Total energy cycle assessment of electric and conventional vehicles: an energy and environmental analysis. Volume 1: technical report

Cuenca, R.; Formento, J.; Gaines, L.; Marr, Bo; Santini, D.J.; Wang, M.; Adelman, Steven A.; Kline, Donald W.; Mark, Jason; Ohi, J.; Rau, Narayan S.; Freeman, Scott; Humphreys, Kenneth K.; Placet, M.

doi:10.2172/627823

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there is reason to differentiate between batteries which can be externally charged with electricity from the grid, referred to as "plugin," and those which are entirely charged by the ICE and brake energy recovery within the vehicle. If the vehicle is externally charged, the battery is often optimized to store energy and for a use pattern where it is alternately fully charged and depleted (Corrigan and Masias 2011). In the other case, the battery is optimized to provide electric power (rather than energy) and to sustain the same charge level all the time.…”

Section: Powertrain Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the other case, the battery is optimized to provide electric power (rather than energy) and to sustain the same charge level all the time. The life length of a battery is dependent on several complex and interacting mechanisms relating to cell chemistry combined with storage and charging and discharging conditions such as temperature, cycle depth, and different forms of chemical degradation (Corrigan and Masias 2011;Vetter et al 2005). Examples are decomposition of active materials, corrosion, and oxidation of various surfaces (Vetter et al 2005).…”

Section: Powertrain Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Environmental impacts of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery electric vehicles—what can we learn from life cycle assessment?

Lundmark

Messagie

Tillman

et al. 2014

Int J Life Cycle Assess

418

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this review article is to investigate the usefulness of different types of life cycle assessment (LCA) studies of electrified vehicles to provide robust and relevant stakeholder information. It presents synthesized conclusions based on 79 papers. Another objective is to search for explanations to divergence and "complexity" of results found by other overviewing papers in the research field, and to compile methodological learnings. The hypothesis was that such divergence could be explained by differences in goal and scope definitions of the reviewed LCA studies. Methods The review has set special attention to the goal and scope formulation of all included studies. First, completeness and clarity have been assessed in view of the ISO standard's (ISO 2006a, b) recommendation for goal definition.Secondly, studies have been categorized based on technical and methodological scope, and searched for coherent conclusions.Results and discussion Comprehensive goal formulation according to the ISO standard (ISO 2006a, b) is absent in most reviewed studies. Few give any account of the time scope, indicating the temporal validity of results and conclusions. Furthermore, most studies focus on today's electric vehicle technology, which is under strong development. Consequently, there is a lack of future time perspective, e.g., to advances in material processing, manufacturing of parts, and changes in electricity production. Nevertheless, robust assessment conclusions may still be identified. Most obvious is that electricity production is the main cause of environmental impact for externally chargeable vehicles. If, and only if, the charging electricity has very low emissions of fossil carbon, electric vehicles can reach their full potential in mitigating global warming. Consequently, it is surprising that almost no studies make this stipulation a main conclusion and try to convey it as a clear message to relevant stakeholders. Also, obtaining resources can be observed as a key area for future research. In mining, leakage of toxic substances from mine tailings has been highlighted. Efficient recycling, which is often assumed in LCA studies of electrified vehicles, may reduce demand for virgin resources and production energy. However, its realization remains a future challenge. Conclusions LCA studies with clearly stated purposes and time scope are key to stakeholder lessons and guidance. It is also necessary for quality assurance. LCA practitioners studying hybrid and electric vehicles are strongly recommended to provide comprehensive and clear goal and scope formulation in line with the ISO standard (ISO 2006a, b). Responsible editor: Hans-Joerg AlthausElectronic supplementary material The online version of this article

show abstract

Section: Powertrain Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Powertrain Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental impacts of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery electric vehicles—what can we learn from life cycle assessment?

Lundmark

Messagie

Tillman

et al. 2014

Int J Life Cycle Assess

418

236

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Compressed Natural Gas and Diesel Powered Refuse Collection Vehicles

Ahmed

Rose

Hussain

et al. 2014

Progress in Sustainable Energy Technologies: Generating Renewable Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental impacts of hybrid and electric vehicles—a review

Hawkins

Gausen

Strømman

2012

Int J Life Cycle Assess

475

258

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose A literature review is undertaken to understand how well existing studies of the environmental impacts of hybrid and electric vehicles (EV) address the full life cycle of these technologies. Results of studies are synthesized to compare the global warming potential (GWP) of different EV and internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) options. Other impacts are compared; however, data availability limits the extent to which this could be accomplished.Method We define what should be included in a complete, state-of-the-art environmental assessment of hybrid and electric vehicles considering components and life cycle stages, emission categories, impact categories, and resource use and compare the content of 51 environmental assessments of hybrid and electric vehicles to our definition. Impact assessment results associated with full life cycle inventories (LCI) are compared for GWP as well as emissions of other pollutants. GWP results by life cycle stage and key parameters are extracted and used to perform a meta-analysis quantifying the impacts of vehicle options. Results Few studies provide a full LCI for EVs together with assessment of multiple impacts. Research has focused on well to wheel studies comparing fossil fuel and electricity use as the use phase has been seen to dominate the life cycle of vehicles. Only very recently have studies begun to better address production impacts. Apart from batteries, very few studies provide transparent LCIs of other key EV drivetrain components. Estimates of EV energy use in the literature span a wide range, 0.10-0.24 kWh/km. Similarly, battery and vehicle lifetime plays an important role in results, yet lifetime assumptions range between 150,000-300,000 km. CO 2 and GWP are the most frequently reported results. Compiled results suggest the GWP of EVs powered by coal electricity falls between small and large conventional vehicles while EVs powered by natural gas or low-carbon energy sources perform better than the most efficient ICEVs. EV results in regions dependant on coal electricity demonstrated a trend toward increased SO x emissions compared to fuel use by ICEVs. Conclusions Moving forward research should focus on providing consensus around a transparent inventory for production of electric vehicles, appropriate electricity grid mix assumptions, the implications of EV adoption on the existing grid, and means of comparing vehicle on the basis of common driving and charging patterns. Although EVs appear to demonstrate decreases in GWP compared to conventional ICEVs, high efficiency ICEVs and grid-independent hybrid electric vehicles perform better than EVs using coalfired electricity.

show abstract

Total energy cycle assessment of electric and conventional vehicles: an energy and environmental analysis. Volume 1: technical report

Cited by 7 publications

References 7 publications

Environmental impacts of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery electric vehicles—what can we learn from life cycle assessment?

Environmental impacts of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery electric vehicles—what can we learn from life cycle assessment?

A Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Compressed Natural Gas and Diesel Powered Refuse Collection Vehicles

Environmental impacts of hybrid and electric vehicles—a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About