Cradle-to-Grave Lifecycle Analysis of U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle-Fuel Pathways: A Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Economic Assessment of Current (2020) and Future (2030-2035) Technologies

Abstract

This study provides a comprehensive life cycle analysis (LCA), or cradle-to-grave (C2G) analysis, of the cost and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of a variety of vehicle-fuel pathways, the levelized cost of driving (LCD) and cost of avoided GHG emissions. The C2G analysis assesses light duty midsize sedans and small sport utility vehicles (SUVs) across a variety of vehicle-fuel technology pathways, including conventional internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs), flexible hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), battery electric vehicles (BEVs) with varying vehicle ranges, and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs).Coming at a timely manner, given the marked increase, since 2016, in climate aspirations announced by governmental institutions and private firms both in the US and across the globe, this analysis builds on a previous comprehensive life cycle analysis, updating that study's 2016 assumptions and methods ). These updates incorporate technological advances and changes in energy supply sources that have emerged during the intervening period. Utilizing these updated assumptions and methods, alongside more recent data, the present report accounts for a broader range of vehicle technologies and considers both current (2020) and expected future (2030-2035) conditions. Reflecting increased research interest in synthetic liquid fuels produced using renewable low-carbon electricity and CO2 sources, electro-fuels (a.k.a. e-fuels) were added to the potential future fuel technologies that are evaluated.This study takes a "pathway" approach rather than a "scenario" approach; hence distinct, technically feasible, routes or sequences of processes starting with one or more feedstocks and ending with an intermediate or a final product are examined, not necessarily constrained by practical feedstock, economic, policy, and market considerations.

Large Decreases in Tailpipe Criteria Pollutant Emissions from the U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Fleet Expected in 2020–2040

“…Finally, while the focus of the present work is the air quality benefits of electrification, we note that addressing climate change driven by emissions of CO 2 and other greenhouse gases has become the primary motivation. Vehicle electrification with electricity grid decarbonization provides substantial benefits in terms of reduced CO 2 emissions as illustrated in Figure and discussed in detail elsewhere. , Several emission reduction opportunities that work in concert with vehicle electrification were not evaluated in the present study. For example, most LDV manufacturers have publicly stated intentions to substantially reduce or eliminate CO 2 emissions from vehicle manufacturing in this time frame (comprising ∼20% of the emissions in the 2040 “with BEV” cases).…”

“…For fuel production (e.g., oil extraction and refining, ethanol production), GHG emission factors were taken from GREET 2021 . Vehicle production emissions were estimated using data reported by Argonne National Laboratory for current and future ICEVs and BEVs, scaling by past and projected future average vehicle weights and sales rates , (SI Section 2).…”

Evaluation of Rail Decarbonization Alternatives: Framework and Application

“…Baseline diesel cost and emissions data are extracted from the R-1 report (52). Forecasts for drop-in fuel costs and emissions are based on Kelly et al (59) and are summarized in Table 1D. For battery-electric locomotives, the electric grid has geographically varying costs and emissions, which directly affect the evaluation of battery-electric deployment.…”

Cradle-to-Gate and Use-Phase Carbon Footprint of a Commercial Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle Lithium-Ion Battery

“…Battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) in the United States have a 27−57% lower carbon footprint than internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) over the full lifecycle. 2 However, the vehicle cycle carbon footprints of EVs are 20−77% higher than those of ICEVs, mainly due to the energy intensive production of LIBs. 3 With the growing EV market and demand for longer allelectric range, reducing the carbon footprint of LIBs is becoming increasingly more important to accomplish climate goals in the light-duty vehicle (LDV) sector.…”