Diesel-electric locomotives remain the dominant mode of freight rail traction in many countries, relying heavily on petroleum-based fuels and significantly contributing to greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions. This study introduces the Well-to-Wheel Locomotive Emissions Assessment framework, grounded in ISO 14040/44 standards, offering a structured, scalable, and globally replicable method for assessing railway fuel strategies. Using real-world data from the Vitória-Minas Railway, five fuel scenarios were modeled, including blends of petroleum diesel (B10), biodiesel (B25), and liquefied natural gas (LNG). Although developed for Brazil, the framework accommodates diverse locomotive types, regional fuel chains, and operational conditions, making it suitable for application in other national contexts. The results showed that the most favorable scenario, an 80% LNG and 20% B25 blend, achieved reductions of 24.93% in CO2e, 36.09% in NOx, 45.23% in particulate matter, and 63.05% in SO2 emissions compared with current operations. These findings could offer valuable guidance for transport authorities, infrastructure operators, and energy policy planners worldwide. By integrating upstream and downstream emissions, this research delivers practical, internationally relevant insights into cleaner rail transport solutions and advances the application of life cycle thinking in the freight sector.
ISO 14040. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14040: Life Cycle Assessment: Principles and Framework, Environmental Management. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
2.
ISO 14044. International Organization for Standardization. ISO 14044: Life Cycle Assessment: Requirements and Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
3.
ChenP.LuY.WanY.ZhangA.Assessing Carbon Dioxide Emissions of High-Speed Rail: The Case of Beijing-Shanghai Corridor. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 97, 2021, p. 102949.
4.
DamiánR.ZamoranoC. I.Life Cycle Greenhouse Gases Emissions from High-Speed Rail in Spain: The Case of the Madrid – Toledo Line. Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 901, 2023, p. 166543.
5.
CarvalhaesB. B.de Alvarenga RosaR.Márcio de AlmeidaD. A.RibeiroG. M.A Framework to Measure the Eco-Efficiency of Diesel Locomotive. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Vol. 51, 2017, pp. 29–42.
6.
JeltiF.AllouhiA.Al-GhamdiS. G.SaadaniR.JamilA.RahmouneM.Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Alternative Fuels for City Buses: A Case Study in Oujda City, Morocco. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Vol. 46, No. 49, 2021, pp. 25308–25319.
BilgiliL.KuzuS. L.ÇetinkayaA. Y.KumarP.Evaluation of Railway Versus Highway Emissions Using LCA Approach Between the Two Cities of Middle Anatolia. Sustainable Cities and Society, Vol. 49, 2019, p. 101635.
11.
LiT.ZhuE.Quantifying Carbon Emissions Generated by Monorail Transits: A Life Cycle Assessment Approach Hindawi. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, Vol. 2022, 2022, pp. 541–555.
12.
ChenK.ZhangG.WuH.MaoR.ChenX. S.Uncovering the Carbon Emission Intensity and Reduction Potentials of the Metro Operation Phase: A Case Study in Shenzhen Megacity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 20, 2023, p. 206.
13.
Da Fonseca-SoaresD.EliziárioS. A.GalvinícioJ. D.Ramos-RidaoA. F.Life-Cycle Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Calculation for Urban Rail Transit Systems: The Case of Pernambuco Metro. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), Vol. 13, 2023, p. 8965.
14.
HerrmannI. T.JørgensenA.BruunS.HauschildM. Z.Potential for Optimized Production and Use of Rapeseed Biodiesel. Based on a Comprehensive Real-Time LCA Case Study in Denmark with Multiple Pathways. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2013, pp. 418–430.
15.
ChoiW.SongH. H.Well-to-Wheel Analysis on Greenhouse Gas Emission and Energy Use With Natural Gas in Korea. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2014, pp. 850–860.
16.
BauerC.HoferJ.AlthausH. J.Del DuceA.SimonsA.The Environmental Performance of Current and Future Passenger Vehicles: Life Cycle Assessment Based on a Novel Scenario Analysis Framework. Applied Energy, Vol. 157, 2015, pp. 871–883.
17.
OrsiF.MuratoriM.RoccoM.ColomboE.RizzoniG.A Multi-Dimensional Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Passenger Vehicles in Different Regions: Primary Energy Consumption, CO2 Emissions, and Economic Cost. Applied Energy, Vol. 169, 2016, pp. 197–209.
18.
ErcanT.TatariO.A Hybrid Life Cycle Assessment of Public Transportation Buses With Alternative Fuel Options. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 20, No. 9, 2015, pp. 1213–1231.
19.
JakubS.AdrianL.MieczysławB.EwelinaB.KatarzynaZ.Life Cycle Assessment Study on the Public Transport Bus Fleet Electrification in the Context of Sustainable Urban Development Strategy. Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 824, 2022, p. 153872.
20.
FucP.KurczewskiP.LewandowskaA.NowakE.SelechJ.ZiolkowskiA.An Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Forklift Operation: A Well-to-Wheel Analysis. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, Vol. 21, No. 10, 2016, pp. 1438–1451.
21.
LuuL. Q.Riva SanseverinoE.CelluraM.NguyenH.-N.NguyenT. M.NguyenH. A.Comparative Life Cycle Impact Assessment of Electric and Conventional Bus in Vietnam. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, Vol. 54, 2022, p. 102873.
22.
XuY.GbologahF. E.LeeD. Y.LiuH.RodgersM. O.GuenslerR. L.Assessment of Alternative Fuel and Powertrain Transit Bus Options Using Real-World Operations Data: Life-Cycle Fuel and Emissions Modeling. Applied Energy, Vol. 154, 2015, pp. 143–159.
23.
RahmanM. M.CanterC.KumarA.Well-to-Wheel Life Cycle Assessment of Transportation Fuels Derived from Different North American Conventional Crudes. Applied Energy, Vol. 156, 2015, pp. 159–173.
24.
Di LulloG.ZhangH.KumarA.Evaluation of Uncertainty in the Well-to-Tank and Combustion Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Transportation Fuels. Applied Energy, Vol. 184, 2016, pp. 413–426.
ANP. Agência Nacional do Petróleo. Gás Natural e Biocombustíveis. Anuário Estatístico Brasileiro do Petróleo, Gás natural e Biocombustíveis 2023. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2024.
28.
EPE. Empresa de Pesquisa Energética. Panorama da Indústria de Gás Natural na Bolívia. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2017. www.epe.com.br. Accessed October 21, 2017.
29.
WilsonD.BillingsR.ChangR.PerezH.SellersJ.Year 2011 Gulfwide Emissions Inventory Study. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA, OCS Study BOEM, 2014, p. 666.
EIA. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Frequently Asked Questions: How Many Gallons of Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Are Made from One Barrel of Oil?, 2018. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=327&t=9. Accessed January 12, 2018.
WinnesH.FridellE.Particle Emissions from Ships: Dependence on Fuel Type. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, Vol. 59, No. 12, 2009, pp. 1391–1398.
AltamiranoC. A. A.Análise de ciclo de vida do biodiesel de soja: uma Comparação entre as rotas metílica e etílica. PhD dissertation, MS thesis. Escola de Química, Universidae Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2013.
37.
MMA. Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Inventário Nacional de Emissões Atmosféricas por Veículos Automotores Rodoviários 2013: Ano-Base 2012, 2014.
38.
SkoneT. J.JamesR.Life Cycle Analysis: Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) Power Plant Report. No. NETL/DOE-2012/1551. NETL, U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information, 2012. https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1515244. Accessed March 27, 2024.
