hybrids • Advanced materials

– Lightweight composites and alloys– Coatings & textured surfaces

Ricardo 2006

Base oil & bio-fuels trends

• Base Oils– Group 1- demand declining – Increased supply of Group II & III– Bio-based oils and re-refined base oils – Increased availability of GTL in coming years

� Base Oil composition - important in energy efficient lubricant designs (Gunsel et al, 1999)

• Bio-fuels– Fuels with higher content of biodiesel and ethanol – Development of 2nd generation biofuels

� Lubrication of biofuelled engines –becoming an important area of research

Gasoline Diesel

Food crops1st generationEthanol Bio

-esters

Eco-ethanol

2nd generationCrop waste

Eco-diesel

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

1 10 100 1000 10000

Mean Speed [mm/s]

Coeff

icie

nt

of

fric

tion

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

1 10 100 1000 10000

Mean Speed [mm/s]

Coeff

icie

nt

of

fric

tion

mineral Gp II

mineral Gp III

Shell GTL

PAO

Naphthenic white oil

Gp II

Gp III

GP III

PAOPAO

Naphthenic white oilNaphthenic white oil

Impacts on engine oil technology

Challenges

• Improve energy efficiency, maximize friction reduction, reduce CO2

• Reduce or eliminate detrimental effects of oil on emission systems

• Extended Life

� High temperature stability , deposit control

� Antiwear protection/durability

� Low temperature performance, sludge control

� Soot control

� Fuel economy retention

• Compatibility with biofuels and new materials

13

≤ 0.12--API SJ / GF-2

(’96)

---API SH (’93)

0.05

0.07 - 0.09

0.07 - 0.09

0.2

0.3

0.3

0.5

0.8

0.8

ACEA ‘08 C1

C2

C3

≤ 0.08≤ 0.5-API SM / GF-4

(‘04)

≤ 0.1--API SL/GF-3

(’01)

P wt.%S

wt.% Sulfated Ash wt.%

Category

�Achieving improved fuel economy while maintaining good durability -

becoming more challenging due to the legislation of S and P limits

Energy Losses in Vehicles (urban driving)

Lubricant- important design parameter in reducing friction losses,

10% reduction in mechanical losses leads to 1.5% reduction in fuel consumption

100% 25% 13.5% 12%

32 kW 8 kW 4.3 kW 3.8 kW

cooling+exhaust+pumping losses

engine mechanical

lossesTransmission/axle losses

“Useful work”• rolling resistance• air resistance• acceleration

Taylor CM, (1998); Bartz WJ, (2000)

Types of mechanical losses

• Engines & transmissions contain several differing types of contact regimes where energy dissipation occurs

Valve train

Piston Rings

Piston Skirt

Plain

bearings

� Hydrodynamic lubrication� Elastohydrodynamic lubrication� Boundary lubrication� Churning

• Important to minimize friction in all regimes� Lubricant Formulation� Surface Engineering� Component redesign

Relative importanceEngines – Typical Result

Transmissions - Losses are mainly churning and EHD friction

Losses are mainly hydrodynamic and boundary

HTHS Viscosity

Boundary

Bovington & Spikes, 1996

HTHS

48%Traction 15%

Boundary37%

Sequence VI Test, Overall

HTHS

72%Traction 4%

Boundary24%

Sequence VIA Test, OverallSequence VIB Test, Overall

Lacey, 2001

Lubricant Properties that Influence Friction

Film Thickness

Friction Coefficient valve train

piston rings skirt

plain bearings

boundary mixed fluid-film (HD, EHD)

hU

W∝

η0 5.

( )h

U

W

o∝

η α0 7 0 5

01

. .

.

HD film thickness

EHD film thickness

η: η: η: η: viscosity

α: α: α: α: pressure-viscosity

coefficient

Boundary- surface films

Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Use of lower viscosity lubricants

•Reduces friction in HD conditions

•Reduces churning losses

•Lower EHD traction coefficients

Friction c

oeff

icie

nt

Speed

mixed

BL

HD

Korcek & Nakada, 1996

But leads to thinner HD and EHD films; larger proportion of contact operates in mixed regime

Balance of low viscosity with durability and volatility is important

Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Low friction boundary films

Solid-like boundary films reduce shear strength at load-bearing asperity contacts

• Soluble organomolybdenum friction modifiers

• Organic friction modifiers

• Nano-colloidal particles

Surface competition and interaction with other surface active additives- important

Some additives (e.g. ZDDP and detergents) form high friction films

Fri

ctio

n c

oef

fici

ent

Speed

mixed

BL

HD

Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Low friction boundary films (cont.)

Example- MoDTC: widely used in engine oils

- friction reduction results from MoS2 formation in the rubbing contact

0.01

Entrainment speed (m/s)

0

0.04

0.08

0.12

0.16

0.2

0.001

Frictio

n c

oeff

icie

nt

0.1 1 10

Base Oil

+MoDTC

Grossiord et al., 1998

Graham et al. , 2001

Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Viscous boundary films

Boundary films of enhanced viscosity enable transition from BL to mixed at lower speeds

• Functionalized polymers

• Liquid crystals

• Other?

Friction c

oeff

icie

nt

Speed

BL/mixedHD

Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Viscous boundary films (cont.)

Functionalized viscosity

modifier polymers form thick

viscous boundary films

Friction & wear benefits

observed(Gunsel et al, 1996)

120°C

1

10

100

1000

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10

Entrainment speed (m/s)

Film

th

ickn

ess (

nm

) PMAHIP-SPSBOCP-1OCP-DPMA-OBase oil

At slow speed At high speed

Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Smart viscometrics

Provide high viscosity under low speeds, but lower viscosities at high speeds:

Wright et al. SAE 830027

�shear thinning in mid stroke lowers HD friction

�important in designing fuel efficient lubricants

Shear thinning- viscosity modifier polymers shear

thin under high shear stresses

Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Smart viscometrics

Viscoelasticity- polymer behaviour under transient conditions

Enhanced squeeze behaviour during halting & viscoelastic response to acceleration/deceleration (Gunsel, 98)

With polymer, the film forms much faster during accelaration, and decays more slowly during decelaration

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 50 100 150 200

Time [ms]

Film

th

ickne

ss [

nm

]

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

Speed

[m

/s]

polymer

Speed

[m

/s]

10

20

30

40

50

Film

th

ickne

ss [

nm

]

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25no polymer

Spikes, 2007

film thicknessentrainment speed

Lubricant design approaches for improved friction: Surface & Lubricant Design

• Development and application of low friction coatings advancing e.g. DLC, CrN,….

• Requires lubricants compatible with non-ferrous surfaces• Fuel economy improvements > 4% (Fox, 2005)• Very low friction (superlubricity, µ ∼0.01) possible ( J.M.Martin et al, 2005)• Surface texturing - effective in reducing hydrodynamic friction

www.nissan-global.com/en/technology/introduction/details/dlc/index.htmlSinanoğlu, 2005

Design Tools for Developing Energy Efficient Lubricants

• Models for predicting lubricant behavior– Molecular Dynamic simulations– Computational Fluid Dynamics– Mathematical models of individual machine components

– Empirical models

• Laboratory screener tests

• Engine & specialized testing rigse.g. driveline rig - allows contributions from individual drivetrain components to be measured

• Field trials

Engine

Gearbox

Axle

Dynamometers

27

Examples of energy efficient lubricants in automotive applications

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

Mean truck 1 truck 2 truck 3 truck 4%Im

pro

ve

me

nt

cf

av

era

ge

va

lue

fo

r 1

5W

-40

oil

0W20

0W30

Heavy duty trucks

Passenger cars

Energy efficiency improvements by lubricantdesign in engine tests

Improvements in in heavy duty field trials (5W40 vs 15W40)

R.I Taylor, 2008

28

Examples of energy efficient lubricants in automotive applications

Heavy duty trucks

Energy efficiency improvements by lubricant designindustry standard fuel economy tests

M111 engine test results

0

1

2

3

4

5

2.5 3 3.5 4

HTHS Viscosity (mPa.s)

EF

EI

(%)

No FM

With FM

Taylor & Coy, 2000

M 111 Seq. VIA

R I Taylor, 2008

Examples of energy efficient lubricants in industrial applications

Modeling of energy losses in industrial systems

e.g. Hydraulic Systems

Pipes

Filter

ExitPress Rel

Valve

Control Valve

Pump

Cylinder

Reservoir/

Reference

Filter

Hydraulic

Pump

Hydraulic

Cylinder

Pressure

relief valve

Directional

control valve

Piston,

Gear,

VaneHigh pressure

pipe

Low

pressure pipe

Green, 2009

30

Examples of energy efficient lubricants in industrial applications

70

80

90

100

Mineral Synthetic Mineral SyntheticISO 46ISO 32

19% 8%Lubricant design provides ~ 19% energy savings in hydraulic system (Vickers Vane Pump)

0.0075

0.0080

0.0085

0.0090

0.0095

0.0100

kW

h/C

yc

le

Mineral Hydraulic Fluid Specially Formulated

Synthetic Hydraulic Fluid

Specially Formulated

Synthetic Hydraulic Fluid

with Full Flush

~ 12% energy savings achieved in plastic molding injection machines field trials

Summary / Recommendations

Energy Challenge- the three hard truths are very hard• Surging energy demand

• Supply will struggle to keep pace, end of easy oil

• Increasing environmental stresses

Political and regulatory choices are pivotal

Tackling all three hard truths together is essential for a sustainable future

Technology plays a major role- development of technologies that increase efficiency and reduce emissions

Summary / Recommendations

Key drivers for new technology development in transportation industry : improved resource utilization, environmental protection and customer satisfaction

The ability of the lubricant to reduce overall friction lossin practical systems depends on a number of different properties, depending on the prevailing lubrication regime

In designing energy efficient & sustainable lubricants, it is essential to minimize all types of friction and ensure compatibility with emission systems

Summary / Recommendations

Energy efficient & sustainable lubricant designs require• Lower mechanical friction

– Lowest possible viscosity base oil without volatility and durability issues

– Optimized surface films through carefully balanced additive chemistry; friction modifiers, viscous surface film formers, synergistic additive combinations for combating high friction films

– Optimized rheology of viscosity improver polymers

• Emission system compatibility– Low P, S, Sulfated Ash (low SAPS)– Improved soot tolerance

• Improved oxidation, dispersancy & wear performance

• Higher quality base oils with low volatility, high viscosity index, narrow boiling range & oxidation stability

Summary / Recommendations

Energy efficient & sustainable lubricant designs requirecontinuing research on

• Lubricant/Biofuels Compatibility • Compatibility with non-ferrous surfaces• Surface texturing impacts on lubricant behavior• New additive technologies• Development of screener tests and models – important design tools• Simulations of the lubricated system as a whole that relate lubricant properties to energy efficiency

• Carbon footprint analysis

Energy efficient and sustainable lubricant benefits achievable in both automotive and industrial applications

Thank You