In order to attain emissions reduction targets to improve air quality and reduce global warming, electric vehicles (EVs) arise as alternatives to conventional vehicles fueled by fossil fuels. In this context, this work presents a comparative study between an EV and its conventional version, a medium-duty, diesel engine powered vehicle, from road tests following a standard cycle in urban driving conditions. The performance parameters evaluated are EV electric energy consumption and carbon dioxide (CO 2) emissions from electricity generation and, for the conventional vehicle, exhaust CO 2 emissions and energy consumption calculated from fuel consumption and heating value. Five scenarios were built to conduct an economic viability study in terms of payback and net present value (NPV). Considering the conditions applied, the results from the environmental analysis showed that CO 2 emissions from the EV was 4.6 times lower in comparison with the diesel vehicle. On the other hand, the economic analysis revealed that the viability of the EV is compromised, mainly due to the imported parts with unfavorably high exchange rates. In the best scenario and not considering revenue from commercial application, the calculated payback period of the EV is 13 years of operation.
This work evaluates the effects of the replacement of engine-powered vehicles by electric vehicles on carbon dioxide (CO 2) emissions and energy consumption. A case study of a taxi fleet replacement was conducted with the aid of the AVL Cruise software. The simulation was performed under different scenarios of total or partial fleet replacement along a period of 15 years. The scenarios were designed considering favorable and unfavorable conditions for electricity production from a clean source, thus influencing the CO 2 emission factor adopted. The simulations showed that the electric energy consumption by the electric vehicles is about four times lower than fuel energy consumption by the conventional vehicles undergoing a standard test schedule. At the end of the period considered the electric vehicles will produce lower CO 2 emissions than the conventional vehicle fleet by a factor of 10, even considering the most unfavorable scenario of electric power generation. An economic analysis shows that the present value of electric vehicles over the years is lower than that of conventional vehicles, except for the first year after vehicle acquisition.
The desired energy transition to guarantee net-zero greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions needs to take place in every sector of the global economy. The transport sector is responsible for a large share of energy consumption and GHGs emissions while contributing to the increase in air pollution. Although new technologies are available, the use of diesel in road transport is still predominant. These new technologies, nonetheless, still present inconsistencies in their environment, economic performances and do not necessarily provide improvements when considering the entire fuel life cycle used in medium and heavy-duty trucks. This systematic review addresses the uncertainties in life cycle studies regarding the road transport sector fuel consumption, GHGs, and air pollutant emissions economic analyses. Results show that there are higher chances of reducing GHGs emissions through biogas or fuel-cell hydrogen trucks, while PM 2.5 and NOx emissions have higher chances of being reduced with fuel-cell hydrogen or natural gas trucks. There is, however, a reduced interest by the scientific community in the transport literature in dealing with air pollutants, and the focus is mainly on GHGs emissions. When it comes to economic viability, natural gas and hybrid trucks are the best substitutes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.