How to compare the environmental performance of different vehicle technologies? Vehicles with lower tailpipe emissions are perceived as cleaner. However, does it make sense to look only to tailpipe emissions? Limiting the comparison only to these emissions denies the fact that there are emissions involved during the production of a fuel and this approach gives too much advantage to zero-tailpipe vehicles like battery electric vehicles (BEV) and fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV). Would it be enough to combine fuel production and tailpipe emissions? Especially when comparing the environmental performance of alternative vehicle technologies, the emissions during production of the specific components and their appropriate end-of-life treatment processes should also be taken into account. Therefore, the complete life cycle of the vehicle should be included in order to avoid problem shifting from one life stage to another. In this article, a full life cycle assessment (LCA) of petrol, diesel, fuel cell electric (FCEV), compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), hybrid electric, battery electric (BEV), bio-diesel and bio-ethanol vehicles has been performed. The aim of the manuscript is to investigate the impact of the different vehicle technologies on the environment and to develop a range-based modeling system that enables a more robust interpretation of the LCA results for a group of vehicles. Results are shown for climate change, respiratory effects, acidification and mineral extraction damage of the different vehicle technologies. A broad range of results is obtained due to the variability within the car market. It is concluded that it is essential to take into account the influence of all the vehicle parameters on the LCA results.

The combustion of fossil fuels in the transport sector leads to an aggravation of the air quality along city roads and highways. Urban air quality is a serious problem nowadays as the number of vehicles increases on a yearly basis. With stricter Euro emission regulations, vehicle manufacturers are not meeting the imposed limits and are also disregarding the non-exhaust emissions. This paper highlights the relevance of non-exhaust emissions of passenger vehicles, both conventional (diesel and petrol) or electric vehicles (EV), on air quality levels in an urban environment in Belgium. An environmental life cycle assessment was carried out based on a real-world emission model for passenger cars and fuel refinery data. A cut-off was applied to the models to highlight what emissions, both from the refinery to the exhaust and electricity production for EV, do actually occur within Belgium’s borders. Results show that not much progress has been made from Euro 4 to 6 for conventional vehicles. Electric vehicles pose the best alternative solution as a more environmentally friendly means of transportation. The analysis results target policy makers with the intention that regulations and policies would be developed in the future and target the characterization of non-exhaust emissions from vehicles. These results indicate that EVs offer a valid solution for addressing the urban air quality issue and that non-exhaust emissions should be addressed in future regulatory steps as they dominate the impact spectrum.

The potential environmental impacts of producing and using future electric vehicles (EVs) are important given their expected role in mitigating global climate change and local air pollutants. Recently, studies have begun assessing the effect of potential future changes in EVs supply chains on overall environmental performance. This study contributes by integrating expected changes in future energy, iron, and steel production in the life cycle assessment (LCA) of EVs. In this light, the study examines the impacts of changes in these parameters on producing and charging future EVs. Future battery electric vehicles (BEV) could have a 36–53% lower global warming potential (GWP) compared to current BEV. The change in source of electricity generation accounts for 89% of GWP reductions over the BEV’s life cycle. Thus, it presents the highest GWP reduction potential of 35–48%. The use of hydrogen for direct reduction of iron in steelmaking (HDR-I) is expected to reduce vehicle production GWP by 17% compared to current technology. By accounting for 9% of the life cycle GWP reductions, HDR-I has the second-highest reduction potential (1.3–4.8%). The results also show that the potential for energy efficiency improvement measures for GWP reduction in vehicle and battery manufacture would be more beneficial when applied now than in the distant future (2050), when the CO₂ intensity of the EU electricity is expected to be lower. Interestingly, under the same conditions, the high share of renewable energy in vehicle supply chains contributed to a decrease in all air pollution-related impact categories, but an increase in toxicity-related categories, as well as land use and water consumption.

Vehicles with alternative drive trains are regarded as a promising substitute for conventional cars, considering the growing concern about oil depletion and the environmental impact of our transportation system. However, “clean” technologies will only be viable when they are cost-efficient. In this paper, the environmental impacts and the financial costs of different vehicle technologies are calculated for an average Belgian driver. Environmentally friendly vehicles are compared with conventional petrol and diesel vehicles. The assessments are done from a life cycle perspective. The effect on human health, resources and ecosystems is considered when calculating the environmental impact. The total cost of ownership (TCO) model includes the purchase price, registration and road taxes, insurance, fuel or electricity cost, maintenance, tires replacement, technical control, battery leasing and battery replacement. In the presented analysis different vehicle technologies and fuels are compared (petrol, diesel, hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs)) on their level of environmental impact and cost per kilometer. The analysis shows a lower environmental impact for electric vehicles. However, electric vehicles have a higher total cost of ownership compared to conventional vehicles, even though the fuel operating costs are significantly lower. The purchase cost of electric vehicles is highly linked to the size of the battery pack, and not to the size of the electric vehicle. This explains the relative high cost for the electric city cars and the comparable cost for the medium and premium cars.

Producing electricity from waste gas is an after treatment for waste gas while recovering the energy content. This paper addresses the methodology to calculate the effect that waste gas energy recovery has on lowering the impact of climate change. Greenhouse gases are emitted while burning the waste gas. However, a thorough study should include the production of the feedstock as well as the production of the infrastructure. A framework is developed to calculate the environmental impact of electricity production from waste gas with a life cycle approach. The present paper has a twofold purpose: to assess the climate change impact of generating electricity with blast furnace gas (BFG) as a waste gas from the steel industry; and to establish a sensitivity assessment of the environmental implications of different allocation rules.

In this paper, the environmental and economic impacts of the life cycle of an advanced lithium based energy storage system (ESS) for a battery electric vehicle are assessed. The methodology followed to perform the study is a Multiregional Input–Output (MRIO) analysis, with a world IO table that combines detailed information on national production activities and international trade data for 40 countries and a region called Rest of the World. The life cycle stages considered in the study are manufacturing, use and recycling. The functional unit is one ESS with a 150,000 km lifetime. The results of the MRIO analysis show the stimulation that the life cycle of the EES has in the economy, in terms of production of goods and services. The manufacturing is the life cycle stage with the highest environmental load for all the impact categories assessed. The geographical resolution of the results show the relevance that some countries may have in the environmental performance of the assessed product even if they are not directly involved in any of the stages of the life cycle, proving the significance of the indirect effects.