Ee 1

Int J Life Cycle Assess (2014) 19:1866–1890
DOI 10.1007/s11367-014-0788-0
MODERN INDIVIDUAL MOBILITY
Environmental impacts of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery

electric vehicles—what can we learn from life cycle assessment?
Anders Nordelöf & Maarten Messagie &
Anne-Marie Tillman & Maria Ljunggren Söderman &
Joeri Van Mierlo
Received: 24 September 2013 / Accepted: 30 July 2014 / Published online: 21 August 2014
# The Author(s) 2014. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com
Abstract Secondly, studies have been categorized based on technical

Purpose The purpose of this review article is to investigate and methodological scope, and searched for coherent
the usefulness of different types of life cycle assessment conclusions.
(LCA) studies of electrified vehicles to provide robust and Results and discussion Comprehensive goal formulation
relevant stakeholder information. It presents synthesized according to the ISO standard (ISO 2006a, b) is absent in
conclusions based on 79 papers. Another objective is to most reviewed studies. Few give any account of the time
search for explanations to divergence and “complexity” of scope, indicating the temporal validity of results and con-
results found by other overviewing papers in the research clusions. Furthermore, most studies focus on today’s elec-
field, and to compile methodological learnings. The hypoth- tric vehicle technology, which is under strong develop-
esis was that such divergence could be explained by differ- ment. Consequently, there is a lack of future time perspec-
ences in goal and scope definitions of the reviewed LCA tive, e.g., to advances in material processing, manufactur-
studies. ing of parts, and changes in electricity production.
Methods The review has set special attention to the goal and Nevertheless, robust assessment conclusions may still be
scope formulation of all included studies. First, completeness identified. Most obvious is that electricity production is the
and clarity have been assessed in view of the ISO standard’s main cause of environmental impact for externally charge-
(ISO 2006a, b) recommendation for goal definition. able vehicles. If, and only if, the charging electricity has
very low emissions of fossil carbon, electric vehicles can
reach their full potential in mitigating global warming.
Responsible editor: Hans-Joerg Althaus
Consequently, it is surprising that almost no studies make
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article this stipulation a main conclusion and try to convey it as a
(doi:10.1007/s11367-014-0788-0) contains supplementary material, clear message to relevant stakeholders. Also, obtaining
which is available to authorized users.
resources can be observed as a key area for future research.
A. Nordelöf (*) : A.<M. Tillman : M. Ljunggren Söderman : In mining, leakage of toxic substances from mine tailings
J. Van Mierlo
Division of Environmental Systems Analysis, Department of Energy
has been highlighted. Efficient recycling, which is often
and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, assumed in LCA studies of electrified vehicles, may reduce
412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden demand for virgin resources and production energy.
e-mail: [email protected] However, its realization remains a future challenge.
M. Messagie : J. Van Mierlo
Conclusions LCA studies with clearly stated purposes
MOBI—Mobility, Logistics and Automotive Technology Research and time scope are key to stakeholder lessons and guid-
Centre, Department of Electric Engineering and Energy Technology, ance. It is also necessary for quality assurance. LCA
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium practitioners studying hybrid and electric vehicles are
strongly recommended to provide comprehensive and
M. Ljunggren Söderman
IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, Box 530 21, clear goal and scope formulation in line with the ISO
400 14 Gothenburg, Sweden standard (ISO 2006a, b).
Int J Life Cycle Assess (2014) 19:1866–1890 1867
Keywords Battery . Electric vehicle . Hybrid . LCA . production and use phase energy efficiency affect the results.
Meta-analysis . Well-to-wheels Additionally, the history of life cycle assessments of
electrified vehicle is summarized; various technical aspects
of vehicle electrification such as charging management is
1 Introduction described and uncertainty in results is discussed. Among
conclusions, Hawkins et al. (2012) do not find any of the
1.1 Background reviewed 51 studies to comply with their definition of how a
complete state-of-the-art LCA of electrified vehicles should
Electric and hybrid powertrains are currently regarded as be conducted, and hence request more rigorous and complete
promising emerging technologies for propulsion of vehicles inventories and studies. The quality of “stylized studies,”
with potential to reduce greenhouse and other exhaust gas described as studies based on rudimentary inventories and a
emissions from road transport (Nemry and Brons 2010; low level of detail, is questioned. It is argued that such studies
Sadek 2012). The arguments are that electric powertrains are have limited utility for informing policy makers as they only
more energy efficient for propelling vehicles than convention- cover limited subsets of the complete system (Hawkins et al.
al internal combustion engines fuelled by petrol or diesel, and 2012).
that full electric propulsion does not emit tailpipe emissions Another paper by Helmers and Marx (2012) compiles a
(IAE 2011; Sadek 2012). In addition, electric powertrains can broad description of technical characteristics and environmen-
assist in decoupling the transport sector from its heavy reli- tal impacts of electric and hybrid vehicles, however without
ance on fossil fuels. On the other hand, electric vehicles may focus on literature evaluation. They conclude that electric
require additional electricity production (Tran et al. 2012) and vehicles have many benefits over conventional ones, but that
this can be done using several different energy sources with the LCA literature on the subject “is complex.” Overviews are
diverse environmental impacts. Furthermore, electric also provided in a conference report by Frischknecht and
powertrains require new advanced components (Chan 2007), Flury (2011), in an appendix to a case study by Ma et al.
causing additional, or at least different, environmental impacts (2012) and an editorial by Althaus (2012). Althaus (2012)
compared to conventional vehicles. observes that results come out as diverging and that there is “a
The trade-off between the benefits when operating the rather weak consensus” on the environmental performance of
vehicle and possible new or increased negative impacts from electric vehicles. Also, Frischknecht and Flury (2011) argue
production and from energy supply can be analyzed using life that results are diverging and, as an example, mention that
cycle assessment (LCA). However, LCA studies come in emissions for electric vehicles vary between 95 to 240 g CO2-
many shapes and cause diverging arguments about the envi- eq./km.
ronmental performance of the technology on which they are In contrast, we argue that the numerical results in any
based. Some advocate the technology, for example, using the system study, such as LCA, is dependent on its purpose or,
well-to-wheels approach to guide government promotion pol- more to the point, which specific problem or question it is
icies toward different types of powertrains and alternative fuel investigating (see for example Sterman (1991)). In LCA, the
options (Ou et al. 2010b). Others claim that the prospective for formulation of the purpose is made during what the interna-
electric cars to reduce the environmental impacts of mobility tional standard for LCA (ISO 2006a, b) defines as the goal and
is “substantially overrated” (Frischknecht and Flury 2011) or scope definition. The scope consists of the methodological
that they will lead to “significant increases in human toxicity” choices made to address the stated goal, ensuring that the
(Hawkins et al. 2013a). conclusions of the study are sufficiently supported, for exam-
Few reviews have been carried out in the field of LCA of ple in selection of technical scope, time horizon, and level of
electric vehicles, synthesizing results and assessing the scope impact assessment. But, from going through the literature in
of the research field. In the most thorough, Hawkins et al. the field, it is evident that while the scope (i.e., the modeling
(2012) benchmarked 55 studies and surveyed what 51 of them choices) at large, except for the time frame, is mostly well
cover in terms of scope compared to their own recommended described in LCA studies of electric and hybrid vehicles, the
practice and definition of a state-of-the-art complete LCA of goal is sometimes expressed vaguely and even partly, or fully,
electrified vehicles. The review commendably discusses and left out. As a consequence, there is a risk that the research field
evaluates the datasets used in the research field, and identifies appears unnecessarily complex and provides seemingly di-
gaps in the inventories of the main components such as verging results, in particular if common messages are sought
batteries, electric motors, and electronic equipment. It also from studies with very different goal and scope. Unclearly
presents an analysis of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for articulated purposes of studies make it necessary to go into the
the complete life cycle across studies, including meta-analysis details of each study to find the motivation for its limitations
of the effect of assumptions regarding lifetime on impact from and underlying assumptions. This may also disguise that
production of equipment and discussions on how battery consensus can be found in several main conclusions from
1868 Int J Life Cycle Assess (2014) 19:1866–1890
studies with similar scope. As a consequence, stakeholders Section 5.4. Lastly, lessons are discussed and formulated into
within the area of vehicle electrification, such as policy conclusions in Section 6, both in terms of assessment results
makers and various branches of industry, might end up with- and in terms of methodological learnings.
out guidance when it could have been, and was intended to be,
given.
2 Methodology
1.2 Purpose
2.1 Inclusion of literature
The purpose of this review is to investigate the usefulness of
different types of LCA studies to provide relevant information A review of, in total, 79 scientific articles, conference papers,
to stakeholders in the area of vehicle electrification, to tease and reports on life cycle assessment of electric and hybrid
out general and robust conclusions, and to exemplify with vehicles published in the time period from 1998 to early 2013
results. We thereby intend to complement the work of has been conducted. All studies include at least one vehicle
Hawkins et al. (2012), recognizing that there are many possi- with an electric or partly electric powertrain, with a battery as
ble goals for LCA studies of electrified vehicles and applying the on-board electric energy storage. Fuel cell-based electric
a learning perspective to the field. A parallel objective is to powertrains are not included in the evaluation, although such
examine the inconsistency of results observed by other are covered in several of the reviewed papers.
overviewing literature (Althaus 2012; Frischknecht and To the authors’ best knowledge and access, all peer-
Flury 2011; Helmers and Marx 2012). Our hypothesis is that reviewed papers found in established scientific journals are
if comprehensive and detailed goal and scope formulation is included. The review also includes all conference papers
not sufficiently reported, the results in the research field will encountered in the search process. Studies presented in gray
appear diverging and inconsistent. literature from universities and established research institutes
The review addresses industrial managers, governmental have been included when sufficient documentation has been
agencies, and other institutions seeking advice and guidance found. In some cases, very similar papers were found, both as
from LCA studies. It investigates what set of methodological a conference paper and a later published peer-reviewed paper.
choices provide answers to what questions. More specifically, The latter were then chosen for the review.
which answers do stakeholders get from so-called well-to-
wheels (WTW) studies in comparison to complete LCA stud- 2.2 Review approach
ies? What difference does it make if a study includes a narrow
or broad set of environmental impacts, and if different types of The starting point, and continued goal of this review, is to
impact assessment are conducted? Other target groups are identify robust lessons and learnings from LCA about the
scientists and industrial practitioners conducting and develop- environmental impacts of electrification of vehicles. A struc-
ing LCA in the field of electrified vehicles. In particular, the tured evaluation of literature has been conducted and a search
investigation of goal and scope is compiled into methodolog- for consensus among studies. Reviews may utilize a large
ical learnings for an LCA specialist audience. range of methods to synthesize conclusions from the best
available evidence (Zumsteg et al. 2012), including various
1.3 Reading guide forms of meta-analysis, quantitative and qualitative, grouping,
and statistical summaries.
In Section 2, we provide an account of the methodology used In this review, qualitative meta-analysis provides evidence
in the review, such as the criteria for literature inclusion and a for the robustness of the key conclusions. We address the
description of the analysis made in the review process. coverage of the literature by analysis of the goal and scope
Section 3 supplies a technical background to the scope of definition. Further, we investigate key factors behind assess-
the paper. Section 4 presents a methodological background ment results of studies by analysis of their discussion of results
and various aspects of the goal and scope formulation as found and conclusions. More in detail, several tables statistically
in current literature and in the ISO standard (ISO 2006a, b), present the degree of consensus in statements formulated on
including its connection to different types of uncertainty in prevalent topics of investigation within a certain scope. First,
LCA and different life cycle scope in LCA of vehicles. Next, the reporting of goals and time frame were compared with the
in Section 5, focus is set on the results of the literature recommendations provided by the ISO standard (ISO 2006a,
analysis. First, in subsection 5.1, the communication of goals b). Second, all included studies were sorted into categories
and the selection of scope in the reviewed papers are investi- and presented according to what they cover in terms of vehicle
gated. This is followed by an analysis of energy use and GHG technology and impact. Third, we investigated what set of
emissions for different life cycle scopes in sections 5.2 and 5.3, methodological choices provide answers to what questions, or
before additional environmental impacts are investigated in phrased differently, we tried to link the selection of scope to
corresponding goals, regardless of how the goal of each study more ample, numerical harmonization of a subset of studies
has been stated; clearly, vaguely, or not all. This was achieved for those who wish to seek it.
by asking what we can learn from the different categories and In general, example results from single or only a few
by qualitatively synthesizing the assessment results and con- sources are shown as illustrations of the type of information
clusions into lessons and learnings for different stakeholders. contained within a certain scope. When such examples also
All studies included in the review have been qualitatively are pointed out as “typical,” it is based on the observations and
meta-analyzed. Relevant topics, i.e., questions which can be judgments of the authors. All exemplifying results derive from
addressed by the different categories of LCA studies, were studies with sufficiently clear information about assumptions,
identified, for example “the influence of supplied electricity calculations, and data, either available in literature or from the
for charging.” The prevalence of these topics was investigated. corresponding author upon request.
Next, a statement about each topic was defined, e.g., that the For more information about all presented tables and fig-
“supplied electricity for charging is a key factor for the results.” ures, please see the Electronic Supplementary Material.
The coverage of topics and evidence for support or refutation
of statements was sought for in tables, figures, and texts
coupled to results, discussion of results, and conclusions. 3 Technical background
Finally, the results for the support of statements were summa-
rized statistically in relation to the total number of studies 3.1 Powertrain aspects
covering the topic and compiled into tables, presented in sec-
tion 5. An exception is the topic of resource use for equipment An electric powertrain can be realized in several different
manufacturing which is addressed in a gap analysis. configurations. Whichever way, it requires a set of advanced
Additionally, quantitative meta-analysis of some selected electrical components such as one or more electric machines
studies is used to reflect consequences of certain important to provide motoring and generating capacity. Electronic power
methodological choices. The effect of different electricity devices are used to control the electric machines, to modify
supplies for charging is illustrated by varying input data for the voltage, and to shift between AC and DC currents. There is
electricity in a reconstructed LCA model of one specific study. often a mechanical power path to the wheels, with many
Similarly, the importance of lifetime assumptions for equip- design options, just as in conventional vehicles. In hybrid
ment results is investigated through quantitative analysis of vehicles, the electric propulsion system is combined with the
sensitivity to the value for lifetime driven distance in three conventional powertrain, either to achieve better driving per-
selected studies. Common for all studies used for quantitative formance as in a “power hybrid” or with the internal combus-
meta-analysis is that they provide transparent and sufficiently tion engine (ICE) downsized aiming for increased energy
detailed accounts of calculation procedures and input data, to efficiency and emission reduction (Chan 2007).
allow these single modifications. Even so, the ambition has Additionally, there is a need for electric energy storage,
not been to harmonize system boundaries and create compa- most commonly realized as a battery. However, there is reason
rable numerical results. Instead, the authors acknowledge that to differentiate between batteries which can be externally
each LCA study is uniquely specified by its own methodo- charged with electricity from the grid, referred to as “plug-
logical choices. This inherent property of system studies leads in,” and those which are entirely charged by the ICE and brake
to significant challenges for easy but relevant comparison of energy recovery within the vehicle. If the vehicle is externally
quantitative results across studies and harmonization of nu- charged, the battery is often optimized to store energy and for
merical results (Brandão et al. 2012; Farrell et al. 2006; a use pattern where it is alternately fully charged and depleted
Zumsteg et al. 2012). (Corrigan and Masias 2011). In the other case, the battery is
Indeed, deeper quantitative meta-analysis of LCA studies is optimized to provide electric power (rather than energy) and to
sometimes conducted, such as by Farrell et al. (2006) with six sustain the same charge level all the time. The life length of a
studies within the area of biofuels. The results of the selected battery is dependent on several complex and interacting mech-
studies were reproduced with altered and thereby comparable anisms relating to cell chemistry combined with storage and
final numerical results. However, this may only be done if charging and discharging conditions such as temperature,
enough information is accessible to change and fully harmo- cycle depth, and different forms of chemical degradation
nize the system boundaries. In contrast, our review includes a (Corrigan and Masias 2011; Vetter et al. 2005). Examples
large number of studies with different life cycle and technical are decomposition of active materials, corrosion, and oxida-
scope, and very varying level of detail in the methodology tion of various surfaces (Vetter et al. 2005). Hence, the ageing
account. Also, the adoption of a learning perspective calls for process is dependent both on the number of charging cycles,
a survey of key conclusions, rather than key numbers. i.e. how much the battery is used, and on calendar time.
Anyhow, given the parallel focus on goal and scope definition, Electric powertrains can be realized in many different
the review examines prerequisites and possibilities for future, configurations and are relatively novel in modern automotive
applications (Chan 2007). This implies that there are time- support is called the “all-electric range.” Conventional vehi-
related assumptions made in LCA studies with influence on cles are always propelled by an ICE and are in this text referred
results, but also that there is a large improvement potential for to as “internal combustion engine vehicles” (ICEVs).
the future. Electric motor manufacturing is one area where Vehicles come in various sizes, implying different weights,
material and energy use can be saved by adapting motor which is a key factor for environmental performance
design for manufacturing (Hellsing 2013) as well as for (Frischknecht and Flury 2011). A passenger vehicle classified
recycling (Machacek 2012). Moreover, electric motors devel- as “small family-sized” is roughly of the same size as one
oped for automotive traction applications are currently not classified as a “compact car” or “C-segment,” i.e., they belong
produced in any large series and there is low energy efficiency to the same size and performance class or segment. Examples
in manufacturing compared to other automotive components of vehicles in this segment are Volvo C30, Ford Focus, VW
(Hellsing 2013). Golf, and Nissan Leaf. Smaller vehicles are often classified as
In the case of lithium-ion batteries, it is the production of city or supermini cars (A and B segment) and that could be a
battery cells which is most energy demanding (Volkswagen Fiat Punto, Citroen C1, Peugeot 106, or Smart. For larger
Group 2012), and more specifically the processing of the vehicles, there is a whole range of segments. Examples of
active materials (Dunn et al. 2012). While each chemistry larger family cars (D-segment) include Volvo V60, Toyota
has a number of viable synthesis procedures, there are a Prius, and Ford Mondeo, and an executive car (E-segment) is
number of very energy-intensive processes, such as grinding the Volvo S80. Even larger segments are called luxury cars (F-
cathode materials down to very fine particles (Kushnir and segment, e.g., Lexus LS, Mercedes S-Klasse), monovolumes
Sandén 2011) that are sometimes needed depending on the (M-segment, e.g., Ford S-Max), and sport utility vehicles (J-
desired properties of the final material. Various types of tai- segment, e.g., Lexus RX and Mercedes M-Klasse). Today’s
lored improvements with regard to process, cell, and the BEVs are normally city or compact cars, PHEVs are often
overall component design along with increased production within the family and executive vehicle span, and HEVs can
scale are predicted to moderately but steadily increase be found in all segments. The letter system for segmentation
performance and reduce cost over the coming 5 years classes A, B, C, etc. have been proposed by the European
according to the National Research Council (2013) in the Commission but have no strict definition. For more details,
USA. These types of advances are also coupled to decreased please see the Electronic Supplementary Material.
material and energy use. Additionally, in a longer time per- Heavy vehicles such as busses, distribution trucks, and
spective, battery recycling may offer both economic and en- long haulers can also be electrified, and are then mostly found
vironmental benefits (Li et al. 2013). Gaines et al. (2011) find as hybrids without the possibility of external charging. City
that recycling may reduce material production energy demand buses have a particularly large fuel-saving potential and can
by as much as 50 %. Another long-term improvement possi- also be found in plug-in hybrid or all-electric versions.
bility is the use of nanotechnology to enhance performance
and durability of lithium-ion batteries (Kushnir and Sandén
2011). Although such a step would probably increase the 4 Life cycle assessment of road vehicles
production energy demand, it still has the potential to lower
the overall life cycle energy (Kushnir and Sandén 2011). 4.1 Overview and purpose formulation
3.2 Vehicle terminology LCA is a systemic tool for evaluating the environmental impact
related to goods and services. It includes technical surveys of
The term “hybrid electric vehicle” (HEV) is used to describe a all product life cycle stages, from material acquisition and
vehicle with both an electric motor and an ICE, but without manufacturing to use and end-of-life. Data is gathered for
external charging. Different HEVs may still have different inflows and outflows at each stage. By linking processes within
sizes of battery and consequently different degrees of electric the system from cradle to grave, a model is made of how the
propulsion. This spans from regeneration of brake power and flows are connected and influence each other. This results in an
assistance to the ICE (mild hybrids) to include a certain dis- inventory of inflows to the system in terms of natural resources
tance of pure electric driving (full hybrids). The distinction, and outflows in terms of emissions to the surrounding natural
however, is not often accounted for in the reviewed LCAs. system. The inventory is then analyzed to indicate potential for
“Battery electric vehicles” (BEVs) have batteries adapted for environmental impacts in various categories, such as global
external charging, no ICE and drive purely on electric energy. warming, human toxicity, and acidification. (ISO 2006a)
The plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) runs on externally An LCA study of a vehicle can be conducted in different
charged electricity but enters a blended hybrid mode of electric ways, but not arbitrarily. The selection of scope and other
motor and ICE operation when the battery has been depleted. methodological choices are subordinate to the purpose
The maximum distance a PHEV can cover without any engine formulation. The ISO standard (ISO 2006b) requires that the
goal and scope must be “clearly stated and consistent with the Lave 2003). For pure electric vehicles charged from the grid,
intended application.” Furthermore, the standard states that the TTW stage involves no emissions at all. Nevertheless, the
the goal “shall unambiguously state the intended application, TTW is still important as different powertrain configurations
the reasons for carrying out the study and the intended audi- have different efficiencies and energy losses, which affect the
ence, i.e. to whom the results of the study are intended to be overall results of the WTW.
communicated” (ISO 2006a, b). Similar recommendations are The vertical flow in Fig. 1 represents the life cycle of the
given in the eLCAr guidelines for the LCA of electric vehicles vehicle itself, which is sometimes referred to as “cradle-to-
(Duce et al. 2013). The latter also points out that a clear goal grave” (Baptista et al. 2011; Messagie et al. 2010; Van Mierlo
definition is essential for a correct later interpretation of the et al. 2003a) or as “vehicle cycle” (Gao and Winfield 2012;
results (Duce et al. 2013). The subsequent scope definition Jaramillo et al. 2009; Lane 2006). In this text, we introduce the
should then be sufficiently well defined to ensure that the term “equipment life cycle”—in line with terminology used in
coverage and the detail of the study are compatible and the ISO standard (ISO 2006a). In addition, this term is more
sufficient to address the stated goal (ISO 2006a). For example, generic, since it is applicable also to studies of powertrain or
it includes specifying the functions of the system being stud- component levels. This way of dividing the complete life
ied, allocation procedures, life cycle impact assessment cycle into two main flows is common in vehicle LCA
(LCIA) methodology, limitations, and technological as well (Baptista et al. 2011; Gao and Winfield 2012; Jaramillo et al.
as geographical system boundaries. The system boundaries 2009; Lane 2006; Messagie et al. 2010; Van Mierlo et al.
also include a time scope, i.e., a time-related coverage of the 2003a). For studies where all processes are included, i.e., both
study. This information is a prerequisite to evaluate the time- the WTW and equipment life cycles, the term “complete
related representativeness of the data used and the temporal LCA” is used hereinafter.
validity of the results. We argue that the time scope is espe- The first processes in the equipment life cycle consist of
cially important in the case of an emerging technology which raw material extraction and material processing. They are
is likely to change over time. Likewise, the scope definition followed by manufacturing, where parts are fabricated and
example of the eLCAr guidelines (Duce et al. 2013) includes a assembled into a vehicle. The subsequent activity is the vehi-
very clear time scope statement. cle operation, which is also where WTW life cycle of the
Several factors determine the system boundaries, including energy carrier and the equipment life cycle are connected.
the intended application of the study and the intended audi- However, some aspects of the operation are solely connected
ence. Surprisingly enough, these goal considerations along to the equipment life cycle, namely service and reparation,
with the time scope are not always fully presented in the shown in Fig. 1 as maintenance. The final stage, the end-of-
scientific literature covered in this review. However, by inves- life, involves dismantling and recovery of certain parts, as well
tigating the actually selected system boundaries and other as shredding, recycling, and disposal of residues.
methodological choices, it is possible to identify implicit
questions and problems typically addressed by a group of 4.3 Uncertainty
studies, and then to match these with relevant target groups.
The assessment of quality and robustness of results in LCA is
4.2 Life cycle scope referred to as uncertainty analysis, which is of particular
relevance for LCA of an emerging technology, such as elec-
The WTW study is one type of LCA of vehicles, which trified vehicles. Thorough review and in-depth discussions
focuses on the life cycle of the energy carrier used to propel about uncertainty in LCA can be found in, for example,
the vehicle, such as liquid fuel or electricity (see Fig. 1). The Heijungs and Huijbregts (2004) or Lloyd and Ries (2007).
WTW life cycle can be subdivided into the well-to-tank The topic is also covered by broad LCA methodology reviews
(WTT) stage, which focuses on the delivery of energy from such as Finnveden et al. (2009).
its source to the storage equipment in the vehicle, and the tank- Heijungs and Huijbregts (2004) argue that different types
to-wheel (TTW) stage, where the energy carrier is used to of uncertainties can be defined at different levels: parameter,
propel the vehicle during operation. The WTT stage involves scenario, and model uncertainty. Parameter uncertainty is
all processes from harnessing a primary energy flow or stock coupled to the fact that parameters may be very difficult to
to different forms of conversion, distribution, and storage of measure with high precision or are inherently variable. It may
energy carriers. The environmental burden of the WTT stage be addressed by incorporating mathematical tools for error
differs a lot, depending on how the energy carrier is produced. propagation from the data input to the life cycle results. For
For example, there is a large difference between electricity vehicles, Boureima et al. (2009) have presented a “range-
produced from hydropower- and coal-fired plants. based” model where representative statistical distributions
In the case of liquid fuels, the TTW stage typically results are calculated from collected vehicle data. However, when it
in both exhaust and evaporative emissions (MacLean and comes to impact assessment, uncertainty estimates for error
Fig. 1 Simplified view of the well-to-wheels and equipment flows (a more detailed view would include, for example, recycling options)
propagation are only provided for one of the established goal statements and time frame. In line with ISO (2006a, b),
impact categories, the global warming potential (Hauschild the comprehensiveness of the goal formulation was examined
et al. 2013). based on three reporting criteria—the reason for carrying out
Scenario uncertainty may be addressed by avoiding pre- the study, the intended application, and the intended audience.
dictions and instead use stylized states. In this case, a “stylized In addition, following from the discussion in section 4.1, the
state” denotes an extreme state (e.g., a state where all electric- declaration of a time scope was selected as a fourth criterion
ity and heat are produced from coal) that is unlikely to mate- for evaluation. All types of statements about these four
rialize, but that could illustrate important technology differ- criteria, including vague or indirect formulations, were
ences in a clear way, as defined by Hillman and Sanden searched for.
(2008). The stylized state can then be regarded as a mean to The result of the evaluation is presented in Table 1. At first
“test” the technology at some system limit and thereby iden- sight, it can be noted that the first two criteria are met by
tify its inherent properties. Another possibility is to use several roughly three quarters of all studies. However, this appearance
explorative scenarios (Finnveden et al. 2009). Model uncer- is a little deceptive, as some studies fulfill one of the first two
tainty may be addressed by having a well-formulated goal and criteria, but not the other. In combination, more than a third of
scope definition, and construct the model accordingly, with all evaluated studies lack either the intended application or the
system boundaries chosen to reach the goal of the study and a reason for conducting the study. Furthermore, only 14 of 79
suitable level of detail in the technical representation of the studies state an intended audience and 20 some kind of time
system (Tillman 2000). frame. This also includes vague statements such as “decision
makers” as the audience (Hackney and de Neufville 2001;
Harto et al. 2010) or “2015 and beyond” (Ma et al. 2012; Van
5 Results of literature analysis
Table 1 Number of studies reporting goals according to ISO (2006a, b)
5.1 Goal and scope formulation and with time scope
Studies reporting the reason for carrying out the study 77 %

5.1.1 Reporting of goals and time frame Studies reporting the intended application 73 %
Studies reporting the intended audience 18 %
In the review of the 79 papers on life cycle assessment of
Studies reporting a time frame for the study 25 %
electric and hybrid vehicles, special attention was given to
Vliet et al. 2011) as the time scope. Eleven studies, reported in to abandon energy produced from fossil fuels in the WTT
peer-reviewed journals or conference literature, have no stage. For all vehicles, especially if propelled with externally
study goal formulated at all. Six of these 11 also lack the time charged electricity (BEVs and PHEVs), GHG emissions de-
scope. pend on the entire WTW life cycle. Consequently, it is com-
It was found that only 1 of 79 references made all the mon to adopt the WTW perspective when the purpose of a
requested information available, Brinkman et al. (2005), by study is to assess the efficiency of different powertrain op-
referring back to an earlier report by GM et al. (2001) in the tions, to assess the climate impacts of different energy carriers,
same series. The purpose is “to help inform public and private and to examine how electricity production influences vehi-
decision makers about advanced propulsion system path- cles’ environmental performance. Comparative WTW studies
ways.” The papers most frequently cited generally account are relevant for vehicles of similar size, weight, and electric
well for both the motive behind and the application of the driving range.
study, but leave out the time frame and intended audience In a large WTW study commissioned by the European
(Samaras and Meisterling 2008a; Notter et al. 2010a). A good Union, externally chargeable electric vehicles in the compact
example of the goal formulation among the reviewed papers class were compared with conventional vehicles with respect
can be found in Kliucininkas et al. (2012), but it lacks the time to GHG emissions based on the standard European driving
scope. Another useful example within LCA of vehicles, but cycle (NEDC) (Edwards et al. 2011a, b). Three generic types
not included in this review as it does not concern any electri- of vehicles with different degrees of electrification were de-
cally propelled vehicle, has been provided by Spielmann and fined: PHEVs, BEVs, and “extended range electric vehicles”
Althaus (2007). It includes an overall goal of the research as (E-REVs). Study data was based on prototypes and develop-
well as three specific questions under study and a time scope ment vehicles with batteries and electric motors in a range of
(Spielmann and Althaus 2007). Also, several stakeholders are different sizes to provide a worst (maximum) case and a best
mentioned in the paper, although no specific intended audi- (minimum) case for each category. Use of liquid fuel was
ence is highlighted. limited to petrol. The PHEV category has limited electric
performance and an all-electric range of 20–40 km, with
5.1.2 Scope of analyzed studies start-up in either pure electric or blended hybrid operation.
The E-REV category refers to vehicles having all traction
In terms of technical scope, most studies model the whole performed by the electric motor using the internal combustion
vehicle, or at least the powertrain, using a similar level of detail. engine only for generating electricity to charge the battery and
A different, but also quite common technical scope, is to focus thus extend the range of the vehicle above the electric range of
on the battery, either in a complete LCA, as placed in a vehicle, 60–80 km. Finally, the BEV category includes vehicles pro-
or considering only the equipment life cycle in a component pelled entirely by externally produced electricity, with a driv-
study. The reason for the extra attention on battery technology ing range span of 120–160 km. These vehicles were compared
is a consensus among all studies over the traction battery being to a reference case defined as a petrol-driven ICEV with
a key component in terms of weight, performance, and dura- tailpipe emissions of 120 g CO2-eq./km. Tailpipe emissions
bility, as pointed out by Frischknecht and Flury (2011). refer to the TTW stage and correspond to 143 g CO2-eq./km
Table 2 shows a compilation of all 79 reviewed papers and for the full WTW (Edwards et al. 2011b).
reports. They are divided into three groups, depending on their Figure 2 displays the results of the EU WTW analysis. The
scope—WTW studies, complete LCAs, and battery LCAs. bars on the right show the different generic-type vehicles based
The table provides an overview of the research field and what on the average EU electricity mix (467 g CO2-eq./kWh in
the different groups of studies cover in terms of vehicle 2008 (Maas 2013)). As can be seen, all electrified vehicles
technology and impact assessment. The functional unit is the have lower emissions than the reference case. The data also
entity to which all data in a study is correlated. With regards to demonstrates a reduction in GHG emissions with an increasing
complete LCA, it is notable that the assumed vehicle lifetime degree of electrification, although different vehicle categories
(in km) differs widely between studies. The strong focus on overlap with regard to minimum and maximum values.
light passenger vehicles and greenhouse gas emissions is also The bars to the left in Fig. 2 show how different means of
evident in Table 2. electricity production give altered WTW GHG emissions for
the BEV category. As expected, they increase with higher
5.2 What can we learn from well-to-wheels studies? electricity GHG intensity, and above around 900 g CO2-eq./
kWh, roughly what oil-fired power production cause accord-
5.2.1 Electricity supply and efficiency ing to the EU study, the BEV vehicle emits more than the
reference vehicle. It is clear that carbon-intensive electricity
Powertrain electrification can potentially reduce GHG emis- production results in strikingly higher emissions than renew-
sions by increasing TTW efficiency and by making it possible able electricity, in this case represented by wind energy.
Table 2 An overview of the scope of publications on LCA of electric and hybrid vehicles from 1998 to the start of 2013. The main share consists of scientific articles (53 titles) and conference papers (13
1874
titles) and the remaining titles are reports and books. Rows in bold show the sum per category and, on the last row, the total sum. “NA” means that no specific vehicle application has been stated
Articles/categories Functional unit Technology Environmental impact assessment
Functional unit and Light duty or Other Externally Global warming/ Energy Emissions 6 or more impact Weighted results
related specification. passenger vehicle chargeable greenhouse inventory or up categories besides other
Summary rows show vehicles types gases (GHG) to 5 impact besides GHG categories
the number of studies per categories and energy
category and, on the last besides GHG
row, in total and energy
Well-to-wheels life cycle 26 24 4 23 24 16 7 1 5

Brinkman et al. (2005) 1 mi x x x x
Daniel and Rosen (2002) 1 mi x x x x
Edwards et al. (2004) 1 km x x x
Edwards et al. (2011a) 1 km x x x x
Elgowainy et al. (2010) 1 mi x x x x
Faria et al. (2012) 1 year (15,000 km/year) x x x x
Hackney and de Neufville (2001) 1 life (12 years) x x x x x
Helland (2009) 1 km x x x
Huo et al. (2009) 1 mi x x x x
Karbowski et al. (2008) 1 km x x x x
Kintner-Meyer et al. (2007) 1 mi x x x x
Kliucininkas et al. (2012) 1 km x x x x
Ou et al. (2010b) 1 MJ of fuel and 1 km x x x x
Prakash et al. (2005) 1 km x x x
Querini et al. (2011) 1 km x x x x x
Querini et al. (2012) 1 km x x x
Raykin et al. (2012) 1 km x x x x
Shen et al. (2012) 1 km x x x x
Sioshansi and Denholm (2009) 1 fleet and year x x x x x
Stephan and Sullivan (2008) 1 year (14,300 mi/year) x x x x
Timmermans et al. (2006) 1 km x x x x x
Van Mierlo et al. (2003a) 1 km x x x x
Van Mierlo et al. (2003b) 1 km x x x x
Van Mierlo et al. (2004) 1 km x x x x x
Van Vliet et al. (2011) 1 km x x x x
Williamson and Emadi (2005) 1 mi x x x
Complete life cycle 39 35 4 32 38 12 17 4 4
Andrews (2006) 1 vehicle (12,000–128,000 km life) x x x x
Table 2 (continued)
Baptista et al. (2009) 1 fleet and year (12 years, 12,800 km/year) x x x x x
Baptista et al. (2011) 1 life (563,250 km) x x x x
Bartolozzi et al. (2013) 1 daily route of 200 km x x x x x
Boureima et al. (2009) 1 life (13.7 years and 230,500 km) x x x x

Boureima et al. (2012) 1 life (13.7 years and 230,500 km) x x x x
Chan et al. (2013) 1 life (1,270,000 km) x x
Cooney et al. (2013) 1 life (12 years and 3,700 mi/year) x x x x
Cuenca et al. (1998) 1 life (130,000 mi) x x x x x
Faria et al. (2013) 1 km (12 years) x x
Gao and Winfield (2012) 1 life (160,000 mi) x x x x
Geyer et al. (2013) 100 km (240,000 km life) x x x x
Harto et al. (2010) 1 gal/mi (152,000 mi life) x x x
Hawkins et al. (2013a) 1 km (150,000 km life) x x x x
Hearron et al. (2011) 1 life (160,000 mi) x x x x
Held and Baumann (2011) 1 life (12 years and 171,600 km) x x x x
Jaramillo et al. (2009) 1 km (240,000 km life) x x x
Kudoh et al. (2007) 1 life (10 years and 100,000 km) x x x
Lane (2006) 1 km x x x x x
Lave et al. (2000) 1 life (13.7 years and 225,300 km) x x x
Ma et al. (2012) 1 km (15 years, 12,000/19,300 km/year) x x x
MacLean and Lave (2003) 1 life (312,000 km) x x x
MacPherson et al. (2012) 1 life 160,000 mi) x x x
Matsuhashi et al. (2000) 1 km (9.5 years and 10,000 km/year) x x x x
McCleese and LaPuma (2002) 1 life (in km for 1–34 years) x x x x
McKenzie and Durango-Cohen (2012) 1 life (26,000 mi/year and 15 years) x x
Messagie et al. (2010) 1 life (13.7 years and 230,500 km) x x x x
Messagie et al. (2011) 1 life (13.7 years and 230,500 km) x x x x x
Messagie et al. (2012) 1 life (13.7 years and 230,500 km) x x x x
Mousazadeh et al. (2009) 1 life (30 years) x x x x
Nonaka and Nakano (2010) 1 life (10 years, 0–210,000 km) x x x
1875
Table 2 (continued)
1876
Notter et al. (2010a) 1 life (150,000 km) x x x x x x

Ou et al. (2010a) 1 km (240,000 km) x x x x
Samaras and Meisterling (2008a) 1 km (240,000 km) x x x
Szczechowicz et al. (2012) 1 km (150,000 km) x x x x
Sharma et al. (2013) 1 life (150,000 km) x x x
Sullivan et al. (2010) 1 life (160,000 mi) x x x x
Tahara et al. (2001) 1 life (10 years and 100,000 km) x x x
Van Mierlo et al. (2009) 1 life (13.7 years and 225,300 km) x x x x
LCA of batteries 14 5 0 14 6 9 4 1 4
Cicconi et al. (2012) 1 battery (10 kWh) NA x x x
Dewulf et al. (2010) 1 kg cathode material NA x x
Dunn et al. (2012) 1 charge (60 km range) x x x x
Gaines et al. (2011) 1 charge (20 km range) NA x x
Majeau-Bettez et al. (2011) 1 battery (50 MJ) NA x x x
Matheys et al. (2007) 1 battery (300 kg/12 kWh/60 km) x x x
Matheys et al. (2008) 1 charge (60 km range) x x x x
Matheys et al. (2009) 1 charge (60 km range) x x x x
Simon and Weil (2013) 1 battery (20 kWh) NA x x
Sullivan and Gaines (2010) 1 battery (1 kg) NA x x x x
Sullivan and Gaines (2012) 1 battery (1 kg) NA x x x x
Sullivan et al. (2011) 1 battery (1 kg and 1 Wh) NA x x
Van den Bossche et al. (2006) 1 charge (60 km range) x x x
Zackrisson et al. (2010) 1 battery (10 kWh) NA x x x
Total 79 64 8 69 68 37 28 6 13
Fig. 2 WTW GHG emissions for different electricity production and recalculated for different types of electricity production (Dones et al.
degrees of electrification. To the right, BEV, E-REV, and PHEV values 2007). The reference vehicle corresponds to the 2012 EU fleet target for
using the EU average electricity mix of 2008 (467 g CO2-eq./kWh), tailpipe emissions of sold cars (European Parliament 2008). For detailed
according to Edwards et al. (2011b). To the left, BEV data has been information, see Electronic Supplementary Material
The reference vehicle in Fig. 2 corresponds to a former fleet impact of different driving styles, traffic situations and
target value suggested by the European Parliament for new powertrain control strategies governed by software. Figure 3
sales in EU of 120 g CO2-eq./km, later rephrased to a man- shows an example of such a WTW study, which examines the
datory fleet value of 130 g CO2-eq./km by 2015 (for the type GHG emissions of a conventional petrol vehicle compared to
approval and per manufacturer) (European Parliament 2008). a HEV and a PHEV operating in different traffic conditions
However, typical average values for family-sized cars on the (Raykin et al. 2012). The study is limited to large family cars
road in Belgium today are above 200 g CO2-eq./km (Messagie with similar specifications. The results for three driving modes
et al. 2010). This difference emphasizes the importance of are shown. City driving refers to slow driving with many starts
selecting a reference object in line with the study goal and time and stops in highly congested traffic. Suburban driving refers
perspective. The formulation of the functional unit is closely to a scenario with less congestion, allowing for higher speeds.
related. It is a reference unit used to quantify all studied Highway driving refers to high speeds and no stops. Results
alternatives in a comparison on equal basis. As shown in show that hybridized powertrains are beneficial in congested
Table 2, almost all WTW results are presented in relation to traffic where the many stops allow for regenerative breaking
the unit “kilometers of driving” (or “miles of driving”) which to recover energy. In addition, at standstill, conventional ve-
suggests all evaluated WTW studies use exactly the same hicle engines are kept idling whereas hybridized vehicles
basis of comparison. Other quantifiable differences, such as automatically turn off (Kobayashi et al. 2009).
seat numbers and load capacity, as well as non-quantifiable
functions, for example comfort, safety aspects, and the role of 5.2.3 Meta-analysis of learnings from well-to-wheels studies
vehicles as status symbols, are then disregarded.
Table 3 shows the results of the qualitative meta-analysis
5.2.2 Driving modes conducted on all included WTW studies. Three topics were
identified—influence of the supplied electricity for charging,
WTW studies can also be used to assess the impacts of degree of electrification, and mode of operation—and it can
different modes of operation. Typically, this could be the be concluded that a vast majority of the WTW studies
Fig. 3 WTW GHG emissions for

three large family vehicles with
different degrees of electrification
in three different traffic situations
according to Raykin et al. (2012).
Electricity is assumed to be
produced from natural gas and all
vehicles use petrol. For detailed
information, see Electronic
Supplementary Material
support that all three are key factors for the outcome of the mapping of vehicles’ environmental impact. This allows com-
results. In addition, none of the reviewed studies point out parison between vehicles of different sizes, as powertrain com-
any of the factors as unimportant. In the case of electricity position is included in the assessment. Complete LCA is also
production, all studies including chargeable vehicles were suitable to assess the balance between the electric part and the
included. conventional part of the powertrain in a PHEV, e.g., different all-
WTW studies link production of various energy carriers to electric range depending on the battery. Figure 4 shows an
different emissions, and then to how efficiently energy car- example of overall lifetime GHG emissions per kilometer for
riers are converted to transportation work within different 13 ICEVs and 3 electrified vehicles in four different segments.
vehicle types. The energy use and efficiency are dependent Data is based on NEDC-certified fuel consumption rates (Van
on the vehicle size along with the degree of electrification and Mierlo et al. 2009) and average EU electricity mix for 2008 for
mode of operation. However, in some cases, WTW studies the BEV. As expected, larger vehicles generally have higher
provide insufficient information. For example, when results emissions. Notable is that HEVs have low emissions within their
are presented for BEVs charged with electricity with low segments and that the small family-sized BEV has the lowest
GHG emissions. WTW studies might give the impression lifetime GHG emissions, including in comparison to the smaller
such vehicles have almost no environmental burden at all. city segment.
This is untrue. Another case is WTW studies used to compare A general rule of thumb may be established from the
climate impacts of vehicles in very diverse segments. In both results of the complete life cycle studies in Table 2—the
cases, it can be argued that a complete LCA is more WTW life cycle dominates with regard to energy use, both
appropriate. for ICEVs and those with electrified powertrains. However,
many studies show the relative importance of the
5.3 What can we learn by including the equipment life cycle? manufacturing stages increases with electrification. This is
due to the reduction of emissions from the WTW life cycle
5.3.1 Complete LCA and the introduction of new components. For example, one
reviewed study of light passenger vehicles indicates that
Including both the WTW life cycle and the equipment life cycle GHG emissions of BEVs can come in approximately equal
as part of a complete LCA can provide a more comprehensive shares from the WTW life cycle of the energy carrier and the
equipment life cycle of the vehicle (Ma et al. 2012). More
specifically, this result refers to a BEV driven in urban
Table 3 Summary of a qualitative meta-analysis conducted on all in-
cluded WTW studies. For detailed information, see Electronic Supple- conditions without load and charged with a projected aver-
mentary Material age grid mix in the UK (450 g CO2-eq./kWh). But the
WTW share of total GHG emissions dominates as soon as
Share of studies, when covering the topic, which report that the…
more fossil-intense electricity is considered or the driving
… supplied electricity for charging is a key factor for the results 87 % scenario is set to highway or suburban because then energy
… degree of electrification is a key factor for the results 78 % consumption per driven kilometer increases. Another study
… mode of operation is a key factor for the results 100 % shows the equilibrium point between the WTW and equip-
ment life cycles varies in different countries because of
Fig. 4 Passenger cars divided into typical segments (Belgian Ecoscore on statistical data from the Belgian vehicle registration database. Fuel
classification) showing the general trend in CO2-emissions for the com- consumption is based on NEDC data. The Nissan Leaf BEV has been
plete life cycle divided into WTT, TTW, and equipment life cycle based assumed to be charged with EU-mix electricity. For detailed information,
on the CLEVER study (Van Mierlo et al. 2009). An average vehicle see Electronic Supplementary Material
lifetime of 230,500 km corresponding to 13.7 years has been used, based
different electricity mixes, but that BEVs and PHEVs always European UCTE mix of 596 g CO2-eq./kWh), and combustion
increase their benefits compared to ICEVs, the longer they are of diesel in transportation (Notter et al. 2010b).
driven during their lifetime (Nonaka and Nakano 2010). Slightly higher values are presented in some other studies.
Samaras and Meisterling (2008a) find that for PHEVs in same
5.3.2 Energy demand of material production and equipment segment with all-electric ranges of 30 to 90 km, the values
manufacturing span from 113 to 136 GJ per vehicle. This is coupled to GHG
emissions of 62–73 g CO2-eq./km when recalculated with a
Obviously, a main element in the equipment life cycle of 150,000 km lifetime for comparison (240,000 km was used in
electrified vehicles is the energy necessary for the first two the study). However, out of this, the manufacturing of the base
stages: material production and manufacturing of parts. Results vehicle represents as much as 102 GJ. Also, the main share of
for vehicles in the compact class with present technology and energy is electricity based on a relatively carbon-intensive US
manufacturing procedures can be found in, for example, Notter average grid mix (Samaras and Meisterling 2008b).
et al. (2010a). This paper presents the cumulative energy Some of the highest values for energy demand in equipment
demand and GHG emissions for one BEV and one ICEV manufacturing has been shown by Hawkins et al. (2013a, b),
version of the same type of car, comparable to a Volkswagen reporting 72–81 g CO2-eq./km for a compact-sized BEV
Golf in size and power. They find that manufacturing of the (150,000 km lifetime). Battery manufacturing, based on a study
BEV demands around 120 GJ compared to 94 GJ for the ICEV by Majeau-Bettez et al. (2011), is pointed out as an important
(Notter et al. 2010b). Assuming, as in the study, a 150,000 km explanation. Actually, Dunn et al. (2012) have investigated the
lifetime gives 46 and 35 g CO2-eq./km, respectively, in terms difference between the values reported by Majeau-Bettez et al.
of GHG emissions. For the BEV, the base vehicle (i.e., exclud- (2011) and Notter et al. (2010a), and observed that the energy
ing the powertrain) accounts for 54 % of these emissions, the used to manufacture specific battery subcomponents is more than
lithium-ion battery for 26 %, and the remainder of electric 1 order of magnitude larger in the study by Majeau-Bettez et al.
powertrain for 20 %. The energy use in the production stages In trying to explain the cause, Dunn et al. (2012) found that
derives from several different types of processes, such as use of studies which use a more detailed “process level” approach to the
natural gas in industrial furnace, use of electricity (in this case life cycle inventory, as Notter el al., produce much lower values
for equipment life cycle of the battery, compared to a higher level Table 5 Summary of a qualitative meta-analysis conducted on all equip-
ment life cycle studies, i.e., sorted under “complete life cycle” in Table 2.
“top-down” approach used by Majeau-Bettez et al. Finally, Dunn
For detailed information, see Electronic Supplementary Material
et al. (2012) argue that the process level approach is more
accurate and presents results similar to those of Notter et al. for Share of studies, when covering the topic, which report that the…
the overall battery manufacturing energy demand.
… WTW stage dominates over equipment life cycle in terms of 100 %
energy
5.3.3 Functional unit … impact of the equipment life cycle increases with electrification 85 %
… battery is the most contributing component of the powertrain 95 %
In general, the functional unit of complete LCAs is defined as a
“vehicle life” specified by a total number of driven kilometers, as
shown by Table 2. It can be observed that assumed life lengths most contributing component of the powertrain. All three state-
vary largely, both in terms of total driving distance and years of ments are clearly supported by the literature which covers the
operation. One reason for this is that different segments are topic. As regards the impact of the equipment life cycle, clear
considered. However, a key reason for conducting a complete evidence has not been found in some cases, neither for an
LCA instead of a WTW study is to effect comparison between increase nor a decrease. However, one study finds that all impacts
different sized vehicles. A common total drive distance is often decrease with electrification, for a non-road agricultural vehicle
stipulated, although in reality there might be differences between (Mousazadeh et al. 2009). Andrews (2006) is the only study
study objects. One way to approach this is to use some type of which reports that the “intelligent power unit” contributes more
fleet average, as in Fig. 4. Nevertheless, the assumptions made than the battery to the overall environmental impact.
for the total amount of kilometers driven are very important to the By adding the equipment and WTW life cycles, a more
outcome of the study and the choice of functional unit in com- complete assessment is achieved. This is necessary when vehicles
plete LCA calls for extra attention. Several reviewed studies with similar WTW performance but in different segments, or with
which include the equipment life cycle have “1 km” or some different degrees of equipment complexity, are compared. As
other trip distance as the selected functional unit. The calculated long as fossil fuels are used for electricity production and propel-
contribution to the environmental impact of the equipment will ling ICEVs, the WTW stage will play a dominating role for the
vary with the assumption for lifetime driven distance. As an emission of GHG. Keys to improvement of environmental per-
example of how this can affect results, the numerical results for formance will then be to minimize the demand for fossil fuels in
GHG emissions previously presented in section 5.3.2, with a the WTT stage and to increase efficiency in the TTW stage. The
150,000-km stipulated distance, has been summarized in Table 4. addition of the equipment life cycle provides information about
It is also shown how the results change if instead 250,000 km is the roles of the different components and the effects of changes in
assumed. As it can be observed, when assuming a short the powertrain. It can clearly be observed that GHG intensity of
lifetime driven distance, the impact of the equipment life cycle the equipment manufacturing is coupled to the amount of fossil
becomes higher in the LCA end results. energy present in both the electricity supply as well as in industrial
processes. The manufacturing of the battery, and the preceding
5.3.4 Meta-analysis of learnings from equipment life cycle material production, are main drivers of energy use in production
studies of electrified vehicles. Still, production of other electric
powertrain components also demands energy with notable con-
The qualitative analysis carried out on all complete LCA studies tributions to GHG emissions. But, regarding the meta-analysis
is presented in Table 5. It shows the share of studies that report result for the most contributing component, it can be noted that
the WTW stage to dominate over equipment life cycle of elec- Andrews (2006) takes more environmental aspects into consid-
trified vehicles in terms of energy, the impact of the equipment eration than emissions of GHG. A more comprehensive descrip-
life cycle to increase with electrification, and the battery as the tion of the environmental performance of electrified vehicles thus
requires the scope of environmental impact to be broadened.
Table 4 Sensitivity of equipment life cycle GHG emissions to the 5.4 What can we learn from a broader impact assessment?
lifetime driven distance, when presented per kilometer. For detailed
information, see Electronic Supplementary Material
5.4.1 General description of LCIA
Original study 150,000 km 250,000 km
So far, we have mainly discussed emissions of GHG connected
Notter et al. (2010a) 46 g CO2-eq./km 28 g CO2-eq./km
to the use of energy in operation and manufacturing. However,
Samaras and Meisterling 62–73 g CO2-eq./km 37–44 g CO2-eq./km
there are other resources and emissions which are relevant. For a
(2008a)
Hawkins et al. (2013b) 72–81 g CO2-eq./km 43–49 g CO2-eq./km life cycle assessment to be regarded as extensive and complete, it
should cover impacts on three important areas of protection:
natural environment, natural resources, and human health (ISO and harm both health and growing crops. Eutrophication
2006a). potential (EP) covers the effect of macronutrients in soil and
LCA results can be presented in different formats. For water (including NOx). Acidification potential (AP) indicates
example, the inventory format (detailed resource use and the potential environmental impact of acidifying substances
emissions) is useful when the target audience is well informed such as NOx and sulfur oxides (SOx).
about the substances emitted from the life cycle in focus. This Figure 5 shows examples of LCA results presented as
is the case in the automotive industry with regulated tailpipe LCIA indicators for eutrophication and acidification from
emissions additional to carbon dioxide—carbon monoxide two different studies, both based on the same Belgian
(CO), unburned hydrocarbons (HC/VOC), nitrogen oxides vehicle database as those shown in Fig. 4, but with the
(NOx), and particulate matter (PM). There are also numerous Belgian electricity mix (studies with a common underlying
other substance flows, including resources and non-regulated dataset were chosen in order to be able to combine them)
emissions, and this is why LCIA is often conducted. LCIA (Boureima et al. 2012; Messagie et al. 2010). A BEV and
aggregates emissions contributing to the same type of envi- a HEV in the small family-size segment are compared
ronmental effect into one indicator per impact category, e.g., with two ICEV references. As can be seen, the impact is
climate change, eutrophication, and human toxicity, and like- lowest for the fully electric vehicle in both impact cate-
wise for resource use, e.g., land use and resource depletion. By gories, just as in the case of GHG emissions in Fig. 4.
means of weighting, further aggregation can be achieved all The explanation is a covariance for all categories relating
the way to one single number: a one-dimensional measure of to airborne pollutants, mainly caused by combustion in the
environmental impact. However, whatever weighting method vehicle or at a power plant. Consequently, results for
is used, it will include a large number of contested value externally chargeable vehicles in any of these categories
judgments. Therefore, LCIA is often stopped at characteriza- are strongly dependent on the pollution status of the
tion, where inventory results are aggregated into a limited electricity production and the overall efficiency of the
number of impact categories using models based on natural WTW life cycle.
science.
5.4.3 Resource use
5.4.2 Airborne pollutants
Indicators discussed so far relate to emissions of pollutants.
A typical impact category is the frequently shown global However, LCA aspires to include resource use. Use of
warming potential (GWP), reporting all GHGs as CO2-equiv- abiotic resources may be aggregated into one indicator
alents. Another is photo-oxidant creation potential (POCP), for abiotic resource depletion potential (ADP), often
which indicates how local air pollutants (NOx and unburned expressed in terms of antimony equivalents (kg Sb-eq.). It
hydrocarbons) build up smog under the influence of sunlight covers non-living resources such as metals and oil (Guinée
Fig. 5 Results for eutrophication (left) and acidification (right) im- and a Euro 4 emission standard engine. The reason that HEV have
pact categories in an LCA of family vehicles in Belgium (Messagie slightly higher values for acidification than the petrol ICEV is that the
et al. 2010; Boureima et al. 2012). The BEV is equipped with a production of nickel for the NiMH battery emits acidifying sub-
lithium ion battery assumed to be charged with the Belgian electricity stances. ICEV references for petrol and diesel are both Euro 5
mix for 2007 (roughly half nuclear, one third fossil, and one sixth standard. For detailed information, see Electronic Supplementary
imported energy) (Dones et al. 2007). The HEV has a NiMH battery Material
et al. 2002). In Notter et al. (2010a), ADP was presented significantly higher impact from BEVs than ICEVs with
for two different versions of a vehicle in the compact class: respect to toxicity. The largest impact comes from the equip-
an ICEV and a BEV. According to the study, total results ment cycle of the non-powertrain parts (base vehicle) for both
were around 260 kg Sb-eq./vehicle life (26 % equipment the BEV and the ICEVs. But in the case of the BEV, the
cycle and 74 % WTW cycle) for the ICEV and 190 kg Sb- components specific to the electric powertrain (Li-ion
eq./vehicle life (41 % equipment cycle and 59 % WTW battery, electric motor and power electronics) together cause
cycle) for the BEV. The BEV uses up more metal resources close to half of the overall impact (44 % in this specific case).
in its equipment cycle than the ICEV, while the latter uses In the ICEVs, the small electric starter motor and catalytic
more fossil energy. However, underlying ADP characteri- converters in the conventional propulsion system have an
zation factors used in this example are based on extraction important impact.
rates now 10–15 years old (Guinée et al. 2002; Schneider Mining processes are an important explanation for HTP
et al. 2011). As a consequence, high scores are given for results in Fig. 6. Excavation is required for metal production
fossil energy depletion in comparison to copper, nickel, as well as nuclear and fossil electricity. Material processing is
lithium, and rare earth metals relevant for electric and especially energy intensive, and leakage from the waste dis-
hybrid vehicles. More recent, frequently used LCIA re- posal of mining spoils of nuclear and hard coal energy con-
source use indicators, for example ReCiPe2008, would tributes to toxicity (Dones et al. 2007). High use of copper and
have placed more weight on copper and nickel nickel, in batteries and electric motors, and copper and gold, in
(Goedkoop et al. 2012). Also, materials which currently power electronics, increase disposal of mine tailings contain-
play a key role in vehicle electrification, such as lithium ing sulfides (Classen et al. 2009). Consequently, improved
and rare earth metals, are not covered by any of the easily waste handling in the mining industry and a less coal-
available LCIA methods (Goedkoop et al. 2012; Goedkoop dependent energy mix could dramatically change these results
and Spriensma 2001; Jolliet et al. 2003). and decrease the environmental load of BEVs.
Toxicity impact categories (human toxicity and various
5.4.4 Toxicity and mining types of ecological toxicity) are complicated (Finnveden
et al. 2009) and relate to many different substances and their
Local emissions of toxic substances from the manufacturing inherent toxicity, along with potentials to which humans and
stages are an environmental aspect brought up by Hawkins ecosystems are exposed in a manner that cause adverse effects
et al. (2013a) as a possible disadvantage of electric powertrains, (Huijbregts et al. 2000). HTP describes environmental persis-
and especially in connection to battery production. Few other tence and accumulation in the food chain. Data is derived from
studies in Table 2 include the human toxicity potential (HTP), test data from humans or laboratory animals, in which inter-
and to broaden the analysis of the topic, Fig. 6 presents our own species conversion factors are assumed. Such dependence on
results (Messagie 2013) for HTP in units of 1,4-dichloroben- various background conditions and the need for very large
zene (DCB) equivalents, a well-known pesticide. Our results data sets in assessments generally couple this impact category
confirm the earlier work of Hawkins et al. (2013a) and indicate to a high degree of uncertainty (Finnveden et al. 2009).
Fig. 6 Results for human toxicity

potential comparing compact
class vehicles for different
powertrain options (Messagie
2013). For calculation of WTW
life cycle values for the BEV, a
vehicle life distance of
209,470 km charged with 2011
Belgian electricity mix has been
assumed. All petrol and diesel are
Euro 5 standard. For detailed
information, see Electronic
Supplementary Material
However, the results in Fig. 6 can be put in perspective. Gaines et al. 2011; Li et al. 2013; Sullivan et al. 2011).
Human toxicity is not the only contributor to damage to However, only in the case of lead acid batteries are highly
human health (Goedkoop et al. 2012): global warming, par- efficient recycling processes currently in practice. For newer
ticulate matter formation, photochemical oxidant formation, technologies, this means an entirely new and large-scale
ozone depletion, and ionizing radiation also contribute. Using recycling industry must be put in place if these results are to
for example ReCiPe2008 (Goedkoop et al. 2012), climate be realized (National Research Council 2013). In 2005 still,
change as a consequence of global warming contributes most the recycling rates of important included specialty metals such
to human health damage caused by vehicles. This is followed as rare earths and lithium were less than 1 % globally.
by human toxicity and effects of particulate matter. Calculated Additionally, battery technology is progressing very rapid-
this way, the petrol and diesel vehicles in Fig. 6 thus have a ly and data for environmental performance outdates quickly.
larger impact on human health than the BEV. In LCA studies conducted around 2005, it was common to
assume one or even two battery replacements over an average
5.4.5 Weighted results for batteries and recycling vehicle lifetime. Today it is often argued that the battery will
last as long as the vehicle (Zackrisson et al. 2010). Also,
So far, mainly studies modeling the entire vehicle have been critical steps in manufacturing have been improved.
described. As pointed out earlier, it is quite common to focus Furthermore, technology development changes which battery
on the battery. Figure 7 shows LCA results for different types are considered relevant and included in the study, which
battery types for a fully electric compact car aggregated to a can be observed in the reviewed literature.
single score according to the panel-based weighting system, Finally, as noted above, weighting methods are based on
Eco-indicator’99 (Van den Bossche et al. 2006). Different value judgments and can be very different depending on the
impact categories are weighted based on societal values and stakeholder. For this reason, the ISO standard (ISO 2006b)
summed up to analyze the trade-off between benefits in sev- recommends that LCA studies which use single scoring in-
eral impact categories and drawbacks in others. It shows that clude several different weighting factors and weighting
high-energy density and low system losses of lithium-ion and methods, and that sensitivity analysis is conducted to assess
sodium-nickel chloride technologies are rewarded with low the consequences of the LCIA results of different value-
scores. The difference between “with” and “without choices.
recycling” shows that modeling assumptions about the
recycling are very important to the results for all battery types. 5.4.6 Meta-analysis of learnings from a broader LCIA
High collection rates and that almost all material is recovered
to virgin quality have been assumed (Van den Bossche et al. The qualitative meta-analysis conducted on studies with
2006). The potential for such recycling of lithium-ion batte- broader LCIA scope than GHG emissions and energy de-
ries, which is both energy efficient and has high recovery rate, mand, with results shown in Table 6, demonstrates two main
has been investigated in several papers (Dunn et al. 2012; observations, i.e., that few studies assess resource depletion
Fig. 7 Eco-indicator’99 results with and without highly efficient WTW stage corresponds to the amount of European mix electricity
recycling for the environmental score of different battery types—all needed to cover internal losses and carry the weight of the battery itself
dimensioned to provide 60 km range at an 80 % depth of discharge for (Van den Bossche et al. 2006). For detailed information, see Electronic
an 888 kg electric car (excluding the weight of the battery) and a vehicle Supplementary Material
life distance of 180 000 km with 3,000 charge–discharge cycles. The
Table 6 Summary of a qualitative meta-analysis conducted on all equip- may vary to a large extent, depending on the goal and scope
ment life cycle studies and battery component LCA studies, i.e., sorted
definition” (ISO 2006a). However, as shown, most LCA
under “complete life cycle” or “LCA of batteries” in Table 2. For detailed
information, see Electronic Supplementary Material studies in Table 2 do not have comprehensive purpose decla-
ration. The motive for key assumptions and limitations there-
Share of studies which report… by becomes non-transparent, and general conclusions might
… resource use of the equipment life cycle as a part of the 13 %
appear to be drawn without foundation. Our impression is that
assessment the discussion is then easily caught up in the details of numer-
… that recycling is a key factor for the result, if the topic is 100 % ical results and, as a consequence, important lessons from the
covered research field are overshadowed by an appearance of complexity
and diverging outcome. Also, without a clearly stated and moti-
vated goal, it becomes difficult to critically evaluate the appro-
and that recycling is a key factor for the environmental impact. priateness of the selected scope and data sets. As a solution, we
It included all studies in Table 2 considering the equipment argue that a clear definition of both goal and scope has to be
life cycle, both on component and vehicle level, namely both presented in all studies, to provide context and basis for conclu-
complete vehicle LCAs and battery LCAs. As regards sions (ISO 2006a). For example, the functional unit shapes the
recycling, those that present results for different rates of format of the end results and is decisive to their interpretation. It
recycling in the end-of-life scenarios were deemed to cover often includes assumptions about the lifetime driven kilometers
the topic. Only seven studies were found to investigate re- of the studied vehicles. Both low and high estimates can be valid,
source use. Three (Bartolozzi et al. 2013; Notter et al. 2010a; and thus it is not enough to solely state the selected functional
Szczechowicz et al. 2012) use CML’s (Guinée et al. 2002) unit. A clear and thorough motivation is required, directly linked
abiotic resource depletion category, two (Hawkins et al. to the purpose of the study.
2013a; Majeau-Bettez et al. 2011) use ReCiPe2008 Another important methodological aspect is time. The ma-
(Goedkoop et al. 2012), one (Andrews 2006) uses jority of all reviewed studies do not report the time scope, a
Ecoindicator’99 (Goedkoop and Spriensma 2001), and one crucial motive for the selection of data and significant for the
(Lave et al. 2000) presents and discusses inventory results. universality of the conclusions. Additionally, the review shows
Impact assessment beyond GHG can be conducted to very that most assessments focus on the performance of today’s
different degrees, from a couple of selected additional emis- electric vehicle technology used in today’s electricity produc-
sions in inventory format to more than ten different aggregated tion system, although both vehicle technology and electricity
impact categories or, even further, to a weighted single score production can be expected to have changed considerably
result. Different categories provide information for different before electric vehicle volumes become comparable to those
stakeholders, i.e., the intended audience is very important of ICEVs. Nonetheless, many studies consider the sensitivity of
when selecting which categories to include in a study. their results to different electricity production mixes in the
However, with regard to emissions of airborne pollutants, background energy system, both geographically and methodo-
the value for GHG is generally a good overall indicator for logically (average/marginal). But such sensitivity analysis is not
all related impact categories. often coupled to a discussion about improvements or develop-
In contrast, impact categories related to resource extraction, ment over time. Sometimes, improved component design is
such as abiotic resource depletion and human toxicity, provide subject to sensitivity analysis, for example increased battery
new information. But, such impact categories are complicated, life length, but benefits of scale in material processing and
highly uncertain, and do not always consider all relevant manufacturing are rarely explored.
aspects, for example rare earth metals in the case of ADP. As an emerging technology, electric propulsion of road
For a more thorough evaluation of all different LCIA methods vehicles cannot be expected to yet have reached the level of
discussed in this paper, please see Hauschild et al. (2013). maturity or scale of production for which it shows potential
(Sandén 2008). It can then be argued it is equally important to
examine the environmental performance of future states, in
6 Learnings and conclusions which the technology has reached its full potential, as the
current state of development (Hillman and Sanden 2008).
6.1 Methodological learnings But, the use of future scenarios introduces uncertainty. As a
solution, different stylized scenarios can be used to reflect
The numerical results presented by any LCA study are partic- relevant options for technical and societal change. Such sce-
ular to the given context and study format. At the same time, narios must not likely become reality. Instead, they are select-
LCA can be used to address many different questions using ed to show inherent properties of the technology. In such a
varying technical and methodological scope. The ISO stan- setup, LCA can be regarded as a learning tool for strategic
dard states that “the depth of detail and time frame of an LCA assessments of a technology, with the main aim of identifying
key improvement areas and potential showstoppers in order to charging capability, such as BEVs and PHEVs, can reach their
guide development towards a desired future. full potential in mitigating global warming. Surprisingly, few
Conversely, if the aim is to explore technology in present studies make this a main conclusion and clearly communicate
time, there are still many aspects of uncertainty to deal with. the obvious message that environmental benefits from large-
Hawkins et al. (2012) promote more detailed LCIs, which is a scale deployment of electric vehicles is strongly dependent on
part solution. But data may be both inherently variable and parallel improvements of the background energy system to key
very difficult to obtain with high precision; for example in the stakeholders such as policy makers, the automotive and power
configuration of a powertrain or the technical design of a industries, as well as the general public as customers.
specific component. Parameter uncertainty analysis using In addition, WTW studies show that driving behavior and
mathematical error propagation methods can then be used, if traffic situation is important. Electrified powertrains are most
sufficient amount of data to provide statistical distributions is beneficial in city traffic, with stop–start driving and low speed,
available. Several of the reviewed references conduct param- being a perfect match with built-in reduction of local tailpipe
eter uncertainty analysis. However, some parameters are then emissions and limited range. Moreover, complete LCA stud-
not covered, for example, most LCIA characterizations fac- ies point out the increased importance of the manufacturing
tors. There are also methodological uncertainties in selecting stage, and that the benefits of electric propulsion increase with
which technologies to assess, how to draw system boundaries, the lifetime driven distance. As batteries feature partly
and when making necessary simplifications and assumptions. calendar-dependent aging, this indicates it is most beneficial
A well-formulated goal and scope definition decreases such to make use of electric powertrains in vehicles that are inten-
model uncertainties, but cannot remove them. High recycling sively used. This conclusion is of particular importance to
rates are an example, and they are assumed although vehicle policy design, as well as strategies in the automotive sector,
end-of-life generally is not well mapped and effective e.g., which market sectors benefit most from incentives and
recycling of every material, to high quality products, is far investments, and how to balance the size of the electric and
from being achieved (Graedel et al. 2011). For these reasons, ICE powertrains in PHEV designs.
we find it important to always test the robustness of results in On the whole, studies providing more extensive impact
any study and to take this into account when giving recom- assessment confirm the important role of electricity produc-
mendations. With so many uncertainties, it becomes irrelevant tion. WTW electricity is generally the dominating factor in
to strive for very high precision in results. Instead, robust impact categories relating to airborne emissions. However,
lessons which hold for sensitivity analysis may be sought. with regard to resource use and toxicity issues, policy makers
Nearly all studies in Table 2 use ready-made LCIA methods. and the automotive industry ought to be aware that aspects
But few elaborate on the robustness and uncertainties of differ- related to mining can become an area with significant adverse
ent LCIA methods or how they relate to each other. In this impacts on the environmental performance of electric vehicles
context, it is important to point out that impact categories in the future. Efforts made to improve these practices and
relating to vehicle tailpipe emissions, such as global warming, minimize leakage of toxic substances from mine tailings are
are both well-established (Hauschild et al. 2013) and co-vary- beneficial for hybrid and electric vehicles. A geopolitical
ing. Resource-related impact categories are more complex. For dimension is thereby linked to LCA study recommendations
abiotic resource depletion, improvements in LCIA characteri- because mining activities are concentrated to certain regions
zation methods are needed (Hauschild et al. 2013), as there are of the world.
data gaps regarding several metals and dependency on old data. This is true also for resource availability and efficiency.
In the case of human toxicity, there are many uncertainties Notably, the LCIA of resources in its current form accentuates
related to data availability and aggregation procedure. fossil energy and does not reveal constraints on minerals such
A final methodological observation made from Table 2 is as lithium or rare earth metals, which may become critical to
the dominance of studies concerning cars for individual trans- large-scale deployment of electric and hybrid vehicles in the
portation. Other vehicle types, such as heavy duty trucks and future. A conclusion relevant to policy makers, the automotive
buses, remain to be explored. industry, and the recycling industry is that establishing a
proper recycling system for lithium batteries and other com-
6.2 Lessons for stakeholders ponents is yet another key to success.
Lastly, the frequent lack of time perspective in existing LCA
WTW studies demonstrate that greenhouse gas emissions from studies should be noted by all stakeholders and in particular
vehicles in general reduce as electrification of the powertrain policy makers. Improvements in production processes, both
increases, but the main lesson is that this improvement is due to progress in manufacturing technology and benefits of
heavily dependent on the fossil content of the electricity mix. scale, may decrease the future environmental load of electric
Thus, if and only if electricity production becomes free of fossil powertrains significantly in different life cycle stages. The
carbon on a global scale, electrified vehicles with external background energy system will also continue to change.
6.3 Key conclusions Doctor of Philosophy, Imperial College of Science, Technology

and Medicine at University of London, London, UK
Baptista P, Ribau J, Bravo J, Silva C, Adcock P, Kells A (2011) Fuel cell
This review shows that many LCA studies of electric and hybrid taxi life cycle analysis. Energy Pol 39(9):4683–4691
hybrid vehicles have been conducted. The discussion reveals Baptista P, Silva C, Gonçalves G, Farias T (2009) Full life cycle analysis
that the answers provided by any study depend on both tech- of market penetration of electricity based vehicles. World Electr Veh
3(1):1–6
nical and methodological scope, indicating that a clearly stated
Bartolozzi I, Rizzi F, Frey M (2013) Comparison between hydrogen and
purpose is crucial. However, comprehensive goal formulation electric vehicles by life cycle assessment: a case study in Tuscany,
is very often left out in current studies. The time scopes of the Italy. Appl Energy 101:103–111
assessments are also often omitted. This makes it difficult to Boureima F, Messagie M, Sergeant N, Matheys J, Mierlo J. Van, Vos M.
De, Caevel BD, Turcksin L, Macharis C (2012) Environmental
determine the temporal validity of results and conclusions. In
assessment of different vehicle technologies and fuels. In:
addition, electric powertrain technology is not fully developed Longhurst JWS, Brebbia CA (eds) Urban transport XVII, Urban
and emerging, while most studies consider current technology Transport and the Environment in the 21st Century, 15–17 May
used in today’s electricity production system. Consequently, 2012. WIT Transactions on The Built Environment. WIT Press,
pp 15–25
there is a lack of future time perspective, for example
Boureima FS, Messagie M, Matheys J, Wynen V, Sergeant N, Van Mierlo
concerning advances in material processing, manufacturing J, De Vos M, De Caevel B (2009) Comparative LCA of electric,
of parts, and changes in electricity production. In a final remark hybrid, LPG and gasoline cars in Belgian context. World Electr Veh
on methodology, it can be observed that environmental impact 3(1):1–8
Brandão M, Heath G, Cooper J (2012) What can meta-analyses tell us
assessment coupled to obtaining resources is an area with a
about the reliability of life cycle assessment for decision support? J
lack of knowledge and a need for more research. Ind Ecol 16(S1):S3–S7
As regards assessment results, this knowledge gap is a Brinkman N, Wang M, Weber T, Thomas Darlington (2005) Well-to-
cause of uncertainty suggesting that processes related to re- wheels analysis of advanced fuel/vehicle systems—a North
source handling might become targeted for improvements. In American study of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and
criteria pollutant emission. May 1, 2005. General Motors
mining, leakage of substances from mine tailings poses a risk Corporation and Argonne National Laboratory, USA
for toxic emissions. Also, recycling may avoid future con- Chan CC (2007) The state of the art of electric, hybrid, and fuel cell
straints on key resources and reduce production energy de- vehicles. Proc IEEE 95(4):704–718
mand, but the realization of efficient recycling of electrified Chan S, Miranda-Moreno LF, Alam A, Hatzopoulou M (2013)
Assessing the impact of bus technology on greenhouse gas emis-
vehicles remains as a future challenge. Finally, the most sions along a major corridor: a lifecycle analysis. Transp Res Part D
obvious conclusion is that electricity production is the main 20:7–11
cause of environmental impact for externally chargeable ve- Cicconi P, Landi D, Morbidoni A, Germani M (2012) Feasibility analysis
hicles. All studies can agree on one crucial message—only if of second life applications for Li-ion cells used in electric powertrain
using environmental indicators. In: ENERGYCON 2012, IEEE
the global electricity production is made clean and essentially International Energy Conference & Exibition, Florence, Italy, 9–12
free from emissions of fossil carbon, these vehicles can reach September 2012. pp 985–990
their full potential in mitigating global warming. Classen M, Althaus H-J, Blaser S, Scharnhorst W, Tuchschmid M,
Jungbluth N, Emmenegger MF (2009) Life cycle inventories of
metals. March, 2009: Ecoinvent report No. 10. Swiss Centre for
Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Mats Wiliander Life Cycle Inventories, Dübendorf. (Data v2.1)
and Steven Sarasini for their comments on previous versions of the text, Cooney G, Hawkins TR, Marriott J (2013) Life cycle assessment of diesel
Rickard Arvidsson for details about the toxicity issue, and Duncan and electric public transportation buses. J Ind Ecol. doi:10.1111/jiec.
Kushnir for specifics about lithium-ion battery manufacturing. We ex- 12024
press our gratitude to Björn Sandén for planting valuable ideas and for his Corrigan DA, Masias A (2011) Batteries for electric and hybrid electric
comments on overall scope and previous text versions. Finally, we thank vehicles. In: Reddy TB (ed) Linden’s handbook of batteries, 4th edn.
all anonymous reviewers for valuable observations. McGraw Hill, New York
Cuenca R, Formento J, Gaines L, Marr B, Santini D, Wang M, Adelman
S, Kline D, Mark J, Ohi J, Rau N, Freeman S, Humphreys K, Placet
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative M (1998) Total energy cycle assessment of electric and conventional
Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and vehicles: an energy and environmental analysis. ANL, NREL,
reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the PNNL report. vol 1. Argonne National Laboratory, National
source are credited. Renewable Energy Laboratory and Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory for U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, USA. (Tecnical report
ANL/ES/RP—96387-Vol.1). doi:10.2172/627823
References Daniel JJ, Rosen MA (2002) Exergetic environmental assessment of life
cycle emissions for various automobiles and fuels. Exergy Int J 2(4):
283–294
Althaus H-J (2012) Modern individual mobility. Int J Life Cycle Assess Dewulf J, Van der Vorst G, Denturck K, Van Langenhove H, Ghyoot W,
17(3):267–269 Tytgat J, Vandeputte K (2010) Recycling rechargeable lithium ion
Andrews SD (2006) Life cycle assessment and the design of ultra-low batteries: critical analysis of natural resource savings. Resour
and zero emission vehicles in the UK. Thesis for the degree of Conserv Recycl 54(4):229–234
Dones R, Bauer C, Bollinger R, Burger B, Heck T, Röder A, GM, ANL, BP, ExxonMobile, Shell (2001) Well-to-wheel energy use and
Emmenegger M, Frischknecht R, Jungbluth N, Tuchschmid M greenhouse gas emissions of advanced fuel/vehicle systems—North
(2007) Life cycle inventories of energy systems: results for current American analysis—executive summary report. vol 1. 2001.
systems in Switzerland and other UCTE countries. 2007: Ecoinvent General Motors Corporation (GM) and Argonne National
report No. 5. Swiss Centre for Life Cycle Inventories. (Data v2.0) Laboratory (ANL), USA. (Conducted by ANL’s Center for
Duce AD, Egede P, Öhlschläger G, Dettmer T, Althaus H-J, Bütler T, Transportation Research and commissioned by GM with Dr.
Szczechowicz E (2013) eLCAr—guidelines for the LCA of electric James P. Wallace III, Wallace & Associates, as Program manager.)
vehicles. January 31, 2013: Proj.no. 285571. (Report from project Goedkoop M, Spriensma R (2001) The Eco-indicator 99: a damage
“E-Mobility Life Cycle Assessment Recommendations”, funded oriented method for life cycle assessment—methodology report.
within the European Union Seventh Framework Programme— June 22, 2001: nr 1999/36A. PRé Consultants B.V., Amersfoort,
FP7/2007-2013) The Netherlands
Dunn JB, Gaines L, Sullivan J, Wang MQ (2012) Impact of recycling on Goedkoop MJ, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, De Schryver A, Struijs J, Van
cradle-to-gate energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of Zelm R (2012) ReCiPe 2008, A life cycle impact assessment method
automotive lithium-ion batteries. Environ Sci Technol 46(22): which comprises harmonised category indicators at the midpoint
12704–12710 and the endpoint level—Report I: characterisation. First (revised)
Edwards R, Larivé J-F, Beziat J-C (2011a) Well-to-wheels analysis of edn. VROM, The Netherlands
future automotive and powertrains in the European context—well- Graedel TE, Allwood J, Birat J-P, Buchert M, Hagelüken C, Reck BK,
to-wheels report version 3C. EUR—scientific and technical research Sibley SF, Sonnemann G (2011) What do we know about metal
series. July, 2011a: ISSN 1831–9424. Publications Office of the recycling rates? J Ind Ecol 15(3):355–366
European Union, Luxembourg. (ISBN 978-92-79-21395-3, report- Guinée JB, Gorrée M, Heijungs R, Huppes G, Kleijn R, Koning Ad, Oers
ed by Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, EUCAR Lv, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Suh S, Udo de Haes HA, Bruijn Hd, Duin
and CONCAWE) doi:10.2788/79018 Rv, Huijbregts MAJ (2002) Handbook on life cycle assessment.
Edwards R, Larivé J-F, Beziat J-C (2011b) Well-to-wheels analysis of Operational guide to the ISO standards. I: LCA in perspective. IIa:
future automotive and powertrains in the European context—well- Guide. IIb: Operational annex. III: Scientific background. Guinée
to-wheels appendix 2 version 3C, WTW GHG-emissions of exter- JB. Centrum Milieukunde Leiden (CML), Leiden University.
nally chargeable electric vehicles. EUR—scientific and technical Kluwer, Dordrecht
research series. July, 2011b: ISSN 1831–9424. Publications Office Hackney J, de Neufville R (2001) Life cycle model of alternative fuel
of the European Union, Luxembourg. (ISBN 978-92-79-21395-3, vehicles: emissions, energy, and cost trade-offs. Transp Res Part A
reported by Joint Research Centre of the European Commission, 35(3):243–266
EUCAR and CONCAWE) doi:10.2788/79018 Harto C, Meyers R, Williams E (2010) Life cycle water use of low-carbon
Edwards R, Mahieu V, Griesemann J-C, Larivé J-F, Rickeard DJ (2004) transport fuels. Energy Pol 38(9):4933–4944
Well-to-wheels analysis of future automotive fuels and powertrains Hauschild M, Goedkoop M, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Huijbregts M, Jolliet O,
in the European context. SAE Technical Paper. 2004. SAE Margni M, Schryver A, Humbert S, Laurent A, Sala S, Pant R (2013)
International. (SAE Technical Paper 2004-01-1924 reported by Identifying best existing practice for characterization modeling in life
CONCAWE, EUCAR and JRC) doi:10.4271/2004-01-1924 cycle impact assessment. Int J Life Cycle Assess 18(3):683–697
Elgowainy A, Han J, Poch L, Wang M, Vyas A, Mahalik M, Rousseau A Hawkins T, Gausen O, Strømman A (2012) Environmental impacts of
(2010) Well-to-wheels analysis of energy use and greenhouse gas hybrid and electric vehicles—a review. Int J Life Cycle Assess
emissions of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. vol ANL/ESD/10-1. 17(8):997–1014
June 1, 2010. Argonne National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Hawkins TR, Singh B, Majeau-Bettez G, Strømman AH (2013a)
Energy, Argonne Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional
European Parliament (2008) Position of the European parliament. The and electric vehicles. J Ind Ecol 17(1):53–64
European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, Hawkins TR, Singh B, Majeau-Bettez G, Strømman AH (2013b)
European Union. Reg. EP-PE_TC1-COD(2007)0297, PE 417.788 Corrigendum to: Hawkins, T. R., B. Singh, G. Majeau-Bettez, and
Faria R, Marques P, Moura P, Freire F, Delgado J, de Almeida AT (2013) A. H. Strømman. 2012. Comparative environmental life cycle as-
Impact of the electricity mix and use profile in the life-cycle assess- sessment of conventional and electric vehicles. J Ind Ecol 17(1):
ment of electric vehicles. Renew Sust Energ Rev 24:271–287 158–160
Faria R, Moura P, Delgado J, de Almeida AT (2012) A sustainability Hearron JD, McDonough M, Ranjbar A, Wei W, Chenjie L, Shamsi P,
assessment of electric vehicles as a personal mobility system. Manohar S, Fahimi B (2011) The sustainability of new technologies
Energy Convers Manag 61:19–30 in vehicular transportation. In: 2011 I.E. Vehicle Power and
Farrell AE, Plevin RJ, Turner BT, Jones AD, O’Hare M, Kammen DM Propulsion Conference, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 6–9 Sept. 2011.
(2006) Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. 2011 I.E. Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference. IEEE. doi:
Science 311(5760):506–508 10.1109/vppc.2011.6043194
Finnveden G, Hauschild MZ, Ekvall T, Guinée J, Heijungs R, Hellweg S, Heijungs R, Huijbregts MAJ (2004) A review of approaches to treat
Koehler A, Pennington D, Suh S (2009) Recent developments in life uncertainty in LCA. In Complexity and Integrated Resources
cycle assessment. J Environ Manag 91(1):1–21 Management. In: Pahl-Wostl C, Schmidt S, Rizzoli AE, Jakeman
Frischknecht R, Flury K (2011) Life cycle assessment of electric mobility: AJ (eds) Complexity and Integrated Resources Management,
answers and challenges—Zurich, April 6, 2011. Int J Life Cycle University of Osnabrück, Germany, 14–17 June 2004.
Assess 16(7):691–695 International Environmental Modelling and Software Society,
Gaines L, Sullivan J, Burnham A, Belharouak I (2011) Life-cycle anal- Manno, Switzerland, pp 332–339
ysis of production and recycling of lithium ion batteries. Transp Res Held M, Baumann M (2011) Assessment of the environmental impacts of
Rec J Transp Res Board 2252:57–65 electric vehicle concepts. In: Finkbeiner M (ed) Towards life cycle
Gao L, Winfield ZC (2012) Life cycle assessment of environmental and sustainability management, 1st edn. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 535–
economic impacts of advanced vehicles. Energies 5(3):605–620 546. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1899-9_52
Geyer R, Stoms D, Kallaos J (2013) Spatially-explicit life cycle assess- Helland Å (2009) Well-to-wheel CO2 analysis of electric and ICE vehi-
ment of sun-to-wheels transportation pathways in the U.S. Environ cles: are global CO2 emission reductions possible? Int J Glob Warm
Sci Technol 47(2):1170–1176 1(4):432–442
Hellsing J (2013) Senior technical specialist electric drive systems, Volvo battery electric vehicles and internal combustion vehicles. Energy
Group Trucks Technology, Volvo Group. Personal communication Pol 44:160–173
with Nordelöf A. March 13 and August 22, 2013 Maas H (2013) AW: inquiry regarding calculations made in Edwards
Helmers E, Marx P (2012) Electric cars: technical characteristics and et al. 2011 WTW study Appendix 2. E-mail sent to Nordelöf A.
environmental impacts. Environ Sci Eur 24(4):1–15 Tuesday 23rd of April at 16:57, 2013
Hillman KM, Sanden BA (2008) Time and scale in life cycle assessment: Machacek E (2012) Potential ecodesign directive contributions to
the case of fuel choice in the transport sector. Int J Altern Propuls resource-efficient innovations - a case study on the electric motor
2(1):1–12 product group expansion and rare earth element use in permanent
Huijbregts MAJ, Thissen U, Guinée JB, Jager T, Kalf D, van de Meent D, magnet motors. Thesis for the fulfilment of the Master of Science in
Ragas AMJ, Wegener Sleeswijk A, Reijnders L (2000) Priority Environmental Management and Policy, Lund University, Lund,
assessment of toxic substances in life cycle assessment. Part I: Sweden, September 2012
calculation of toxicity potentials for 181 substances with the nested MacLean HL, Lave LB (2003) Life cycle assessment of automobile/fuel
multi-media fate, exposure and effects model USES–LCA. options. Environ Sci Technol 37(23):5445–5452
Chemosphere 41(4):541–573 MacPherson ND, Keoleian GA, Kelly JC (2012) Fuel economy and
Huo H, Wu Y, Wang M (2009) Total versus urban: well-to-wheels greenhouse gas emissions labeling for plug-in hybrid vehicles from
assessment of criteria pollutant emissions from various vehicle/fuel a life cycle perspective. J Ind Ecol 16(5):761–773
systems. Atmos Environ 43(10):1796–1804 Majeau-Bettez G, Hawkins T, Hammer Strømman A (2011) Life cycle
IAE (2011) Technology Roadmap—electric and plug-in hybrid electric ve- environmental assessment of lithium-ion and nickel metal hydride
hicles. June, 2011. International Energy Agency, OECD/IEA, France batteries for plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles. Environ Sci
ISO (2006a) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—prin- Technol 45(10):4548–4554
ciples and framework, ISO 14040:2006. International Organization Matheys J, Timmermans J-M, Van Mierlo J, Meyer S, Van den Bossche P
for Standardization, Geneva (2009) Comparison of the environmental impact of five electric
ISO (2006b) Environmental management—life cycle assessment—re- vehicle battery technologies using LCA. Int J Sust Manuf 1(3):
quirements and guidelines, ISO 14044:2006. International 318–329
Organization for Standardization, Geneva Matheys J, Van Autenboer W, Timmermans JM, Van Mierlo J, Van Den
Jaramillo P, Samaras C, Wakeley H, Meisterling K (2009) Greenhouse Bossche P, Maggetto G (2007) Influence of functional unit on the
gas implications of using coal for transportation: life cycle assess- life cycle assessment of traction batteries. Int J Life Cycle Assess
ment of coal-to-liquids, plug-in hybrids, and hydrogen pathways. 12(3):191–196
Energy Pol 37(7):2689–2695 Matheys J, Van Mierlo J, Timmermans J-M, Van den Bossche P (2008)
Jolliet O, Margni M, Charles R, Humbert S, Payet J, Rebitzer G, Life-cycle assessment of batteries in the context of the EU directive
Rosenbaum R (2003) IMPACT 2002+: a new life cycle impact on end-of-life vehicles. Int J Veh Des 46(2):189–203
assessment methodology. Int J Life Cycle Assess 8(6):324–330 Matsuhashi R, Kudoh Y, Yoshida Y, Ishitani H, Yoshioka M, Yoshioka K
Karbowski D, Haliburton C, Rousseau A (2008) Impact of component (2000) Life cycle of CO2-emissions from electric vehicles and
size on plug-in hybrid vehicle energy consumption using global gasoline vehicles utilizing a process-relational model. Int J Life
optimization. World Electr Veh 2(2) Cycle Assess 5(5):306–312
Kintner-Meyer M, Schneider K, Pratt R (2007) Impacts assessment of McCleese D, LaPuma P (2002) Using Monte Carlo simulation in life
plug-in hybrid vehicles on electric utilities and regional US power cycle assessment for electric and internal combustion vehicles. Int J
grids, Part 1: Technical analysis. November, 2007. Pacific Life Cycle Assess 7(4):230–236
Northwest National Laboratory, USA. McKenzie EC, Durango-Cohen PL (2012) Environmental life-cycle as-
Kliucininkas L, Matulevicius J, Martuzevicius D (2012) The life cycle sessment of transit buses with alternative fuel technology. Transp
assessment of alternative fuel chains for urban buses and trolley- Res Part D 17(1):39–47
buses. J Environ Manag 99:98–103 Messagie M (2013) Environmental performance of electric vehicles, a life
Kobayashi S, Plotkin S, Ribeiro S (2009) Energy efficiency technologies cycle system approach. Thesis for the award of the degree of Doctor
for road vehicles. Energy Efficiency 2(2):125–137 in engineering, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
Kudoh Y, Nansai K, Kondo Y, Tahara K (2007) Life cycle CO2 emissions Messagie M, Boureima F, Matheys J, Sergeant N, Timmermans JM,
of FCEV, BEV and GV in actual use. Paper presented at the 23rd Macharis C, Van Mierlo J (2011) Environmental performance of a
International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle battery electric vehicle: a descriptive life cycle assessment approach.
Symposium & Exposition, Anaheim, California, 2–5 Dec World Electr Veh 4(1):782–786
Kushnir D, Sandén BA (2011) Multi-level energy analysis of emerging Messagie M, Boureima F, Matheys J, Sergeant N, Turcksin L, Macharis
technologies: a case study in new materials for lithium ion batteries. C, Van Mierlo J (2010) Life cycle assessment of conventional and
J Clean Prod 19(13):1405–1416 alternative small passenger vehicles in Belgium. Paper presented at
Lane B (2006) Life cycle assessment of vehicle fuels and technologies. the 2010 I.E. Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference, VPPC
Final report. Ecolane transport consultancy on behalf of London 2010, Lille, 1–3 Septembere
Borough of Camden. London, UK Messagie M, Lebeau K, Boureima F, Sergeant N, Macharis C, Van Mierlo
Lave L, MacLean H, Hendrickson C, Lankey R (2000) Life-cycle anal- J (2012) Influence of the uptake of electric vehicles on the impact on
ysis of alternative automobile fuel/propulsion technologies. Environ climate change of an entire future vehicle fleet, a 2020 Brussels
Sci Technol 34(17):3598–3605 perspective. Paper presented at the EVS26, Los Angeles, California,
Li L, Dunn JB, Zhang XX, Gaines L, Chen RJ, Wu F, Amine K (2013) May 6–9, 2012
Recovery of metals from spent lithium-ion batteries with organic Mousazadeh H, Keyhani A, Mobli H, Bardi U, Lombardi G, el Asmar T
acids as leaching reagents and environmental assessment. J Power (2009) Environmental assessment of RAMseS multipurpose electric
Sources 233:180–189 vehicle compared to a conventional combustion engine vehicle. J
Lloyd SM, Ries R (2007) Characterizing, propagating, and analyzing Clean Prod 17(9):781–790
uncertainty in life-cycle assessment: a survey of quantitative ap- National Research Council (2013) Transitions to alternative vehicles and
proaches. Ind Ecol 11(1):161–179 fuels. The National Academies Press, Washington DC, USA
Ma H, Balthasar F, Tait N, Riera-Palou X, Harrison A (2012) A new Nemry F, Brons M (2010) Plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles—
comparison between the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of market penetration scenarios of electric drive vehicles. JRC
Technical Note. European Commission, Luxembourg. (Draft tech- Spielmann M, Althaus H-J (2007) Can a prolonged use of a passenger car
nical note JRC/IPTS JRC58748) reduce environmental burdens? Life cycle analysis of Swiss passen-
Nonaka T, Nakano M (2010) Study of popularization policy of clean ger cars. J Clean Prod 15:1122–1134
energy vehicles using life cycle assessment. Paper presented at the Stephan CH, Sullivan J (2008) Environmental and energy implications of
Third International Conference on Infrastructure Systems and plug-in hybrid-electric vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 42(4):1185–
Services: Next Generation Infrastructure Systems for Eco-Cities 1190
(INFRA), 2010, Shenzhen, China, 11–13 November Sterman JD (1991) A skeptic’s guide to computer models. In: Barney GO,
Notter DA, Gauch M, Widmer R, Wäger P, Stamp A, Zah R, H-Jr A Kreutzer WB, Garrett MJ (eds) Managing a nation: the microcom-
(2010a) Contribution of li-ion batteries to the environmental puter software catalog, 2nd edn. Westview, Boulder, pp 209–229
impact of electric vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 44(17):6550– Sullivan JL, Burnham A, Wang M (2010) Energy-consumption and
6556 carbon-emission analysis of vehicle and component manufacturing
Notter DA, Gauch M, Widmer R, Wäger P, Stamp A, Zah R, Althaus H-Jr (trans: Center for Transportation Research ESD). ANL report.
(2010b) Supporting information to the manuscript entitled contribu- Argonne National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy,
tion of li-ion batteries to the environmental impact of electric vehi- Argonne, Illinois. (GREET VMA model report ANL/ESD/10-6)
cles. EMPA—The Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science Sullivan JL, Gaines L (2010) A review of battery life-cycle analysis: state
and Technology, Switzerland. (Supporting Information for of knowledge and critical needs (trans: Center for Transportation
Environmental Science & Technology) Research ESD). ANL report. Argonne National Laboratory, U.S.
Ou X, Yan X, Zhang X (2010a) Using coal for transportation in China: Department of Energy, Argonne, Illinois. (Review report ANL/
life cycle GHG of coal-based fuel and electric vehicle, and policy ESD/10-7)
implications. Int J Greenh Gas Con 4(5):878–887 Sullivan JL, Gaines L (2012) Status of life cycle inventories for batteries.
Ou X, Zhang X, Chang S (2010b) Alternative fuel buses currently in use Energy Convers Manag 58:134–148
in China: life-cycle fossil energy use, GHG emissions and policy Sullivan JL, Gaines L, Burnham A (2011) Role of recycling in the life
recommendations. Energy Pol 38(1):406–418 cycle of batteries. In: TMS 2011—140th Annual Meeting and
Prakash R, Henham A, Bhat IK (2005) Gross carbon emissions from Exhibition, San Diego, CA, 2011. TMS 2011—140th Annual
alternative transport fuels in India. Energy Sustain Dev 9(2): Meeting and Exhibition. pp 25–32
10–16 Szczechowicz E, Dederichs T, Schnettler A (2012) Regional assessment
Querini F, Dagostino S, Morel S, Rousseaux P (2012) Greenhouse gas of local emissions of electric vehicles using traffic simulations for a
emissions of electric vehicles associated with wind and photovoltaic use case in Germany. Int J Life Cycle Assess 17(9):1131–1141
electricity. Energy Procedia 20:391–401 Tahara K, Sinha S, Sakamoto R, Kojima T, Taneda K, Funasaki A, Ohtaki
Querini F, Morel S, Boch V, Rousseaux P (2011) Global, regional and T, Inaba A (2001) Comparison of CO2 emissions from alternative
local environmental impacts: LCA indicators for energy & mobility. and conventional vehicles. World Resour Rev 13(1):52–60
Paper presented at the LCM 2011—Towards Life Cycle Tillman AM (2000) Significance of decision-making for LCA method-
Sustainability Management, Berlin, 28–31 August ology. Environ Impact Assess 20(1):113–123
Raykin L, MacLean HL, Roorda MJ (2012) Implications of driving Timmermans J-M, Matheys J, Van Mierlo J, Lataire P (2006)
patterns on well-to-wheel performance of plug-in hybrid electric Environmental rating of vehicles with different fuels and drive
vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 46(11):6363–6370 trains: a univocal and applicable methodology. Eur J Transp
Sadek N (2012) Urban electric vehicles: a contemporary business case. Infrastruct Res 6(4):313–334
Eur Transp Res Rev 4(1):27–37 Tran M, Banister D, Bishop JDK, McCulloch MD (2012) Realizing the
Samaras C, Meisterling K (2008a) Life cycle assessment of greenhouse electric-vehicle revolution. Nat Clim Chang 2(5):328–333
gas emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles: implications for policy. Van den Bossche P, Vergels F, Van Mierlo J, Matheys J, Van Autenboer W
Environ Sci Technol 42(9):3170–3176 (2006) SUBAT: an assessment of sustainable battery technology. J
Samaras C, Meisterling K (2008b) Life cycle assessment of greenhouse Power Sources 162(2 SPEC. ISS):913–919. doi:10.1016/j.
gas emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles: implications for poli- jpowsour.2005.07.039
cy—supporting Online Information. Carnegie Mellon University, Van Mierlo J, Boureima F, Sergeant N, Wynen V, Messagie M, Govaerts
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. (Supporting Information for L, Denys T, Vanderschaeghe M, Macharis C, Turcksin L, Hecq W,
Environmental Science & Technology) Englert M, Lecrombs F, Klopfert F, De Caevel B, De Vos M (2009)
Sandén BA (2008) Standing the test of time: signals and noise from Clean vehicle research: LCA and policy measures “CLEVER”—
environmental assessments of energy technologies. In: life-cycle Science for a Sustainable Development—Transport & Mobility,
analysis for new energy conversion and storage systems, Boston, Final Report Phase 1. Belgian Science Policy, Brussels. (Research
MA, 26–27 November 2007. MRS, pp 183–189 Programme Science for a Sustainable Development report SD/TM/
Schneider L, Berger M, Finkbeiner M (2011) The anthropogenic stock 04A)
extended abiotic depletion potential (AADP) as a new Van Mierlo J, Timmermans JM, Maggetto G, Van den Bossche P,
parameterisation to model the depletion of abiotic resources. Int J Meyer S, Hecq W, Govaerts L, Verlaak J (2004) Environmental
Life Cycle Assess 16(9):929–936 rating of vehicles with different alternative fuels and drive
Sharma R, Manzie C, Bessede M, Crawford RH, Brear MJ (2013) trains: a comparison of two approaches. Transp Res Part D
Conventional, hybrid and electric vehicles for Australian driving 9(5):387–399
conditions. Part 2: Life cycle CO2-e emissions. Transp Res Part C Van Mierlo J, Vereecken L, Maggetto G, Favrel V, Meyer S, Hecq W
28:63–73 (2003a) Comparison of the environmental damage caused by vehi-
Shen W, Han W, Chock D, Chai Q, Zhang A (2012) Well-to-wheels life- cles with different alternative fuels and drivetrains in a Brussels
cycle analysis of alternative fuels and vehicle technologies in China. context. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part D 217(7):583–594
Energy Pol 49:296–307 Van Mierlo J, Vereecken L, Maggetto G, Favrel V, Meyer S, Hecq W
Simon B, Weil M (2013) Analysis of materials and energy flows of (2003b) How to define clean vehicles? Environmental impact rating
different lithium ion traction batteries. Rev Metall 110(1):65–76 of vehicles. Int J Automot Technol 4:77–86
Sioshansi R, Denholm P (2009) Emissions impacts and benefits of plug- Van Vliet O, Brouwer AS, Kuramochi T, Van Den Broek M, Faaij A
in hybrid electric vehicles and vehicle-to-grid services. Environ Sci (2011) Energy use, cost and CO2 emissions of electric cars. J Power
Technol 43(4):1199–1204 Sources 196(4):2298–2310
Vetter J, Novák P, Wagner MR, Veit C, Möller KC, Besenhard JO, Winter Research Environmental Affairs Product in cooperation with
M, Wohlfahrt-Mehrens M, Vogler C, Hammouche A (2005) Ageing Group Electric Traction, Volkswagen Group, Wolfsburg,
mechanisms in lithium-ion batteries. J Power Sources 147(1–2): Germany. http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_
269–281 center/en/publications/publications.acq.html/icp-2/index.html.
Williamson SS, Emadi A (2005) Comparative assessment of hybrid Accessed 27 Aug 2013
electric and fuel cell vehicles based on comprehensive well-to- Zackrisson M, Avellán L, Orlenius J (2010) Life cycle assessment of
wheels efficiency analysis. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 54(3): lithium-ion batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles—critical
856–862 issues. J Clean Prod 18(15):1517–1527
Volkswagen Group (2012) The e-Mission. Electric mobility and the Zumsteg JM, Cooper JS, Noon MS (2012) Systematic review checklist. J
environment. July, 2012: Art. No. 27412450118. Group Ind Ecol 16(S1):S12–S21

Ee 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ee 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ee 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Int J Life Cycle Assess (2014) 19:1866–1890

MODERN INDIVIDUAL MOBILITY

Environmental impacts of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and battery

Abstract Secondly, studies have been categorized based on technical

Studies reporting the reason for carrying out the study 77 %

Articles/categories Functional unit Technology Environmental impact assessment

Well-to-wheels life cycle 26 24 4 23 24 16 7 1 5

Articles/categories Functional unit Technology Environmental impact assessment

Boureima et al. (2009) 1 life (13.7 years and 230,500 km) x x x x

Articles/categories Functional unit Technology Environmental impact assessment

Notter et al. (2010a) 1 life (150,000 km) x x x x x x

Fig. 3 WTW GHG emissions for

Fig. 6 Results for human toxicity

6.3 Key conclusions Doctor of Philosophy, Imperial College of Science, Technology

You might also like