This paper applies a case study approach for Australia and calculates the equipment life cycle assessment of diesel, hybrid and electric buses. This study prepared the assessment according to the procedures and methodologies outlined in the ISO 14040:2006 Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment. The authors have chosen three bus models currently in service in the Australian bus fleet to serve as a baseline model for comparison. The amount of greenhouse gas emissions were calculated from the production, assembly, transportation, maintenance and disposal phases. The results in this study show that the electric bus has a higher total environmental impact than the diesel and hybrid bus, mainly due to the manufacturing of the lithium-ion battery. The results also show that the electric bus has a higher environmental impact than the diesel and hybrid bus (18.2% and 14.7% higher, respectively), albeit specific to the product life cycle and without including operation emissions. However, there are many opportunities to reduce product life cycle emissions, such as improvement in manufacturing efficiency, developing new battery technology and production in regions with low carbon-intense grid-mixes.
NotterDAGauchMWidmerR, et al. Contribution of Li-ion batteries to the environmental impact of electric vehicles. Environ Sci Technol2010; 44: 6550–6556.
6.
PeroFDDeloguMPieriniM. Life cycle assessment in the automotive sector: a comparative case study of internal combustion engine (ICE) and electric car. Procedia Struct Integr2018; 12: 521–537.
7.
TagliaferriCEvangelistiSAcconciaF, et al. Life cycle assessment of future electric and hybrid vehicles: a cradle-to-grave systems engineering approach. Chem Eng Res Des2016; 112: 298–309.
8.
MierloJVMessagieMRangarajuS. Comparative environmental assessment of alternative fueled vehicles using a life cycle assessment. Transp Res Procedia2017; 25: 3435–3445.
9.
EllingsenLA-WMajeau-BettezGSinghB, et al. Life cycle assessment of a lithium-ion battery vehicle pack. J Ind Ecol2013; 18: 1–30.
10.
CooneyGHawkinsTRMarriottJ. Life cycle assessment of diesel and electric public transportation buses. J Ind Ecol2013; 17: 689–699.
11.
NugentDSovacoolBK. Assessing the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions from solar PV and wind energy: a critical meta-survey. Energy Policy2014; 65: 229–244.
12.
ISO 14040:2006. Environmental management – life cycle assessment – principles and framework.
13.
NordelöfAMessagieMSödermanML, et al. Environmental impacts of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery electric vehicles – what can we learn from life cycle assessment?Int J Life Cycle Assess2014; 19: 1866–1890.
14.
McIntyreJBergBSetoH, et al. Comparison of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of various electricity generation sources. London: World Nuclear Association, 2011.
15.
PachauriRKAllenMRBarrosVR, et al. Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Geneva, Switzerland: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014.
BYD Auto Co. Ltd. BYD K9 Specifications. Shenzhen, P.R. China, 2017, p. 2.
22.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. 9208.0 - survey of motor vehicle use, Australia, 12 months ended 30 June 2018. Canberra, Australia, 2019.
23.
CAD-Block. Bus Mercedes-Benz Citaro. In: Bus Mercedes-Benz Citaro - CAD Blocks Af, (ed.). 2020.
24.
Argonne National Laboratory (Energy Systems). GREET model: The greenhouse gases, regulated emissions, and energy use in transportation model. Argonne, IL, 2019.
25.
RydhCJSandénBA. Energy analysis of batteries in photovoltaic systems. Part I: Performance and energy requirements. Energy Convers Manag2005; 46: 1957–1979.
26.
Majeau-BettezGHawkinsTRStrømmanAH. Life cycle environmental assessment of lithium-ion and nickel metal hydride batteries for plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles. Environ Sci Technol2011; 45: 4548–4554.
27.
DunnJBJamesCGainesL, et al. Material and energy flows in the production of cathode and anode materials for lithium ion batteries. Report No.: ANL/ESD-14/10. Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory, 2014.
28.
DunnJBGainesLKellyJC, et al. The significance of Li-ion batteries in electric vehicle life-cycle energy and emissions and recycling’s role in its reduction. Energy Environ Sci2015; 8: 158–168.
29.
LuQWuPShenW, et al. Life cycle assessment of electric vehicle power battery. Mater Sci Forum2016; 847: 403–410.
30.
AmbroseHKendallA. Effects of battery chemistry and performance on the life cycle greenhouse gas intensity of electric mobility. Transp Res D Transp Environ2016; 47: 182–194.
31.
HaoHMuZJiangS, et al. GHG Emissions from the production of lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles in China. Sustainability2017; 9(504): 1–12.
32.
YuAWeiYChenW, et al. Life cycle environmental impacts and carbon emissions: a case study of electric and gasoline vehicles in China. Transp Res D Transp Environ2018; 65:409–420.
33.
IoakimidisCSMurillo-MarrodánABagheriA, et al. Life cycle assessment of a lithium iron phosphate (LFP) electric vehicle battery in second life application scenarios. Sustainability2019; 11(9): 2527–2541.
34.
(ST)2 Consultants Inc. Addition of materials data to the Danish transportation LCA model. Denmark: Danish Energy Agency, 2014.
DaiQKellyJCDunnJ, et al. Update of bill-of-materials and cathode materials production for lithium-ion batteries in the GREET model. Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory, 2018.
37.
HalvorsonB. Portland tests BYD K9 all-electric passenger bus: Quick Ride. El Segundo, CA: Green Car Reports, 2014.
38.
McKinnonAPiecykM. Guidelines for measuring and managing CO2 emission from freight transport operations. Edinburgh: Heriot Watt University, 2011.
39.
PotkányMHlatkáMDebnárM, et al. Comparison of the lifecycle cost structure of electric and diesel buses. Int J Marit Sci Technol2018; 65: 270–275.
40.
FrancaA. Electricity consumption and battery lifespan estimation for transit electric buses: drivetrain simulations and electrochemical modelling. University of Victoria, Greater Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, 2018.
41.
LajunenA. Lifecycle costs and charging requirements of electric buses with different charging methods. J Clean Prod2018; 172: 56–67.
42.
BorénS. Electric buses’ sustainability effects, noise, energy use, and costs. Int J Sustain Transp2020; 14: 956–971.
43.
ZackrissonMAvellánLOrleniusJ. Life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles – critical issues. J Clean Prod2010; 18(15): 1519–1529.
44.
KushnirDSandénBA. Multi-level energy analysis of emerging technologies: a case study in new materials for lithium ion batteries. J Clean Prod2011; 19: 1405–1416.
45.
AmarakoonSSmithJSegalB. Lithium-ion batteries and nanotechnology for electric vehicles: a life cycle assessment. Report No.: EPA 744-R-12-001. USA: Environmental Protection Agency, 2013.
46.
HawkinsTRSinghBMajeau-BettezGStrømmanAH. Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional and electric vehicles. J Ind Ecol2013; 17(1): 53–64.
47.
ZackrissonM. Life cycle assessment of long life lithium electrode for electric vehicle batteries – cells for Leaf, Tesla and Volvo bus. Report No.: 24603/2. Mölndal, Sweden: Swerea IVF AB, 2017.
48.
VandepaerLCloutierJAmorB. Environmental impacts of lithium metal polymer and lithium-ion stationary batteries. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017; 78: 46–60.
49.
GrütterJM. Real world performance of hybrid and electric buses. Switzerland: Grütter Consulting, 2014.
50.
BrecherA. Transit bus applications of lithium-ion batteries: Progress and prospects. Report no. 0024, 2012. USA: Federal Transit Administration.
TurnerDAWilliamsIDKempS. Carbon footprinting in the UK waste management sector. Carbon Manag2011; 2: 677–690.
57.
ManfrediSToniniDChristensenTH. Environmental assessment of different management options for individual waste fractions by means of life-cycle assessment modelling. Resour Conserv Recycl2011; 55: 995–1004.
58.
FranchettiMKilaruP. Modeling the impact of municipal solid waste recycling on greenhouse gas emissions in Ohio, USA. Resour Conserv Recycl2012; 58: 107–113.
59.
TurnerDAWilliamsIDKempS. Greenhouse gas emission factors for recycling of source-segregated waste materials. Resour Conserv Recycl2015; 105: 186–197.
60.
Directive 2000/53/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on end-of life vehicles. Off J Eur Communities2000; 5: 1–9.
61.
Carbon Footprint Ltd. Country specific electricity grid greenhouse gas emission factors. Hampshire, UK, 2020.
62.
MoroALonzaL. Electricity carbon intensity in European member states: impacts on GHG emissions of electric vehicles. Transp Res D Transp Environ2018; 64: 4–14.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
