2007
DOI: 10.1065/lca2007.04.322
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of functional unit on the life cycle assessment of traction batteries

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
26
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, in stationary applications, the FU generally used is kg CO 2 e. emitted per battery weight (kg), per battery capacity (Ah) or per energy (kWh) exchanged with the grid (Matheys et al 2007). In this study, kg CO 2 e. emitted per functional kWh will be used given that it has no sense to use km, battery weight or battery capacity for second life applications.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, in stationary applications, the FU generally used is kg CO 2 e. emitted per battery weight (kg), per battery capacity (Ah) or per energy (kWh) exchanged with the grid (Matheys et al 2007). In this study, kg CO 2 e. emitted per functional kWh will be used given that it has no sense to use km, battery weight or battery capacity for second life applications.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these cases, the study will compare the impact reduction of substituting these batteries by re-used Li-ion batteries as it is shown in Figure 1. Using the LCA2GO software, and comparing with the literature (Matheys et al 2007), it is assumed that the GHG emitted by the fabrication of a Lead-acid battery are 60% of those emitted by the fabrication of a Li-ion battery with an equivalent capacity. However, their lifetime is reduced by 2.5 times (Teodorescu et al 2013).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Depending on how the functional unit is defined, varying environmental impact results could be observed (e.g. Matheys et al 2007), and comparisons could come out differently. In comparing electronic media against traditional printed media, the assumed usage scenario played a vital role in determining the environmental impact -one type of media performed better than the other in one scenario but worse in another scenario.…”
Section: Altered User Behaviour -Consumer Vs Manufacturermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in this comparison there is a shift in the central technology applied in the product, and research has shown that different technologies may offer different levels and types of functionality and technology capacity (Kim and Kara 2012). A case study of battery technology for electric vehicle application also demonstrated variance in environmental impact results when a different functional unit was chosen and this may be a source of uncertainty in some cases (Matheys et al 2007). As a rebound effect, technological development may thus influence the expectations and behaviour of consumers in the direction of demanding a higher level of performance or functionality -a change that may negatively offset any environmental improvements made in the new product (Sorell, 2009) so that the increased market volume and the associated consumption increase more than neutralises the efficiency gains, leading to the overall increase in environmental impact mentioned previously.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The study includes emissions related to the building of the infrastructure, the fuel supply chain and the conversion emissions in the electricity plant. Some case studies have shown that allocation rules can have an influence on the calculated impact of bioenergy on the environment [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]. According to Cherubini et al [29] allocation is important in the bio-energy context because bioenergy systems are often part of multifunctional processes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%