! Life-Cycle Assessment and Fuel-Cycle Case Study. K.E. Kelly University of Utah

Transcription

1 ! Life-Cycle Assessment and Fuel-Cycle Case Study!! K.E. Kelly University of Utah

2 Outline Background on LCA! Stages! Steps! Key concepts! Resources! Life-cycle considerations in power generation! GHG life-cycle case study! GREET

3 What is LCA Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC) developed LCA founding principals:!! The life cycle assessment is an objective process to:! evaluate the environmental burdens associated with a product, process, or activity by identifying and quantifying energy and materials usage and environmental releases,! assess the impacts of these burdens! evaluate and implement opportunities to improve the process!! LCA (aka) cradle-to-grave analysis!! A widely accepted series of guidelines and definitions: IS is considered the LCA standard

4 LCA in Regulations Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 requires LCAs of advanced biofuels to ensure that its life-cycle GHG emissions are at least 50% less than the baseline life-cycle GHG emissions.! Act also prohibits any federal agency from procuring an alternative fuel unless its life-cycle GHG emissions are less than or equal to those of a conventional baseline! LCA-based low-carbon fuel standards in California.! Other states have proposed low-carbon fuel standards.! British Columbia and the EU have low-carbon fuel standards.

5 Life-Cycle Stages Open-loop recycling Source: EPA

6 Life-Cycle Stages Open-loop recycling Helps avoid shifting environmental burdens. Source: EPA

7 Life-Cycle Stages Cradle to gate Open-loop recycling Helps avoid shifting environmental burdens. Source: EPA

8 Life-Cycle Stages Cradle to gate Cradle to use Open-loop recycling Helps avoid shifting environmental burdens. Source: EPA

9 Life-Cycle Stages Cradle to gate Cradle to cradle Cradle to use Open-loop recycling Helps avoid shifting environmental burdens. Source: EPA

10 LCA Steps Goals & Defining Scope! What is the purpose, who is the audience, and what is your final product?! Is your study a comparison more more of a benchmarktype study?!!! Inventory! What is the function & functional unit?! What are your system boundaries?! What data do you need and how do you plan to get it?! What assumptions will you make?! What are the limitations of the study?!! Impact Assessment! What are the environmental, social and economic effects?!! Interpretation/improvement! How can you improve the environmental, social and economic effects?! What are your conclusions?! What recommendations can you make? Source: EPA

11 LCA Steps Goals & Defining Scope! What is the purpose, who is the audience, and what is your final product?! Is your study a comparison more more of a benchmarktype study?!!! Inventory! What is the function & functional unit?! What are your system boundaries?! What data do you need and how do you plan to get it?! What assumptions will you make?! What are the limitations of the study?!! Impact Assessment! What are the environmental, Can you social simplify?! and economic effects?!! Interpretation/improvement! Common assumptions include ignoring plant construction.! How can you improve the environmental, social and Making your boundaries cradle to gate instead of cradle to grave.! economic effects?! What are your conclusions?! Can you ignore some stages? Are they the same (comparisons)? Or What recommendations are can they you insignificant? make? Source: EPA

12 Example: Pencil Comparison Source: %2Flca.presentation.ppt&ei=1kJyU-_xBqem0QW84oC4CA&usg=AFQjCNFKuy3X4em02SsZ81zHgruuQ84HGA&bvm=bv ,d.d2k

13 Example: Pencil Comparison Considerations! Use stage - sharpening vs. additional graphite.! End of life - different lifetimes for a comparable amount of writing.! Can we scope anything out of sour study, i.e., packaging? Source: %2Flca.presentation.ppt&ei=1kJyU-_xBqem0QW84oC4CA&usg=AFQjCNFKuy3X4em02SsZ81zHgruuQ84HGA&bvm=bv ,d.d2k

14 Challenges: Goals & Defining Scope Comparing similar products that provide multiple, but different, functions (i.e., mobile phone).! Some products have difficult-to-quantify functions, such as entertainment.! Should your system boundaries be tight (most common) or broad (less common)? Where do you stop drawing your boundaries? Should you include land-use change for biofuels? the transportation of all of the employees who make and sell the product?! Some of these can be addressed by selecting your functional unit.

15 Function & Functional Unit Function! Service provided by the system, i.e., what it does.! Example: function = transportation!! Functional unit! Gives the function a number value.! Allows comparison between products! Reference point! Example: traveling 100 miles

16 Function & Functional Unit Function! Service provided by the system, i.e., what it does.! Example: function = transportation!! Functional unit! Gives the function a number value.! Allows comparison between products! Reference point! Example: traveling 100 miles Important to define broadly enough, for example, to allow different transportation modes to be considered, not just car A versus car B.! For energy and greenhouse gas emissions, time horizon can be important.

17 Inventory Make a flow chart and identify your material and energy flows.! Does this fit with your goals and scope?! Figure out how to collect relevant data! Publicly available data? manufacturer data, pay for data?! How recent should the data be?! Is the data regionally sensitive?! Make and document your data sources and assumptions! Perform and evaluate your material and energy balances for each process/life-cycle stage! Does it pass the sniff test?

18 Inventory Make a flow chart and identify your material and energy flows.! Does this fit with your goals and scope?! Figure out how to collect relevant data! Publicly available data? manufacturer data, pay for data?! How recent should the data be?! Is the data regionally sensitive?! Make and document your data sources and assumptions! Perform and evaluate your material and energy balances for each process/life-cycle stage! This can be the most expensive and time consuming step in a LCA. You may need to refine your goals and scope. Does it pass the sniff test?

19 Inventory Make a flow chart and identify your material and energy flows.! Does this fit with your goals and scope?! Figure out how to collect relevant data! Publicly available The inventory data? manufacturer data will not data, be a pay perfect for data?! fit. Use your judgement How recent should to focus the on data getting be?! the highest quality data for the most important processes. Is the data regionally sensitive?! Make and document your data sources and assumptions! Perform and evaluate your material and energy balances for each process/life-cycle stage! This can be the most expensive and time consuming step in a LCA. You may need to refine your goals and scope. Does it pass the sniff test?

20 Inventory Make a flow chart and identify your material and energy flows.! Does this fit with your goals and scope?! Figure out how to collect relevant data! Publicly available The inventory data? manufacturer data will not data, be a pay perfect for data?! fit. Use your judgement How recent should to focus the on data getting be?! the highest quality data for the most important processes. Is the data regionally sensitive?! Make and document your data sources and assumptions! Perform and evaluate your material and energy balances for each process/life-cycle stage! This can be the most expensive and time consuming step in a LCA. You may need to refine your goals and scope. Does it pass the sniff test? Someone else should be able to repeat your work!!

21 Impact Assessment What are your environmental burdens?! For example, GHG emissions, VOC emissions, heavy metals, CFCs, pesticides!! Define impact categories and assign indicators! Figure out which burdens affect impact categories!! Weigh the importance of each impact category! Figure out which burdens affect impact categories Burdens Impact categories Indicators Weighting CO 2 Global warming GWP VOCs Metals Ground-level ozone Human toxicity PCOP A variety Evaluation CFCs Ozone depletion ODP Pesticides Eco-toxicity A variety

22 Impact Assessment What are your environmental burdens?! For example, GHG emissions, VOC emissions, heavy metals, CFCs, pesticides!! Define impact categories and assign indicators! Figure out which burdens affect impact categories!! Weigh the importance of each impact category! Figure out which burdens GWP affect is impact an indicator categories that you can use to integrate the GHG effect of different gases. GWP:! Burdens Impact categories CO2 = 1! Indicators Weighting CO 2 VOCs Metals CFCs Global warming Ground-level ozone CH4 = 34 (100) and 86 (20)! GWP N2O = 298 (100) and (268) PCOP Human toxicity A variety Ozone depletion ODP Evaluation Pesticides Eco-toxicity A variety

23 Impact Assessment What are your environmental burdens?! For example, This entire GHG process emissions, can VOC be very emissions, subjective, heavy especially metals, when CFCs, you pesticides!! move into human and eco-toxicty or when the impacts occur in Define impact different categories regions. and assign indicators! Figure out which burdens affect impact categories!! Weigh the importance of each impact category! Figure out which burdens GWP affect is impact an indicator categories that you can use to integrate the GHG effect of different gases. GWP:! Burdens Impact categories CO2 = 1! Indicators Weighting CO 2 VOCs Metals CFCs Global warming Ground-level ozone CH4 = 34 (100) and 86 (20)! GWP N2O = 298 (100) and (268) PCOP Human toxicity A variety Ozone depletion ODP Evaluation Pesticides Eco-toxicity A variety

24 Impact Assessment What are your environmental burdens?! For example, This entire GHG process emissions, can VOC be very emissions, subjective, heavy especially metals, when CFCs, you pesticides!! move into human and eco-toxicty or when the impacts occur in Define impact different categories regions. and assign indicators! Figure out which burdens affect impact categories!! Weigh the importance of each impact category! Figure out which burdens GWP affect is impact an indicator categories that you can use to integrate the GHG effect of different gases. GWP:! Burdens Impact categories CO2 = 1! Indicators Weighting CO 2 VOCs Metals CFCs Global warming Ground-level ozone Human toxicity CH4 = 34 (100) and 86 (20)! GWP N2O = 298 (100) and (268) PCOP PCOP = photochemical ozone creation potential! ODP = ozone depletion potential A variety Ozone depletion ODP Evaluation Pesticides Eco-toxicity A variety

25 Interpretation How do the results compare to your original goal and scope?! Which life-cycle stages or processes have the biggest impacts?! Where are your opportunities for improvement?! How could you make the improvements?! Are there risks/unintended consequences?

26 LCA Key Concepts Functional unit - ensure sufficiently broad and time horizon can be important.! System boundary - what stages are most important?! Well to wheels, well to pump, and cradle to grave, cradle to gate, cradle to cradle! Economic input-output analysis - economic sectors like steelmaking (not plant specific)! Impact assessment vs. risk assessment! GWP, eutrophication, acidification, photochemical smog, human health, water usage, etc.

27 Benefits! LCA Benefits & Challenges Systematic approach to evaluating environmental burdens from different stages/locations (helps identify hidden environmental costs, i.e. H 2 economy)! Identify opportunities for reducing burden! Avoids shifting burdens from one stage to another, i.e., EV vs. GV! Challenges! Can be expensive and time consuming! Lack of agreement on impact assessment! Lack of consistency with other studies!

28 LCA Resources Data and resources! EPA: US DOE NREL: Australian data: Swiss LCA data: lang=en! Tools! GREET CMU EIO LCA (sector wide)! Gabi software DYI - Excel, Matlab for simple cases or when the processes are very different from standard processes

29 Power Generation: Coal, Natural Gas and CO2 emissions Coal and natural gas account for ca. 40% and 35% of electricity generation, respectively.! US Reserve-to-Production Ratio (years) Fossil energy is big business! Oil and gas contributes 1 trillion to US economy (API)! Coal contributes another 1 trillion to the US economy (coal industry)!! Reserve-to-Production Ration = the remaining amount of resource remaining (recoverable reserves) divided by the current use of that resource

30 Power Generation: Coal, Natural Gas and CO2 emissions Coal and natural gas account for ca. 40% and 35% of electricity generation, respectively.! US Reserve-to-Production Ratio (years) Fossil energy is big business! externalities, which can be substantial. Exclude Oil andfossil-fuels gas contributes 1 trillion to US economy (API)! Coal contributes another 1 trillion to the US economy (coal industry)!! Reserve-to-Production Ration = the remaining amount of resource remaining (recoverable reserves) divided by the current use of that resource

31 Power Generation: Coal, Natural Gas and CO2 emissions Burning coal emits approximately 1.8 times more CO 2 than natural gas but...! Fugitive emissions from natural gas extraction range from 1 -! 10% of production CH 4 has a global warming potential 25 x greater than CO 2 (depends on timeframe because CH 4 has a shorter atmospheric lifetime).! If powering with natural gas, we must have less than 3.2% loss to be a benefit in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.

32 Power Generation: Coal, Natural Gas and CO2 emissions Burning coal emits approximately 1.8 times more CO 2 than natural gas but...! Group question: any ideas why coal emits 1.8 times more CO2 than natural gas? Fugitive emissions from natural gas extraction range from 1 -! 10% of production CH 4 has a global warming potential 25 x greater than CO 2 (depends on timeframe because CH 4 has a shorter atmospheric lifetime).! If powering with natural gas, we must have less than 3.2% loss to be a benefit in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.

33 The Life Cycle of Power Generation Comparisons of Coal and Natural Gas

34 The Life Cycle of Power Generation Comparisons of Coal and Natural Gas Highly controversial

35 The Life Cycle of Power Generation Comparisons of Coal and Natural Gas Highly controversial New York Times: Shale gas isn t cleaner than coal, Cornell researchers say

36 CASE Study Background on Transportation Fuels

37 Background Transportation Fuels The U.S. produces 8.9 Mbpd (9.6% of the world s 86.2 M bpd) oil production (BP World Statistical Energy Review 2012). The U.S. consumes 18.6 Mbpd (19.8% of the world production).! 94% of petroleum used for transportation. 5% 2% 8% 21% Cars & light-duty trucks Medium/heavy duty trucks Air Water Rail 64% Source: Transportation Energy Book, 32nd! edition, ORNL-6986

38 Background Transportation Fuels The U.S. produces 8.9 Mbpd (9.6% of the world s 86.2 M bpd) oil production (BP World Statistical Energy Review 2012). The U.S. consumes 18.6 Mbpd (19.8% of the world production).! 94% of petroleum used for transportation. US R/P: 11 5% 2% years (oil), 13 years (natural gas), 257 years (coal) 8% Global R/P: 53 years (oil), 56 years (natural gas), 109 years (coal) 21% Cars & light-duty trucks Medium/heavy duty trucks Air Water Rail Source: BP World Statistical Energy Review, % Source: Transportation Energy Book, 32nd! edition, ORNL-6986

39 Contribution of Transportation to GHG Emissions Source: Center for Climate & Energy Solutions

40 GHG and the Transportation Fuel Cycle U.S. Average Fuel-Cycle GHG Emissions for Gasoline

41 GHG and the Transportation Fuel Cycle U.S. Average Fuel-Cycle GHG Emissions for Gasoline

42 Well to Pump Not All Crude Sources are Equal 80" 70" 60" Product"transport" Liquid"fuels"producSon" Raw"material"transport" Raw"material"acquisiSon" Oil Shale g CO2 eq/mj 50" 40" 30" 20" Conventional Med Heavy Oil Sands 10" 0" US" Canada"" Saudi"Arabia"" Iraq"" Venezuela"" Feedstock)Source) Nigeria"" Angola"" Algeria" Alaska,"North"Slope"" California"(PADD2)" Mexico"" Venezuela"" Canada,"mining""" Canada,"SAGD,"no"coke"(PADD2)"" US,"Green"River"ATP""

43 Well to Pump Not All Crude Sources are Equal 80" 70" 60" Product"transport" Liquid"fuels"producSon" Raw"material"transport" Raw"material"acquisiSon" Oil Shale g CO2 eq/mj 50" 40" 30" 20" Conventional Med Heavy Oil Sands 10" 0" US" Canada"" Saudi"Arabia"" Iraq"" Venezuela"" Feedstock)Source) Nigeria"" Angola"" Algeria" Alaska,"North"Slope"" California"(PADD2)" Mexico"" Venezuela"" Canada,"mining""" Canada,"SAGD,"no"coke"(PADD2)"" US,"Green"River"ATP""

44 Opportunities for Reducing the Carbon Footprint Fuel consumption - greatest opportunity! Raw material extraction and processing - important for unconventional fuels and some conventional crude sources! Refining - conventional sources, typically second most important life-cycle stage.

45 Opportunities for Reducing the Carbon Footprint Fuel consumption - greatest opportunity! Improving the average fuel efficiency of gasoline- powered passenger vehicles from 21.6 mpg to 28.6 mpg reduces the life- cycle WTW GHG emissions by 20% - equal to the average WTP GHG emissions (US DOE). Raw material extraction and processing - important for unconventional fuels and some conventional crude sources! Refining - conventional sources, typically second most important life-cycle stage.

46 Trends: Oil Production Source: IEA Forum on Oil Market Challenges,

47 Trends: Oil Production Any ideas why the fraction of unconventional oil is increasing and what effect this will have on US GHG emissions? Source: IEA Forum on Oil Market Challenges,

48 Trends: Low-Carbon Fuel Standards California low- carbon fuel standard (2007) - effective 2011.! US EPA Renewable Fuel Standard (2010) - effective 2022.!. British Columbia low- carbon fuel standard (2008) - effective European Union (2008) standard - effective 2020.!

49 Trends: Low-Carbon Fuel Standards California low- carbon fuel standard (2007) - effective 2011.! Requires the mix of fuel sold in California to not exceed 86 g CO2 equiv./mj energy released by 2020 for gasoline (WTW). US EPA Renewable Fuel Standard (2010) - effective 2022.!. British Columbia low- carbon fuel standard (2008) - effective European Union (2008) standard - effective 2020.!

50 Trends: Low-Carbon Fuel Standards California low- carbon fuel standard (2007) - effective 2011.! Requires the mix of fuel sold in California to not exceed 86 g CO2 equiv./mj energy released by 2020 for gasoline (WTW). US EPA Renewable Fuel Standard (2010) - effective 2022.!. Requires renewable fuel use to increase from 13 billion gal (2010) to 36 billion gal. It includes mandatory life- cycle GHG thresholds for renewables. British Columbia low- carbon fuel standard (2008) - effective European Union (2008) standard - effective 2020.!

51 Trends: Low-Carbon Fuel Standards California low- carbon fuel standard (2007) - effective 2011.! Requires the mix of fuel sold in California to not exceed 86 g CO2 equiv./mj energy released by 2020 for gasoline (WTW). US EPA Renewable Fuel Standard (2010) - effective 2022.!. Requires renewable fuel use to increase from 13 billion gal (2010) to 36 billion gal. It includes mandatory life- cycle GHG thresholds for renewables. British Columbia low- carbon fuel standard (2008) - effective Requires transportation fuels contain 5% renewable fuel by 2010 and allows the development of life- cycle low- carbon fuel standards. European Union (2008) standard - effective 2020.!

52 Trends: Low-Carbon Fuel Standards California low- carbon fuel standard (2007) - effective 2011.! Requires the mix of fuel sold in California to not exceed 86 g CO2 equiv./mj energy released by 2020 for gasoline (WTW). US EPA Renewable Fuel Standard (2010) - effective 2022.!. Requires renewable fuel use to increase from 13 billion gal (2010) to 36 billion gal. It includes mandatory life- cycle GHG thresholds for renewables. British Columbia low- carbon fuel standard (2008) - effective Requires transportation fuels contain 5% renewable fuel by 2010 and allows the development of life- cycle low- carbon fuel standards. European Union (2008) standard - effective 2020.! Requires the reduction of WTP, life- cycle GHG emissions by up to 10% through the use of sustainability- certified biofuels, the reduction of flaring and venting, CCS technology, electric vehicles, and the purchase of GHG credits.

53 0% Alternative Fueled Vehicles 10% 6% 12% E85 CNG LNG LPG Electric 72% Source: Transportation Energy Data Book, 32nd edition data.

54 0% Alternative Fueled Vehicles Alternatively 6% fueled vehicles are still less than 1% of 10% vehicle registrations. 12% E85 CNG LNG LPG Electric 72% Source: Transportation Energy Data Book, 32nd edition data.

55 Trends: Alternative Fueled Vehicles 900" Alterna2ve)Fueled)Vehicles)in)Use) 800" Thousand)Vehicles) 700" 600" 500" 400" 300" 200" H2" Elec" E95" E85" M100" M85" LNG" CNG" LPG" 100" 0" 1995" 1996" 1997" 1998" 1999" 2000" 2001" 2002" 2003" 2004" 2005" 2006" 2007" 2008" Source: US DOE Alternative Fuels & Advanced Vehicle Data Center

56 Trends: Alternative Fueled Vehicles 900" Alterna2ve)Fueled)Vehicles)in)Use) 800" Thousand)Vehicles) 700" 600" 500" 400" 300" 200" H2" Elec" E95" E85" M100" M85" LNG" CNG" LPG" 100" 0" 1995" 1996" 1997" 1998" 1999" 2000" 2001" 2002" 2003" 2004" 2005" 2006" 2007" 2008" 235 million light vehicles on the road Source: US DOE Alternative Fuels & Advanced Vehicle Data Center

57 Trends: Alternative Fueled Vehicles 900" Alterna2ve)Fueled)Vehicles)in)Use) 800" Thousand)Vehicles) 700" 600" 500" 400" 300" 200" H2" Elec" E95" E85" M100" M85" LNG" CNG" LPG" 100" 0" 1995" 1996" 1997" 1998" 1999" 2000" 2001" 2002" 2003" 2004" 2005" 2006" 2007" 2008" Any ideas why fraction of alternatively fueled vehicles is still so low? 235 million light vehicles on the road Source: US DOE Alternative Fuels & Advanced Vehicle Data Center

58 GHG Summary & Trends Transportation fuel sector is an important piece of the GHG pie! US consumes much more oil than it produces (for the moment)! Fuel combustion is the most significant portion of fuel cycle for conventional fuels.! Trends!! More VMT and unconventional fuels! Stricter fuel and vehicle emissions, some GHG standards! Alternative fueled vehicles!

59 CASE Study: The Life Cycle of Two Transportation Options

60 CASE Study: The Life Cycle of Two Transportation Options Union of Concerned Scientists Study

61 Case Study Goals & Defining Scope! What is the purpose, who is the audience, and what is your final product?! Compare an electric vehicle to a gasoline-fueled vehicle. Public audience.! Is your study a comparison more more of a benchmark-type study?! Comparison.! Inventory! What is the function & functional unit?! Somewhat tricky for this comparison.!!!! To do this:! They determined GHG emissions from a power plant for charging a vehicle with x amount of electricity.! Converted this x amount of electricity into miles traveled! Coverted this to mpg ghg! If mpg ghg is equal for a gasoline and electric vehicle, they emit the same amount of GHG for every mile they travel. from:

62 Case Study Goals & Defining Scope! What is the purpose, who is the audience, and what is your final product?! Compare an electric vehicle to a gasoline-fueled vehicle. Public audience.! Is your study a comparison more more of a benchmark-type study?! Comparison.! Inventory! What is the function & functional unit?! Somewhat tricky for this comparison.!!! Functional unit = mpg! To do this:! They determined GHG emissions from a power plant for charging a vehicle with x amount of electricity.! Converted this x amount of electricity into miles traveled! Coverted this to mpg ghg! If mpg ghg is equal for a gasoline and electric vehicle, they emit the same amount of GHG for every mile they travel. from:

63 CASE Study: Life-Cycle GHG Emissions from a Gasoline Vehicle

64 CASE Study: Life-Cycle GHG Emissions from a Gasoline Vehicle Anything missing from this picture?

65 Life Cycle of an electric vehicle Releases Power Releases generation Energy Energy Energy Energy Materials Manufacturing Use Reuse/recycle Materials Releases Entire mass Releases balance

66 Life Cycle of an electric vehicle Is an electric vehicle really zero emission? Releases Power Releases generation Energy Energy Energy Energy Materials Manufacturing Use Reuse/recycle Materials Releases Entire mass Releases balance

67 GHG Emissions from Electricity Generation Including GHG emissions associated with building the power plant, extracting the fuel, transporting the fuel to the plant, using the fuel, and electricity transmission. Coal has double the GHG emissions of natural gas.

68 Case Study: Comparing Power Generation from:

69 Case Study: Comparing Power Generation The cleaner the generation source the better the mpg from:

70 Case Study: Comparing Power Generation Note - nuclear waste is not considered. The cleaner the generation source the better the mpg from:

71 Case Study Inventory! Data and assumptions:! GREET1_2011 model of the Argonne National Laboratory was used for upstream emissions estimates (ANL 2011);! Production and consumption of gasoline were also estimated using default GREET1_2011;! 2009 plant data were used to estimate emissions from generation by fuel source, with an assumed average grid loss factor of 6.5 percent (EPA 2012a);! Plant construction data were from ANL life-cycle analyses (ANL 2010).! EV efficiency is assumed to be 0.34 kwh/mile, reflective of the Nissan LEAF a five-passenger EV.! I could not find any discussion of spills, leaks, or accidents.! What are the limitations of the study?! Be aware of who is publishing the study, the manufacturer, a trade group, a university, etc.! Factors other than GHG are not considered.! Could some aspects of the battery life be a concern?! Does the fuel mix used to produce electricity remain the same? Does bas load may differ significantly from peak power. What effect could this have? from:

72 Case Study Inventory! Data and assumptions:! GREET1_2011 model of the Argonne National Laboratory was used for upstream emissions estimates (ANL 2011);! Production and consumption of gasoline were also estimated using default GREET1_2011;! 2009 plant data were used to estimate emissions from generation by fuel source, with an assumed average grid loss factor of 6.5 percent (EPA 2012a);! Plant construction data were from ANL life-cycle analyses (ANL 2010).! Can EV you efficiency think of is any assumed burdens to be (other 0.34 kwh/mile, than energy reflective and GHG of emissions) the Nissan that might LEAF a be particularly five-passenger important EV.! for an electric vehicle? I could not find any discussion of spills, leaks, or accidents.! What are the limitations of the study?! Be aware of who is publishing the study, the manufacturer, a trade group, a university, etc.! Factors other than GHG are not considered.! Could some aspects of the battery life be a concern?! Does the fuel mix used to produce electricity remain the same? Does bas load may differ significantly from peak power. What effect could this have? from:

73 CASE Study Results from:

74 CASE Study Results Average fuel economy for compact vehicles = 27 mpg (2010) and for midsize vehicles = 26 mpg (combined city/highway). from:

75 CASE Study Results from:

76 CASE Study Results Benefit of an EV depends on where you live or charge your vehicle. from:

77 CASE Study Results Benefit of an EV depends on where you live or charge your vehicle. Note that states do not necessarily reflect their region, i.e., Utah. from:

78 CASE Study Results 45% of Americans live in the best regions - EVs have lower GHG emissions than a 50 mpg vehicle.! Charging your vehicle in the cleanest regions, i.e., California and parts of Alaska, is the equivalent to driving a vehicle with 38 mpg.! 38% of Americans live in regions where EV emissions would be equivalent to a mpg gasoline vehicle (similar to the best gasoline hybrids today).! 17% of Americans live in regions where EV emissions would be equivalent to 31 to 40 mpg gasoline vehicles. This makes some gasoline hybrid vehicles a better choice.! The Rocky Mountain Region (including Utah) has the highest GHG emission intensity for power generation, making some gasoline vehicles with a fuel economy greater than 34 mpg more attractive. from:

79 CASE Study Results & Final Thoughts As gasoline vehicle efficiency continues to improve under new CAFE standards..! EVs will need to continue to improve and/or! Electricity portfolios will need to move to cleaner fuels! Transitioning away from coal to natural gas! GHG emissions are not the only piece of the puzzle! Regional effects - like poor air quality along Utah s Wastach Front! Battery manufacture and disposal can be a concern for releases of toxics

80 Alternate View: IEEE Spectrum IEEE Spectrum: Unclean at Any Speed Electric cars don t solve the automobile s environmental problems (see below)! It s about values, which inevitably shape what questions the researchers ask as well as what they choose to count and what they don t.! Battery packs are heavy, and manufacturers are working to lighten the rest of the vehicle. As a result, electric car components contain many lightweight materials that are energy intensive to produce and process carbon composites and aluminum in particular. Electric motors and batteries add to the upstream energy consumption of the electric car.! The batteries and magnets contain metals, which have significant environmental burdens.! They assert that the NAP study found that the vehicles lifetime health and environmental damages (excluding long-term climatic effects) are actually greater than those of gasoline-powered cars from: from: National Academies Press: Transitions to Alternative Vehicles and Fuels (2013)

81

82 Can you explain why the range for the numbers appears so much larger for EVs compared to gasoline vehicles? Do you think this statement is accurate: NAP study found that the vehicles lifetime health and environmental damages (excluding long-term climatic effects) are actually greater than those of gasoline-powered cars.

83 CASE Study Results & Final Thoughts National Academy of Sciences:! EVs will become more efficient and cheaper (factor of 5), but EVs are unlikely to achieve a large market share because a battery large enough for a 300 mi range presents significant weight and volume penalties. Recharging time will still be an issue.! EVs reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and some pollutants that affect public health; however, their use could result in a slight increase in emissions of some pollutants.! The degree to which EVs affect pollutant emissions will depend on how the electricity that fuels a vehicle is generated, the degree to which charging of the vehicle is managed. National Academies Press (2013) Overcoming Barriers to Electric-Vehicle Deployment: Interim Report

84 Where Does the Energy GO? Source:

85 Where Does the Energy GO? Source:

86 Fuel Cycle & Vehicle Technologies %"Difference"compared"to"gasoline" 120$ 100$ 80$ 60$ 40$ 20$ 0$!20$!40$!60$!80$ Gas Adv. Vehicles EV HEV Corn EtOH + land use Corn EtOH Cell EtOH Coal liquids Cell EtOH + land use!100$ Source:

87 Fuel Cycle & Vehicle Technologies Advanced technology 20-26%! HEV 29-35%! EV 31-94%! Fuel cell 120$ 21-92% %"Difference"compared"to"gasoline" 100$ 80$ 60$ 40$ 20$ 0$!20$!40$!60$!80$!100$ Gas Adv. Vehicles EV HEV Corn EtOH + land use Corn EtOH Cell EtOH Coal liquids Cell EtOH + land use Source:

88 Fuel Cycle & Vehicle Technologies Advanced technology 20-26%! HEV 29-35%! EV 31-94%! Fuel cell 120$ 21-92% %"Difference"compared"to"gasoline" 100$ 80$ 60$ Adv. Cell 40$ Vehicles HEV EtOH 20$ How can EVs generate less GHG if electricity is fueled from fossil energy 0$ (coal)? Gas Corn Cell EtOH!20$ EtOH + land use EV efficiency:!40$ 88% (PP is approximately 35%, 5% line losses)!60$ EV Gas vehicle efficiency: 15% (fuel to energy to wheels)!80$!100$ Corn EtOH + land use Coal liquids Source:

89 ANL s GREET Model

90

91

92 Home work Some of the questions are similar in style to your project.! Opportunity to understand expectations for the project.

93 Strategies for Reducing GHG Emissions from Transportation Source:

94 Trends: Fuel Economy 40.0# 35.0# Fuel%economy%(mpg)% 30.0# 25.0# 20.0# 15.0# 10.0# 5.0# 0.0# 1980# 1990# 1992# 1994# 1996# 1998# 2000# 2002# 2004# 2006# 2008# Year% Passenger#car# Light#truck# CAFE#std#?#car# CAFE#std#?#truck# CAFE = Corporate Average Fuel Economy

95 Trends: Fuel Economy Fuel%economy%(mpg)% 40.0# 35.0# 30.0# 25.0# Passenger#car# 20.0# Light#truck# 15.0# 10.0# CAFE#std#?#car# CAFE standards 5.0# have improved fuel economy 14% (National CAFE#std#?#truck# Academy of Sciences) 0.0# 1980# 1990# 1992# 1994# 1996# national fuel- economy standard of 35 mpg by # 2000# Year% CAFE increases to 35.5 mpg and 54 mpg by # 2004# 2006# 2008# CAFE = Corporate Average Fuel Economy

96 Trends: Fuel Economy & VMT Hydrocarbon emissions (g/mi) and VMT per year (US EPA,