Search

Light-duty battery electric vehicles (BEVs) can reduce both greenhouse gas (GHG) and criteria air pollutant (CAPs) emissions, when compared to gasoline vehicles. However, research has found that while today's BEVs typically reduce GHGs, they can increase certain CAPs, though with significant regional variability based on the electric grid mix. In addition, the environmental performance of electric and gasoline vehicles is not static, as key factors driving emissions have undergone significant changes recently and are expected to continue to evolve. In this study, we perform a cradle-to-grave life cycle analysis using state-level generation mix and vehicle operation emission data. We generated state-level emission factors using a projection from 2020 to 2050 for three light-duty vehicle types. We found that BEVs currently provide GHG benefits in nearly every state, with the median state's benefit being between approximately 50% to 60% lower than gasoline counterparts. However, gasoline vehicles currently have lower total NOx, urban NOx, total PM2.5, and urban PM2.5 in 33%; 15%; 70%; and 10% of states, respectively. BEV emissions will decrease in 2050 due to a cleaner grid, but the relative benefits when compared to gasoline vehicles do not change significantly, as gasoline vehicles are also improving over this time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: A well-to-wheels (WTW) analysis of pyrolysis-based gasoline was conducted and compared with petroleum gasoline. To address the variation and uncertainty in the pyrolysis pathways, probability distributions for key parameters were developed with data from literature. The impacts of two different hydrogen sources for pyrolysis oil upgrading and of two bio-char co-product applications were investigated. Reforming fuel gas/natural gas for H2 reduces WTW GHG emissions by 60% (range of 55–64%) compared to the mean of petroleum fuels. Reforming pyrolysis oil for H2 increases the WTW GHG emissions reduction up to 112% (range of 97–126%), but reduces petroleum savings per unit of biomass used due to the dramatic decline in the liquid fuel yield. Thus, the hydrogen source causes a trade-off between GHG reduction per unit fuel output and petroleum displacement per unit biomass used. Soil application of biochar could provide significant carbon sequestration with large uncertainty. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Use of ethanol as a transportation fuel in the United States has grown from 76 dam3 in 1980 to over 40.1 hm3 in 2009 — and virtually all of it has been produced from corn. It has been debated whether using corn ethanol results in any energy and greenhouse gas benefits. This issue has been especially critical in the past several years, when indirect effects, such as indirect land use changes, associated with U.S. corn ethanol production are considered in evaluation. In the past three years, modeling of direct and indirect land use changes related to the production of corn ethanol has advanced significantly. Meanwhile, technology improvements in key stages of the ethanol life cycle (such as corn farming and ethanol production) have been made. With updated simulation results of direct and indirect land use changes and observed technology improvements in the past several years, we conducted a life-cycle analysis of ethanol and show that at present and in the near future, using corn ethanol reduces greenhouse gas emission by more than 20%, relative to those of petroleum gasoline. On the other hand, second-generation ethanol could achieve much higher reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. In a broader sense, sound evaluation of U.S. biofuel policies should account for both unanticipated consequences and technology potentials. We maintain that the usefulness of such evaluations is to provide insight into how to prevent unanticipated consequences and how to promote efficient technologies with policy intervention. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]