Cost analysis of autonomous battery electric field tractors in agriculture

Lagnelöv, Oscar; Dhillon, Shweta; Larsson, Gunnar; Nilsson, Daniel; Larsolle, Anders; Hansson, Per‐Anders

doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2021.02.005

Cited by 22 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because the vehicles were assumed to be autonomous, it was assumed that they had no cabin. This vehicle system has been shown in previous studies to have a high theoretical work rate [17] and to compare favourably to contemporary tractor systems in economic terms [18]. The infrastructure necessary for charging the vehicle system was also included in the analysis.…”

Section: Goal and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The system boundary of the study started at manufacturing of the main vehicle components and ended after the end-of-life phase, as shown in Figure 1. As the focus of the study was on machinery, the agricultural part of the use phase was not modelled other than in terms of energy demand [18], as it was assumed to be similar for the cases studied. In addition, the autonomous system only included the hardware on the vehicle and a single base station, while any additional infrastructure was not included.…”

Section: Goal and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The battery considered in Lagnelöv, Dhillon, Larsson, Nilsson, Larsolle and Hansson [18] was a Li-ion battery with an NCA positive electrode (LiNi 0.8 Co 0.15 Al 0.05 O 2 ) and graphite as the negative electrode (NCA-C). Inventory data for a NCA-C battery module taken from Le Varlet, Schmidt, Gambhir, Few and Staffel [34] were used to represent this battery.…”

Section: Batterymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In previous studies by our research group assessing the production capacity and economic impact of autonomous battery electric tractors through simulations [17,18], they were shown to have a comparable work rate and lower total annual costs for certain system topographies. One of the main arguments for changing from a few large diesel-powered tractors to multiple smaller battery electric tractors is the potential environmental benefit in replacing diesel with electricity that has a smaller environmental footprint.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…One of the main arguments for changing from a few large diesel-powered tractors to multiple smaller battery electric tractors is the potential environmental benefit in replacing diesel with electricity that has a smaller environmental footprint. For this change to be feasible, we have shown that autonomous operation is a prerequisite, due to economic factors [18]. While a multitude of environmental impact assessments and life cycle assessments (LCAs) have been performed for agricultural machinery [19][20][21], Li-ion batteries [6,7,22,23], components in the electric driveline [24,25] and on on-road BEVs [9,26], there is a lack of LCAs on electric tractors and other electric mobile work machinery.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Life Cycle Assessment of Autonomous Electric Field Tractors in Swedish Agriculture

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an increased interest for battery electric vehicles in multiple sectors, including agriculture. The potential for lowered environmental impact is one of the key factors, but there exists a knowledge gap between the environmental impact of on-road vehicles and agricultural work machinery. In this study, a life cycle assessment was performed on two smaller, self-driving battery electric tractors, and the results were compared to those of a conventional tractor for eleven midpoint characterisation factors, three damage categories and one weighted single score. The results showed that compared to the conventional tractor, the battery electric tractor had a higher impact in all categories during the production phase, with battery production being a majority contributor. However, over the entire life cycle, it had a lower impact in the weighted single score (−72%) and all three damage categories; human health (−74%), ecosystem impact (−47%) and resource scarcity (−67%). The global warming potential over the life cycle of the battery electric tractor was 102 kg CO2eq ha−1 y−1 compared to 293 kg CO2eq ha−1 y−1 for the conventional system. For the global warming potential category, the use phase was the most influential and the fuel used was the single most important factor.

show abstract

Section: Goal and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Goal and Scopementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Batterymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Life Cycle Assessment of Autonomous Electric Field Tractors in Swedish Agriculture

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Lessons to be learned in adoption of autonomous equipment for field crops

Lowenberg‐DeBoer

Behrendt

Ehlers

et al. 2021

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autonomous equipment for crop production is on the verge of technical and economic feasibility, but government regulation may slow its adoption. Key regulatory issues include requirements for on‐site human supervision, liability for autonomous machine error, and intellectual property in robotic learning. As an example of the impact of regulation on the economic benefits of autonomous crop equipment, analysis from the United Kingdom suggests that requiring 100% on‐site human supervision almost wipes out the economic benefits of autonomous crop equipment for small and medium farms and increases the economies‐of‐scale advantage of larger farms.

show abstract