A comparative assessment of battery and fuel cell electric vehicles using a well-to-wheel analysis

A fuel cycle model—called the Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation (GREET) model—has been developed to evaluate well-to-wheels (WTW) energy and emission impacts of motor vehicle technologies fueled with various transportation fuels. The GREET model contains various hydrogen (H2) production pathways for fuel cell vehicle (FCV) applications. In this study, the GREET model was expanded to include four nuclear H2 production pathways: (a) H2 production at refueling stations via electrolysis using light water reactor–generated electricity, (b) H2 production in central plants via thermochemical water cracking using heat from a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR), (c) H2 production in central plants via high-temperature electrolysis using HTGR-generated electricity and steam, and (d) H2 production at refueling stations via electrolysis using HTGR-generated electricity. The WTW analyses of these four options include these stages: uranium ore mining and milling, uranium yellowcake transportation, uranium conversion, uranium enrichment, uranium fuel fabrication, uranium fuel transportation, electricity or H2 production in nuclear power plants, H2 transportation, H2 compression, and H2 FCV operation. Our well-to-pump results show that significant reductions in fossil energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are achieved by nuclear-based H2 compared to natural gas–based H2 production via steam methane reforming for a unit of H2 delivered at refueling stations. When H2 is applied to FCVs, the WTW results also show large benefits in reducing fossil energy use and GHG emissions.

Greenhouse gas emissions of conventional and alternative vehicles: Predictions based on energy policy analysis in South Korea

Life-Cycle Analysis of Fuels and Vehicle Technologies

Lifecycle performance assessment of fuel cell/battery electric vehicles

Parker Hannifin invests in new production plant in Chennai, India

Mitigating Curtailment and Carbon Emissions through Load Migration between Data Centers

Researchers at Argonne National Laboratory expanded the Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation (GREET) model and incorporated the fuel economy and electricity use of alternative fuel/vehicle systems simulated by the Powertrain System Analysis Toolkit (PSAT) to conduct a well-to-wheels (WTW) analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). The WTW results were separately calculated for the blended charge-depleting (CD) and charge-sustaining (CS) modes of PHEV operation and then combined by using a weighting factor that represented the CD vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) share. As indicated by PSAT simulations of the CD operation, grid electricity accounted for a share of the vehicle's total energy use, ranging from 6% for a PHEV 10 to 24% for a PHEV 40, based on CD VMT shares of 23% and 63%, respectively. In addition to the PHEV's fuel economy and type of on-board fuel, the marginal electricity generation mix used to charge the vehicle impacted the WTW results, especially GHG emissions. Three North American Electric Reliability Corporation regions (4, 6, and 13) were selected for this analysis, because they encompassed large metropolitan areas (Illinois, New York, and California, respectively) and provided a significant variation of marginal generation mixes. The WTW results were also reported for the U.S. generation mix and renewable electricity to examine cases of average and clean mixes, respectively. For an all-electric range (AER) between 10 mi and 40 mi, PHEVs that employed petroleum fuels (gasoline and diesel), a blend of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline (E85), and hydrogen were shown to offer a 40-60%, 70-90%, and more than 90% reduction in petroleum energy use and a 30-60%, 40-80%, and 10-100% reduction in GHG emissions, respectively, relative to an internal combustion engine vehicle that used gasoline. The spread of WTW GHG emissions among the different fuel production technologies and grid generation mixes was wider than the spread of petroleum energy use, mainly due to the diverse fuel production technologies and feedstock sources for the fuels considered in this analysis. The PHEVs offered reductions in petroleum energy use as compared with regular hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs). More petroleum energy savings were realized as the AER increased, except when the marginal grid mix was dominated by oil-fired power generation. Similarly, more GHG emissions reductions were realized at higher AERs, except when the marginal grid generation mix was dominated by oil or coal. Electricity from renewable sources realized the largest reductions in petroleum energy use and GHG emissions for all PHEVs as the AER increased. The PHEVs that employ biomass-based fuels (e.g., biomass-E85 and -hydrogen) may not realize GHG emissions benefits over regular HEVs if the marginal generation mix is dominated by fossil sources. Uncertainties are associated with the adopted PHEV fuel consumption and marginal generation mix simulation results, which impact the WTW results and require further research. More disaggregate marginal generation data within control areas (where the actual dispatching occurs) and an improved dispatch modeling are needed to accurately assess the impact of PHEV electrification. The market penetration of the PHEVs, their total electric load, and their role as complements rather than replacements of regular HEVs are also uncertain. The effects of the number of daily charges, the time of charging, and the charging capacity have not been evaluated in this study. A more robust analysis of the VMT share of the CD operation is also needed.

As part of the Net Zero Carbon Water Cycle Program (NZCWCP) for Victoria state in Australia, we have sought to understand the potential to reduce household energy consumption and related Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions by influencing water use. Digital metering data disaggregated into 57 million discrete water usage events across 105 households at a resolution of 10 millilitres at 10 second intervals from June 2017 to March 2020, from a previous Yarra Valley Water (Melbourne, Australia) study, was analysed, together with the dynamic relationship between the multiple energy sources (natural gas, grid electricity, solar) used to heat water for showers in each hour of the day. Water-related energy (WRE) use, including water desalination and treatment, pumping, heating, wastewater collection and treatment, comprised 12.6% of Australia’s primary energy use in 2019. Water heating (by natural gas and electricity) comprised the largest component of WRE use for across residential, commercial, and industrial sectors. Furthermore, 69% of Victoria’s total water usage was by residential customers in 2020-2021. WRE GHG emissions were around 3.8% of Victoria’s total GHG emissions in 2018. Showers (~50% of residential WRE), system losses (~27% of residential WRE), and clothes washers (~9% of residential WRE) are the three largest components of WRE consumption. The main objective of this work is the creation of industry-accessible tools to improve knowledge and management options from the understanding of reductions in cost and GHG emissions from household showering WRE use. Potential options considered, to reduce water and energy use, as well as associated GHG emissions and customer utility bills, include (a) behaviour management such as water and energy pricing to change time of use behaviours, and (b) the adoption of efficient shower head improvements. Shower WRE and GHG emissions were found able to be strongly impacted by small changes in daily routines. GHG emissions reduction from showering could be reduced up to 20 (in summer) - 22% (in winter) by shifting demand time of showering or replacing residential showerheads. Extrapolated to state and Australian scales, reductions in water usage could be up to 14 GL (Victoria) and 144 GL (Australia), and reductions in GHG emissions 1,600 ktCO2eq (Victoria) and 17,300 ktCO2eq (Australia). It provides fundamental new information which could inform a suite of new management options to impact water-related energy from showers, and related GHG emissions and customer water and energy cost.

The transportation sector is generally thought to be contributing up to 25% of all greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions globally. Hence, reducing the usage of fossil fuels by the introduction of electrified powertrain technologies such as hybrid electric vehicle (HEV), battery electric vehicle (BEV) and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle (FCEV) is perceived as a way towards a more sustainable future. With a seemingly more significant shift towards BEV development and roll-out, the research and development of BEV technologies has taken on increasing importance in improving BEV performance and ensuring its competitiveness. Numerical simulation, using MATLAB, is performed as a tool to investigate and to improve the overall performance of BEVs. This study provides an overview of the possible technology outcome and market consequences for future compact BEVs along with HEVs, FCEVs and internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEV). The techno-economics of BEVs, market projection and cost analysis up to 2050 are investigated, as are important BEV characteristics alongside those of other types of vehicles. Well-to-wheel analysis of BEVs is also studied and compared with HEV, FCEV and ICE.

The present work contributes an engineered life cycle assessment (LCA) of hydrogen fuel cell passenger vehicles based on a real-world driving cycle for semi-urban driving conditions. A new customized LCA tool is developed for the comparison of conventional gasoline and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCVs), which utilizes a dynamic vehicle simulation approach to calculate realistic, fundamental science based fuel economy data from actual drive cycles, vehicle specifications, road grade, engine performance, fuel cell degradation effects, and regenerative braking. The total greenhouse gas (GHG) emission and life cycle cost of the vehicles are compared for the case of hydrogen production by electrolysis in British Columbia, Canada. A 72% reduction in total GHG emission is obtained for switching from gasoline vehicles to FCVs. While fuel cell performance degradation causes 7% and 3% increases in lifetime fuel consumption and GHG emission, respectively, regenerative braking improves the fuel economy by 23% and reduces the total GHG emission by 10%. The cost assessment results indicate that the current FCV technology is approximately $2,100 more costly than the equivalent gasoline vehicle based on the total lifetime cost including purchase and fuel cost. However, prospective enhancements in fuel cell durability could potentially reduce the FCV lifetime cost below that of gasoline vehicles. Overall, the present results indicate that fuel cell vehicles are becoming both technologically and economically viable compared with incumbent vehicles, and provide a realistic option for deep reductions in emissions from transportation. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The option of decarbonizing urban freight transport using battery electric vehicle (BEV) seems promising. However, there is currently a strong debate whether fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV) might be the better solution. The question arises as to how a fleet of FCEV influences the operating cost, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and primary energy demand in comparison to BEVs and to Internal Combustion Engine Vehicle (ICEV). To investigate this, we simulate the urban food retailing as a representative share of urban freight transport using a multi-agent transport simulation software. Synthetic routes as well as fleet size and composition are determined by solving a vehicle routing problem. We compute the operating costs using a total cost of ownership analysis and the use phase emissions as well as primary energy demand using the well to wheel approach. While a change to BEV results in 17–23% higher costs compared to ICEV, using FCEVs leads to 22–57% higher costs. Assuming today’s electricity mix, we show a GHG emission reduction of 25% compared to the ICEV base case when using BEV. Current hydrogen production leads to a GHG reduction of 33% when using FCEV which however cannot be scaled to larger fleets. Using current electricity in electrolysis will increase GHG emission by 60% compared to the base case. Assuming 100% renewable electricity for charging and hydrogen production, the reduction from FCEVs rises to 73% and from BEV to 92%. The primary energy requirement for BEV is in all cases lower and for higher compared to the base case. We conclude that while FCEV have a slightly higher GHG savings potential with current hydrogen, BEV are the favored technology for urban freight transport from an economic and ecological point of view, considering the increasing shares of renewable energies in the grid mix.

The recent expansion of unconventional natural gas production in the United States has enabled a steady increase of its use in all consumption sectors, including transportation. In this study, the environmental footprints of three natural gas-based personal mobility options are examined from a life cycle perspective: battery electric vehicles (BEVs), compressed natural gas vehicles (CNGVs), and fuel cell vehicles (FCVs). The results suggest that natural gas-powered vehicles have the potential to considerably reduce the overall environmental impact associated with driven miles in comparison to conventional petroleum-powered internal combustion engine vehicles (PICVs). BEVs and FCVs in particular offer significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, especially if carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technologies are implemented at the fuel conversion facilities. It was furthermore determined that the use phase dominates the life cycle impacts of all of the vehicles considered, although the manufacture of power sources for BEVs and FCVs significantly contributes to their respective environmental burdens. Efforts presently being exerted for the greener manufacture and more efficient powertrain design of BEVs and FCVs are likely to further extend their environmental advantages over CNGVs for the utilization of natural gas as a transportation energy resource.

Well-to-wheel analysis of energy consumption, greenhouse gas and air pollutants emissions of hydrogen fuel cell vehicle in China

<p>The transition to sustainable energy and transportation systems presents complex challenges for the value chain of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs). These challenges are explored through the lens of the 5th wave theory, which predicts the emergence of a new technological paradigm based on clean energy and mobility. One major challenge is the need for a comprehensive infrastructure to support the production, distribution, and consumption of sustainable energy and clean transportation. This includes charging stations for BEVs and hydrogen refueling stations for FCEVs, as well as renewable energy sources such as solar and wind power. Another challenge is the need to develop a circular economy for the production and disposal of BEV and FCEV components, including batteries and fuel cells. This requires designing products for reuse, recycling, and remanufacturing, as well as establishing collection and recycling systems that are both economically and environmentally sustainable. The shift to sustainable energy and transportation requires significant changes in consumer behavior and preferences, as well as policy and regulatory frameworks to support the adoption of BEVs and FCEVs. This includes measures such as incentives for the purchase of clean vehicles, as well as emissions standards and carbon pricing to incentivize the transition to low-carbon transportation. Addressing these challenges will require collaboration across the entire value chain, from vehicle manufacturers and energy providers to policymakers and consumers. By embracing the 5th wave theory and working together to create a sustainable energy and vehicle-related value chain, we can pave the way for a cleaner, greener, and more equitable future.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>In the overall context of global earth overheating (often downplayed as “climate change”), BEVs and FCEVs are at the core of the road mobility solution to be sought. Although this is recognized in expert circles and now even by most politicians worldwide, there are still many challenges in this regard. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the challenges of establishing a sustainable energy and vehicle-related value chain for battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) through the 5th wave theory. The paper aims to identify the key challenges and propose solutions for establishing a sustainable value chain for these vehicles.</p><p><strong>Design/methodology/approach: </strong>The aim was to find out what challenges still exist around the implementation of BEVs and FCEVs. Germany and the EU are exemplary here for most industrialized countries. This paper uses a qualitative approach to analyze the challenges of establishing a sustainable value chain for BEVs and FCEVs through the 5th wave theory. The study is based on a review of existing literature and case studies of countries that have implemented sustainable energy and transportation systems.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Most people have come to understand that anthropogenic global overheating can only be solved by new technologies (which cost money, time, and behavioral change) in production and application. BEVs and FCEVs appear to be an essential part of the desired solution. Nevertheless, there are currently still numerous challenges and also concrete concerns worldwide, which partially cast the implementation in a questionable light. The findings suggest that establishing a sustainable value chain for BEVs and FCEVs requires a comprehensive infrastructure, circular economy principles, and changes in consumer behavior and policy frameworks. The paper proposes solutions for addressing these challenges, including the establishment of charging and hydrogen refueling stations, the development of circular economy principles for the production and disposal of BEV and FCEV components, and the implementation of policies to incentivize the adoption of clean vehicles.</p><p><strong>Affected countries: </strong>The situation described here relates to Germany and the EU countries, but it is likely to be comparable, or at least similar, for many industrialized countries. The challenges and solutions proposed in this paper are relevant to countries worldwide that are transitioning to sustainable energy and transportation systems. The paper includes case studies of countries such as Germany, and the EU countries, that have made significant progress in establishing a sustainable value chain for BEVs and FCEVs.</p><p><strong>Research/future/practical implications: </strong>Yes, there are various hurdles in the introduction of BEVs and FCEVs. Leading association bosses, ministers and government leaders may not want too many changes too quickly themselves; business sees it as an immense cost factor (not to mention technical changes) and private individuals act according to their own motivational factors. In conclusion, it can be assumed that the ability to make money or reduce one’s costs with BEVs/FCEVs can be the fastest accelerator in their adoption. This can then best be achieved with simple “out-of-the-box” solutions in mindset (see Novak triangle)<sup>[1]</sup>. The research implications of this paper include the need for further research on the challenges of establishing a sustainable value chain for BEVs and FCEVs and the effectiveness of the proposed solutions. The future implications of this paper include the importance of establishing a sustainable value chain for BEVs and FCEVs to mitigate climate change and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. The practical implications of this paper include the need for collaboration across the entire value chain to establish a sustainable infrastructure for sustainable energy and transportation systems.</p><p><strong>Originality/value: </strong>Currently, there are virtually no scientific books that would present the overall context of the challenges around BEVs and FCEVs at a glance. Therefore, only current surveys, market volumes and challenges in environmental and working conditions can be described here. This paper contributes to the literature on sustainable energy and transportation systems by analyzing the challenges of establishing a sustainable value chain for BEVs and FCEVs through the 5th wave theory. The paper proposes solutions for addressing these challenges and includes case studies of countries that have implemented sustainable value chains for these vehicles. The paper provides valuable insights for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and researchers working towards a sustainable energy and transportation future.<strong><em></em></strong></p>

Which type of electric vehicle is worth promoting mostly in the context of carbon peaking and carbon neutrality? A case study for a metropolis in China