Abstract
Global warming (GW) and urban pollution focused a great interest on hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and battery electric vehicles (BEVs) as cleaner alternatives to traditional internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs). The environmental impact related to the use of both ICEV and HEV mainly depends on the fossil fuel used by the thermal engines, while, in the case of the BEV, depends on the energy sources employed to produce electricity. Moreover, the production phase of each vehicle may also have a relevant environmental impact, due to the manufacturing processes and the materials employed. Starting from these considerations, the authors carried out a fair comparison of the environmental impact generated by three different vehicles characterized by different propulsion technology, i.e., an ICEV, an HEV, and a BEV, following the life cycle analysis methodology, i.e., taking into account five different environmental impact categories generated during all phases of the entire life of the vehicles, from raw material collection and parts production, to vehicle assembly and on-road use, finishing hence with the disposal phase. An extensive scenario analysis was also performed considering different electricity mixes and vehicle lifetime mileages. The results of this study confirmed the importance of the life cycle approach for the correct determination of the real impact related to the use of passenger cars and showed that the GW impact of a BEV during its entire life amounts to roughly 60% of an equivalent ICEV, while acidifying emissions and particulate matter were doubled. The HEV confirmed an excellent alternative to ICEV, showing good compromise between GW impact (85% with respect to the ICEV), terrestrial acidification, and particulate formation (similar to the ICEV). In regard to the mineral source deployment, a serious concern derives from the lithium-ion battery production for BEV. The results of the scenario analysis highlight how the environmental impact of a BEV may be altered by the lifetime mileage of the vehicle, and how the carbon footprint of the electricity used may nullify the ecological advantage of the BEV.
Highlights
Worldwide vehicle production growth over the past decades has caused strong emissions increments which have affected both population and industrial sectors globally
Three series of histograms are reported, one for each lifetime mileage considered; each series of histograms, in turn, represents the lifecycle impact evaluated for the internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs), the hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), the battery electric vehicles (BEVs) employed in Norway (BEV-NOR), the BEV employed in Poland (BEV-POL), and the BEV employed using the average European electricity mix (BEV-EU28)
The advantage of the BEV on the ICEV, in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, reduces if the average European electricity mix is considered and reveals null if the electric vehicle is operated in Poland
Summary
Worldwide vehicle production growth over the past decades has caused strong emissions increments which have affected both population and industrial sectors globally. EU28’s CO2 emissions correspond to 10.8% of global CO2 emissions [1]. In 2017, the transport sector contributed to 27.9% of the EU-28 CO2 production, with a passenger cars participation of 43.5%, which represents about 12.1% of the total EU-28 CO2 emissions [2]. Governments issued increasingly stringent regulations, pushing vehicle manufacturers towards innovative solutions. With a view to eco-sustainable mobility, battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) are nowadays proposed as clean or light-environmental impact technologies for road transport. BEVs are often promoted as zero-emitting vehicles since they are propelled by the use of electric
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
