LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF FUEL CELLS ELECTRIC VEHICLES

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Transport Problems

Silesian University of Technology

Subject: Economics, Transportation, Transportation Science & Technology

GET ALERTS

eISSN: 2300-861X

DESCRIPTION

95
Reader(s)
188
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue / page

Related articles

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 3 (September 2020) > List of articles

LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT OF FUEL CELLS ELECTRIC VEHICLES

Ivan EVTIMOV / Rosen IVANOV * / Hristo STANCHEV / Georgi KADIKYANOV / Gergana STANEVA

Keywords : fuel cell electric vehicle; life cycle analysis; energy; CO2 emissions

Citation Information : Transport Problems. Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 153-166, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/tp-2020-041

License : (CC BY 4.0)

Received Date : 16-March-2019 / Accepted: 26-August-2020 / Published Online: 05-September-2020

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

In recent years, regarding the influence of the production processes and vehicles on the environment, new technical solutions for reducing air pollutions have been studied and developed. One of the new constructions is fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV). The production and running conditions of the vehicles are specific in different countries. Hence, a study of these conditions and fuel production process is needed. In this paper, a study of the FCEV efficiency, at different producing technologies of hydrogen (H2), is carried out. Life cycle assessment (LCA) method is used. A comparison, concerning fuel consumption and emissions as CO2 equivalent for the whole life cycle, is done for FCEV and conventional gasoline vehicle (GV). The influence of the energy mix and technology of production of hydrogen on spent energy and air pollution is analyzed. As the results show, in countries with CO2 emissions over 447 g per 1 kWh electricity, the technology of hydrogen production from natural gas is most effective. Now and in the near future, the ecological and financial advantages, connected to renovation of existing vehicle fleet with FCEV, are not absolutely verified.

Content not available PDF Share

FIGURES & TABLES

REFERENCES

1. Moro, A. & Lonza, L. Electricity carbon intensity in European Member States: Impacts on GHG emissions of electric vehicles. European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Italy. Transportation Research Part D. 2018. Vol. 64. P. 5-14.

2. Mehmeti, A. & et al. Life Cycle Assessment and Water Footprint of Hydrogen Production Methods: From Conventional to Emerging Technologies. Environments. 2018. Vol. 5. No. 24. P. 1-19. DOI: 10.3390/environments50200006.

3. Scott, A. & Wedmaier, R. The Assessment and Control of Coal Damage and Loss. Project Number C3017. University of Queensland. Available at: https://www.acarp.com.au/abstracts.aspx?repId=C3017.

4. Thomas, C.E. Fuel Cell and Battery Electric Vehicles Compared. Comparison of Transportation Options in a Carbon-Constrained World: Hydrogen, Plug-in Hybrids and Biofuels. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. December 2009. Vol. 34. No. 23. P. 9279-9296.

5. Cumulative Efficiency of Coal Power Plant. Available at: https://www.google.com/search?q=cumulative+efficiency+of+coal+power+stations.

6. Bakker, D. Battery Electric Vehicles. Performance, CO2 emissions, lifecycle costs and advanced battery technology development. Master thesis Sustainable Development, Energy and Resources, Copernicus Institute University of Utrecht. 2010. 75 p.

7. Crea, D. Fuel Cell Efficiency: A Reality Check Times. 05-Aug-2004. Available at: http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=730.

8. Efficient hydrogen production. DLR researchers achieve high-temperature electrolysis with solar-thermal steam for the first time. 16 May 2018. Available at: https://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-10081/151_read-27203/yearall/#/gallery/30470.

9. Biagini, E. & et al. Process Optimization of Hydrogen Production from Coal Gasification. 29th Meeting on Combustion, Conference Paper. June 2008. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-of-the-sensitivity-analysisresults_tbl1_267822888.

10. Petitpas, G. & Simon, A.J. Liquid Hydrogen Infrastructure Analysis. DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Annual Merit Review. Washington D.C. LLNL-PRES-727907. Project ID: PD135, 2017.

11. Eurostat. Energy production, 2005 and 2015 (million tonnes of oil equivalent). Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php?title=File:Energy_production,_2005_and_2015_(million_tonnes_of_oil_equ ivalent)_YB17.png.

12. Hydrogen made by the electrolysis of water is now cost-competitive and gives us another building block for the low-carbon economy. July 05, 2017. Available at: https://www.carboncommentary.com/blog/2017/7/5/hydrogen-made-by-the-electrolysis-of-wateris-now-cost-competitive-and-gives-us-another-building-block-for-the-low-carbon-economy.

13. Hydrogen Production – Steam Methane Reforming (SMR). New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Hydrogen Fact Sheet, archived from the original (PDF) on 4 February 2006, retrieved 28 August 2014.

14. IS0 14040/44:2006. Environmental management - Life cycle assessment.

15. Bartolozzi, I. & Rizzi, F. & Frey, M. Comparison between hydrogen and electric vehicles by life cycle assessment: A case study in Tuscany. Applied Energy. 2013. Vol. 101. P. 103-111.

16. Palou-Rivera, I. & Han, J. & Wang, M. Updates to Petroleum Refining and Upstream Emissions. Center for Transportation Research Argonne National Laboratory, CTR/Argonne. 2011. 12 p.

17. Jechura, J. Hydrogen Production natural gas via Steam Methane Reforming (SMR). Colorado School of Mines. January 4, 2015.

18. Ruether, J. & et al. Life-Cycle Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Hydrogen Fuel Production in the United States from LNG and Coal. DOE/NETL-2006/1227. National Energy Technology Laboratory. November 2005 NETL.

19. Aguirre, K. & et al. Lifecycle Analysis Comparison of a Battery Electric Vehicle and a Conventional Gasoline Vehicle. 2012. 33 p. Available at: https://www.ioes.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/ev-vs-gasoline-cars-practicum-final-report.pdf.

20. Stala-Szlugaj, K. & Grudzinski, Z. Energy efficiency and steam coal transport over long distances. E3S Web of Conferences 10, SEED 00089. 2016. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/20161000089. 6 p.

21. Bakey, K. The Production of Hydrogen Gas: Steam Methane Reforming. ENGL 202C – Process Description. March 23, 2015. 8 p.

22. Ptasinski, K. Efficiency analysis of hydrogen production methods from biomass. Chemical Engineering Department, Eindhoven University of Technology. Int. J. Alternative Propulsion. 2008. Vol. 2. No. 1. P. 39-49.

23. Braga, L.B. & at al. Chapter 2. Hydrogen Production Processes. Springer International Publishing Switzerland. 2017. In: Silveira, J.L. (ed.). Sustainable Hydrogen Production Processes, Green Energy and Technology. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-41616-8_2.

24. Pehnt, M. Life-cycle analysis of fuel cell system components. Vol. 4. Part 13. In: Handbook of Fuel Cells – Fundamentals, Technology and Applications. ISBN:0-471-49926-9. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester. 2003. P. 1293-1317.

25. Pehnt, M. Life Cycle Assessment of Fuel Cell Systems. In: Fuel Cell Handbook, Vol. 3. Fuel Cell Technology and Applications. J. Wiley, 2002. 66 p.

26. Granovskii, M. & Dincer, I. & Rosen, M. Life cycle assessment of hydrogen fuel cell and gasoline vehicles. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2006. Vol. 31. P. 337-352.

27. Wang, M. Estimation of Energy Efficiencies of U.S. Petroleum Refineries. Center for Transportation Research. Argonne National Laboratory. 2008.

28. Eriksson, O. Nuclear Power and Resource Efficiency - A Proposal for a Revised Primary Energy Factor. Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, University of Gävle, Gävle SE 801 76, Sweden. 20 June, 2017.

29. Burmistrz, P. & Czepirsk, L. & Gazda-Grzywacz, M. Carbon dioxide emission in hydrogen production technology from coke oven gas with life cycle approach. E3S Web of Conferences 10. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/20161000023, SEED 2016.

30. Dodds, P. & McDowall, W. A review of hydrogen production technologies for energy system models. UCL Energy Institute, University College London. UKSHEC Working Paper. 2012. No. 6. 22 p.

31. Bhandari, R. & Trudewind, C. & Zapp, P. Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen Production Methods – A Review. Forschungszentrum Jülich, Institute of Energy and Climate Research – Systems Analysis and Technology Evaluation (IEK‐STE), D‐52425 Jülich, Germany. 46 p.

32. Mirabal, S. An economic analysis of hydrogen production technologies using renewable energy resources. A thesis, presented to the graduate school of the University of Florida for the Degree of Master of Science, University of Florida. 2003. 49 р.

33. Dhanushkodi, S. & Mahinpey, N. & Srinivasan, A. & Wilson, M. Life Cycle Analysis of Fuel Cell Technology. DOI: 10.3808/jei.200800109. Journal of Environmental Informatics. 2008. Vol. 11(1). P. 36-44.

34. Skaalbones, S. Electricity disclosure. 2015. Available at: https://www.nve.no/energy-market-and-regulation/retail-market/electricity-disclosure-2015/.

35. Makridis, S. Hydrogen storage and compression. Chapter 1, University of Western Macedonia, GR50132 Kozani, Greece, CH001. 18 June, 2016.

36. Bossel, U. & Eliasson, B. Energy and the Hydrogen Economy. ABB Switzerland Ltd. Corporate Research, CH-5405 Baden-Dättwil/Swit. 35 p.

EXTRA FILES

COMMENTS