Environmental impacts of hybrid and electric vehicles—a review

• Published in: The international journal of life cycle assessment 2012-09, Vol.17 (8), p.997-1014
• Main Authors: Hawkins, Troy R, Gausen, Ola Moa, Strømman, Anders Hammer
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: batteries; Carbon dioxide; Clean energy; Climate change; Coal; combustion; developmental stages; Earth and Environmental Science; Electric vehicles; Electricity; Emissions; energy; Energy sources; Environment; Environmental assessment; Environmental Chemistry; Environmental Economics; Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology; Environmental impact; Environmental studies; Global warming; Greenhouse gases; Hybrid vehicles; hybrids; Internal combustion engines; inventories; Lca in Transportation; life cycle inventory; Life cycles; Literature reviews; materials life cycle; meta-analysis; Natural gas; pollutants; Product life cycle
• ISSN: 0948-3349; 1614-7502
• DOI: 10.1007/s11367-012-0440-9

PURPOSE: A literature review is undertaken to understand how well existing studies of the environmental impacts of hybrid and electric vehicles (EV) address the full life cycle of these technologies. Results of studies are synthesized to compare the global warming potential (GWP) of different EV and internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) options. Other impacts are compared; however, data availability limits the extent to which this could be accomplished. METHOD: We define what should be included in a complete, state-of-the-art environmental assessment of hybrid and electric vehicles considering components and life cycle stages, emission categories, impact categories, and resource use and compare the content of 51 environmental assessments of hybrid and electric vehicles to our definition. Impact assessment results associated with full life cycle inventories (LCI) are compared for GWP as well as emissions of other pollutants. GWP results by life cycle stage and key parameters are extracted and used to perform a meta-analysis quantifying the impacts of vehicle options. RESULTS: Few studies provide a full LCI for EVs together with assessment of multiple impacts. Research has focused on well to wheel studies comparing fossil fuel and electricity use as the use phase has been seen to dominate the life cycle of vehicles. Only very recently have studies begun to better address production impacts. Apart from batteries, very few studies provide transparent LCIs of other key EV drivetrain components. Estimates of EV energy use in the literature span a wide range, 0.10–0.24 kWh/km. Similarly, battery and vehicle lifetime plays an important role in results, yet lifetime assumptions range between 150,000–300,000 km. CO2 and GWP are the most frequently reported results. Compiled results suggest the GWP of EVs powered by coal electricity falls between small and large conventional vehicles while EVs powered by natural gas or low-carbon energy sources perform better than the most efficient ICEVs. EV results in regions dependant on coal electricity demonstrated a trend toward increased SO x emissions compared to fuel use by ICEVs. CONCLUSIONS: Moving forward research should focus on providing consensus around a transparent inventory for production of electric vehicles, appropriate electricity grid mix assumptions, the implications of EV adoption on the existing grid, and means of comparing vehicle on the basis of common driving and charging patterns. Although EVs appear