Provincial Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Gasoline and Plug-in Electric Vehicles in China: Comparison from the Consumption-Based Electricity Perspective

Gan, Yu; Lü, Zifeng; He, Xin; Hao, Chunxiao; Wang, Yunjing; Cai, Hao; Wang, Michael; Elgowainy, Amgad; Przesmitzki, Steven; Bouchard, Jessey

doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c08217

Cited by 45 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of LCA to evaluate the environmental efficiency of ICEVs is also very popular because ICEVs are usually used as a control group to demonstrate that the implementation of EVs can improve environmental efficiency. PHEV and HEV appear almost the same number of times because they are usually discussed together [8,53], while FCEV papers mainly focus on biofuel and HFCEVs. EREVs, which are vehicles with a fuel type between PHEVs and EVs, offer significant advantages in terms of saving mineral resources and fossil energy, with the mineral resource consumption of EREVs being 14.68% lower than that of HEVs and the fossil energy consumption being 34.72% lower than that of ICEVs [34].…”

Section: Vehicle Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 4 shows the database and analysis software used in the selection of research object types and indicators. GREET was specifically used to evaluate automobile LCA and mainly evaluates the WTW process of NEVs [8]. Simapro and Gabi are powerful tools for measuring LCA, LCI, and LCIA.…”

Section: Types Of Research Objects and The Selection Trend Of Perform...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The driving emissions of NEVs transfer the burden of driving emissions to the power plant. Therefore, the power generation configuration and power generation emissions of a country or region greatly affect the environmental improvement efficiency of NEVs in the relevant country or region [7][8][9][10]. Moreover, NEVs will still increase environmental pollution, such as by particulate matter formation (PMF) [11,12], human toxicity (HT) [13,14], and terrestrial acidification (TA) [12,15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis

Wang

Tang

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New energy vehicles (NEVs), especially electric vehicles (EVs), address the important task of reducing the greenhouse effect. It is particularly important to measure the environmental efficiency of new energy vehicles, and the life cycle analysis (LCA) model provides a comprehensive evaluation method of environmental efficiency. To provide researchers with knowledge regarding the research trends of LCA in NEVs, a total of 282 related studies were counted from the Web of Science database and analyzed regarding their research contents, research preferences, and research trends. The conclusion drawn from this research is that the stages of energy resource extraction and collection, carrier production and energy transportation, maintenance, and replacement are not considered to be research links. The stages of material, equipment, and car transportation and operation equipment settling, and forms of use need to be considered in future research. Hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (HFCEVs), vehicle type classification, the water footprint, battery recovery and reuse, and battery aging are the focus of further research, and comprehensive evaluation combined with more evaluation methods is the direction needed for the optimization of LCA. According to the results of this study regarding EV and hybrid power vehicles (including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV), fuel-cell electric vehicles (FCEV), hybrid electric vehicles (HEV), and extended range electric vehicles (EREV)), well-to-wheel (WTW) average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have been less than those in the same period of gasoline internal combustion engine vehicles (GICEV). However, EV and hybrid electric vehicle production CO2 emissions have been greater than those during the same period of GICEV and the total CO2 emissions of EV have been less than during the same period of GICEV.

show abstract

Section: Vehicle Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Types Of Research Objects and The Selection Trend Of Perform...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis

Wang

Tang

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Using life cycle assessment (LCA), the GHG implications of vehicle electrification have been shown over a wide range of conditions, including vehicle model [14], vehicle range [15], electric grid generation mix [16], electric grid emissions factor [17], ambient temperature [18], battery degradation [19], driving patterns [20], charging patterns [21], and the many combinations of these factors [22,23]. Some vehicle LCAs focus on use-phase emissions (also known as fuel cycle or well-to-wheels, WTW, emissions) [16,18,19,21,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35], while others also incorporate vehicle cycle emissions (vehicle materials, part manufacturing, assembly, and disposal) [17,22,23,. Vehicle LCAs also vary in their handling of GHG emissions associated with electricity production (average vs. marginal emissions factors, historic or projected emissions, regional variation, temporal variation) [60], vehicle assumptions (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of pickup truck electrification in the decarbonization of light-duty vehicles

Woody

Vaishnav

Keoleian

et al. 2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electrification can reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of light-duty vehicles. Previous studies have focused on comparing battery electric vehicle (BEV) sedans to their conventional internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) or hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) counterparts. We extend the analysis to different vehicle classes by conducting a cradle-to-grave life cycle GHG assessment of model year 2020 ICEV, HEV, and BEV sedans, sports utility vehicles (SUVs), and pickup trucks in the United States. We show that the proportional emissions benefit of electrification is approximately independent of vehicle class. For sedans, SUVs, and pickup trucks we find HEVs and BEVs have approximately 28% and 64% lower cradle-to-grave life cycle emissions, respectively, than ICEVs in our base case model. This results in a lifetime BEV over ICEV GHG emissions benefit of approximately 45 tonnes CO2e for sedans, 56 tonnes CO2e for SUVs, and 74 tonnes CO2e for pickup trucks. The benefits of electrification remain significant with increased battery size, reduced BEV lifetime, and across a variety of drive cycles and decarbonization scenarios. However, there is substantial variation in emissions based on where and when a vehicle is charged and operated, due to the impact of ambient temperature on fuel economy and the spatiotemporal variability in grid carbon intensity across the United States. Regionally, BEV pickup GHG emissions are 13%–118% of their ICEV counterparts and 14%–134% of their HEV counterparts across U.S. counties. BEVs have lower GHG emissions than HEVs in 95%–96% of counties and lower GHG emissions than ICEVs in 98%–99% of counties. As consumers migrate from ICEVs and HEVs to BEVs, accounting for these spatiotemporal factors and the wide range of available vehicle classes is an important consideration for electric vehicle deployment, operation, policymaking, and planning.

show abstract

“…Annual average vehicle speed and adjusted city and highway driving percentage by state.We use a three-piece linear function to quantify the temperature effects on fuel consumption based on the equations developed by Wu et al and implemented by Gan et al[8,37]:…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional Emissions Analysis of Light-Duty Battery Electric Vehicles

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Light-duty battery electric vehicles (BEVs) can reduce both greenhouse gas (GHG) and criteria air pollutant (CAPs) emissions, when compared to gasoline vehicles. However, research has found that while today’s BEVs typically reduce GHGs, they can increase certain CAPs, though with significant regional variability based on the electric grid mix. In addition, the environmental performance of electric and gasoline vehicles is not static, as key factors driving emissions have undergone significant changes recently and are expected to continue to evolve. In this study, we perform a cradle-to-grave life cycle analysis using state-level generation mix and vehicle operation emission data. We generated state-level emission factors using a projection from 2020 to 2050 for three light-duty vehicle types. We found that BEVs currently provide GHG benefits in nearly every state, with the median state’s benefit being between approximately 50% to 60% lower than gasoline counterparts. However, gasoline vehicles currently have lower total NOx, urban NOx, total PM2.5, and urban PM2.5 in 33%; 15%; 70%; and 10% of states, respectively. BEV emissions will decrease in 2050 due to a cleaner grid, but the relative benefits when compared to gasoline vehicles do not change significantly, as gasoline vehicles are also improving over this time.

show abstract

Provincial Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Gasoline and Plug-in Electric Vehicles in China: Comparison from the Consumption-Based Electricity Perspective

Cited by 45 publications

References 41 publications

A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis

A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis

The role of pickup truck electrification in the decarbonization of light-duty vehicles

Regional Emissions Analysis of Light-Duty Battery Electric Vehicles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About