Societal cost-benefit analysis of electric vehicles in the Philippines with the inclusion of impacts to balance of payments

Lopez, Neil Stephen; Tria, Lew Andrew R.; Tayo, Leo Allen; Cruzate, Rovinna Janel; Oppus, Carlos; Cabacungan, Paul M.; Isla, Igmedio; Ansay, Arjun; Garcia, Teodinis P.; Cruz, Kevien Cabarrubias-Dela; Biona, Jose Bienvenido M.

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2021.111492

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These externalities, sometimes called "Total Cost for Society" include GHG emissions, other air pollutants, infrastructure costs, road congestion, road safety, road damage, and noise pollution (de Clerck et al, 2016(de Clerck et al, , 2018. Job loss or job creation, at a local level, and energy security, at a national level, may also be considered social costs (Lopez et al, 2021). For the most commonly cited social costs-GHG emissions and the impact of air pollution on human health-BEVs offer significant improvements over ICEVs (Bistline, Blanford et al, 2022).…”

Section: Social Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electric and gasoline vehicle total cost of ownership across US cities

Woody,

Adderly,

Bohra

et al. 2024

J of Industrial Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vehicle electrification can significantly decarbonize the transportation sector. Widespread adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) depends on their cost relative to conventional alternatives. Here we compare the total cost of ownership (TCO) of gasoline, hybrid, and electric vehicles. First, we review previous TCO studies, showing that the components (e.g., purchase price, financing, taxes, fees, insurance, refueling, maintenance, repair, and home charging equipment for EVs), parameters (e.g., vehicle miles traveled, discount rate, and lifetime), and methods differ greatly. Then, we develop a comprehensive TCO model comparing across five vehicle classes, three powertrains, and three EV ranges. Using 14 cities in the United States and multiple charging scenarios, we investigate TCO variability based on location and use pattern. We include adjustments for local gasoline prices, electricity rate plans, home charging access, and the impact of local temperatures and drive cycles on fuel economy, among other factors. We show that for a 300‐mile range midsize electric SUV, TCO varies by $52,000, or nearly 40%, across locations. Home charging access reduces the lifetime cost by approximately $10,000 on average, and up to $26,000. EVs are more competitive in cities with high gasoline prices, low electricity prices, moderate climates, and direct purchase incentives, and for users with home charging access, time‐of‐use electricity pricing, and high annual mileage. In general, we find that small and low‐range EVs are less expensive than gasoline vehicles. Larger, long‐range EVs are currently more expensive than their gasoline counterparts. And midsize EVs can reach cost parity in some cities if incentives are applied.

show abstract

Section: Social Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electric and gasoline vehicle total cost of ownership across US cities

Woody,

Adderly,

Bohra

et al. 2024

J of Industrial Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our study seeks to determine how income, deprivation, car ownership, and trip characteristics in areas of Ireland influence the density of these household charging points. This is the novelty of the work, and is unlike previous other work, which has focused on charging optimization [17], battery [18]and fuel cell performance [19], societal cost [20] and consumer acceptance [21], emissions and energy [1], and vehicle to grid opportunities [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the equity impacts of government subsidies for electric vehicles

Caulfield

Rio

Stefaniec

et al. 2022

Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The diffusion of new energy vehicles (NEVs) plays an important role in the deep decarbonization of the transportation sector (Milovanoff et al, 2020;Yang et al, 2020). The diffusion of NEVs is influenced by many factors, such as government subsidies (Zhao et al, 2021a), ownership cost (Lopez et al, 2021), safety (Wang et al, 2021), consumer acceptance (Huang et al, 2021), and the maturity of energy chains (Taalbi and Nielsen, 2021), which are the focus of this study. Energy chains are combinations of technologies that are defined at the level of conversion facilities (e.g., power plants or end-user devices such as cars).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Levelized costs of the energy chains of new energy vehicles targeted at carbon neutrality in China

Qiu

Zhao

et al. 2022

Front. Eng. Manag.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The diffusion of new energy vehicles (NEVs), such as battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel cell vehicles (FCVs), is critical to the transportation sector’s deep decarbonization. The cost of energy chains is an important factor in the diffusion of NEVs. Although researchers have addressed the technological learning effect of NEVs and the life cycle emissions associated with the diffusion of NEVs, little work has been conducted to analyze the life cycle costs of different energy chains associated with different NEVs in consideration of technological learning potential. Thus, relevant information on investment remains insufficient to promote the deployment of NEVs. This study proposes a systematic framework that includes various (competing or coordinated) energy chains of NEVs formed with different technologies of power generation and transmission, hydrogen production and transportation, power-to-liquid fuel, and fuel transportation. The levelized costs of three typical carbon-neutral energy chains are investigated using the life cycle cost model and considering the technological learning effect. Results show that the current well-to-pump levelized costs of the energy chains in China for BEVs, FCVs, and internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) are approximately 3.60, 4.31, and 2.21 yuan/GJ, respectively, and the well-to-wheel levelized costs are 4.50, 6.15, and 7.51 yuan/GJ, respectively. These costs primarily include raw material costs, and they vary greatly for BEVs and FCVs from resource and consumer costs. In consideration of the technological learning effect, the energy chains’ well-to-wheel levelized costs are expected to decrease by 24.82% for BEVs, 27.12% for FCVs, and 19.25% for ICEVs by 2060. This work also summarizes policy recommendations on developing energy chains to promote the diffusion of NEVs in China.

show abstract

Societal cost-benefit analysis of electric vehicles in the Philippines with the inclusion of impacts to balance of payments

Cited by 13 publications

References 27 publications

Electric and gasoline vehicle total cost of ownership across US cities

Electric and gasoline vehicle total cost of ownership across US cities

Measuring the equity impacts of government subsidies for electric vehicles

Levelized costs of the energy chains of new energy vehicles targeted at carbon neutrality in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About