Does a battery-electric truck make a difference? – Life cycle emissions, costs, and externality analysis of alternative fuel-powered Class 8 heavy-duty trucks in the United States

Abstract Attempting to gain insights from how alternative fuel technologies employed in heavy-duty trucks (HDTs) differ with respect to their life-cycle emissions, costs, and externalities presents an important opportunity to develop a more holistic overall analysis of future HDTs. To this end, this study uses a hybrid life-cycle assessment method to analyze and compare alternative fuel-powered Class 8 HDTs. To account for the uncertainty in the data a Monte Carlo simulation is also applied. The HDTs considered in this analysis (biodiesel (B20), compressed natural gas (CNG), hybrid, and BE HDTs) are compared to the diesel HDT (conventional HDT). The results show that BE HDTs outperform all other types of trucks overall, despite their incremental costs and electricity generation-related emissions. Furthermore, if such a BE truck were to run on electricity generated in the Northeast Power Coordinating Council (NPCC) NERC region, fuel-consumption related GHGs emissions from BE HDTs could decrease by as much as 63 percent. It has also been found that, although there is a slight difference between the life-cycle costs (LCCs) of conventional HDTs and CNG-powered HDTs, the latter emits 33% more GHGs than the former. Moreover, this study concludes that CNG trucks yield no improvements in either HDT's life-cycle environmental impacts or LCCs compared to their conventional counterparts. Providing that electricity is generated from renewable energy sources, the use of BE trucks would significantly improve the life-cycle performance of a truck as well as ambient air quality.

[1]  C. Manzie,et al.  Conventional, hybrid and electric vehicles for Australian driving conditions. Part 2: Life cycle CO2-e emissions , 2013 .

[2]  Paulina Jaramillo,et al.  Comparison of life cycle greenhouse gases from natural gas pathways for medium and heavy-duty vehicles. , 2015, Environmental science & technology.

[3]  A. Finkel,et al.  Toward less misleading comparisons of uncertain risks: the example of aflatoxin and alar. , 1995, Environmental health perspectives.

[4]  Nick Nigro,et al.  LIFECYCLE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM DIFFERENT LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE AND FUEL PATHWAYS: A SYNTHESIS OF RECENT RESEARCH , 2013 .

[5]  N. Clark,et al.  Emissions from nine heavy trucks fueled by diesel and biodiesel blend without engine modification , 2000 .

[6]  Todd Ramsden,et al.  Cradle-to-Grave Lifecycle Analysis of U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle-Fuel Pathways: A Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Economic Assessment of Current (2020) and Future (2030-2035) Technologies , 2016 .

[7]  Willett Kempton,et al.  Vehicle-to-Grid Power: Battery, Hybrid, and Fuel Cell Vehicles as Resources for Distributed Electric Power in California , 2001 .

[8]  Vincenzo Marano,et al.  Simulation of an electric transportation system at The Ohio State University , 2014 .

[9]  Antti Lajunen,et al.  Energy consumption and cost-benefit analysis of hybrid and electric city buses , 2014 .

[10]  James J. Eberhardt,et al.  Emissions from Trucks using Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Fuel , 1998 .

[11]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment of Alternative Passenger Vehicles , 2014 .

[12]  Nicholas Z. Muller,et al.  Measuring the damages of air pollution in the United States , 2007 .

[13]  Nigel N. Clark,et al.  Emissions Comparisons of Twenty-Six Heavy-Duty Vehicles Operated on Conventional and Alternative Fuels , 1993 .

[14]  D. Murray,et al.  An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: 2017 Update , 2014 .

[15]  Nigel N. Clark,et al.  Comparative Emissions from Natural Gas and Diesel Buses , 1995 .

[16]  Matthew J. Kotchen,et al.  Private Provision of Environmental Public Goods: Household Participation in Green-Electricity Programs , 2007 .

[17]  Miguel A. Figliozzi,et al.  An economic and technological analysis of the key factors affecting the competitiveness of electric commercial vehicles: A case study from the USA market , 2013 .

[18]  W. Leontief.  Environmental Repercussions and the Economic Structure: An Input-Output Approach , 1970 .

[19]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  A macro-level decision analysis of wind power as a solution for sustainable energy in the USA , 2015 .

[20]  Greg Rideout,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-duty vehicles , 2008 .

[21]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Stochastic decision modeling for sustainable pavement designs , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[22]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Application of the TOPSIS and intuitionistic fuzzy set approaches for ranking the life cycle sustainability performance of alternative vehicle technologies , 2016 .

[23]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Linking national food production to global supply chain impacts for the energy-climate challenge: the cases of the EU-27 and Turkey , 2015 .

[24]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Integrating triple bottom line input–output analysis into life cycle sustainability assessment framework: the case for US buildings , 2014, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[25]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  A global, scope-based carbon footprint modeling for effective carbon reduction policies: Lessons from the Turkish manufacturing , 2015 .

[26]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Economic Input–Output Based Sustainability Analysis of Onshore and Offshore Wind Energy Systems , 2015 .

[27]  James J Winebrake,et al.  Total Fuel-Cycle Analysis of Heavy-Duty Vehicles Using Biofuels and Natural Gas-Based Alternative Fuels , 2011, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association.

[28]  M. Smith,et al.  Costs Associated With Compressed Natural Gas Vehicle Fueling Infrastructure: Factors to Consider in the Implementation of Fueling Stations and Equipment , 2014 .

[29]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  A fuzzy data envelopment analysis framework for dealing with uncertainty impacts of input–output life cycle assessment models on eco-efficiency assessment , 2016 .

[30]  Glen P. Peters,et al.  Efficient algorithms for Life Cycle Assessment, Input-Output Analysis, and Monte-Carlo Analysis , 2007 .

[31]  Omer Tatari,et al.  Electric vehicle cost, emissions, and water footprint in the United States: Development of a regional optimization model , 2015 .

[32]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Carbon and energy footprints of electric delivery trucks: A hybrid multi-regional input-output life cycle assessment , 2016 .

[33]  Miguel A. Figliozzi,et al.  The Seventh International Conference on City Logistics Conventional vs electric commercial vehicle fleets : A case study of economic and technological factors affecting the competitiveness of electric commercial vehicles in the USA , 2012 .

[34]  O. Tatari,et al.  Ecologically based hybrid life cycle analysis of continuously reinforced concrete and hot-mix asphalt pavements , 2012 .

[35]  Omer Tatari,et al.  A hybrid life cycle assessment of the vehicle-to-grid application in light duty commercial fleet , 2015 .

[36]  Arpad Horvath,et al.  Environmental Assessment of Freight Transportation in the U.S. (11 pp) , 2006 .

[37]  Omer Tatari,et al.  On the Front Lines of a Sustainable Transportation Fleet: Applications of Vehicle-to-Grid Technology for Transit and School Buses , 2016 .

[38]  Harry C. Watson,et al.  Fuel-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from alternative fuels in Australian heavy vehicles , 2002 .

[39]  Kevin Chandler,et al.  Emissions from Trucks and Buses Powered by Cummins L-10 Natural Gas Engines , 1998 .

[40]  Enver Doruk Özdemir,et al.  The future role of alternative powertrains and fuels in the German transport sector : a model based scenario analysis with respect to technical, economic and environmental aspects with a focus on road transport , 2012 .

[41]  O. Tatari,et al.  Ranking the sustainability performance of pavements: An intuitionistic fuzzy decision making method , 2014 .

[42]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Energy-climate-manufacturing nexus: New insights from the regional and global supply chains of manufacturing industries , 2016 .

[43]  Tao Li,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of an Engine with Input-Output Based Hybrid Analysis Method , 2014 .

[44]  Gjalt Huppes,et al.  Three Strategies to Overcome the Limitations of Life‐Cycle Assessment , 2004 .

[45]  Nigel N. Clark,et al.  Use of the West Virginia University Truck Test Cycle to Evaluate Emissions from Class 8 Trucks , 1995 .

[46]  O. Tatari,et al.  Sustainability assessment of U.S. final consumption and investments: triple-bottom-line input–output analysis , 2014 .

[47]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Scope-based carbon footprint analysis of U.S. residential and commercial buildings: An input–output hybrid life cycle assessment approach , 2014 .

[48]  David E. Smith,et al.  Fuel Consumption and Cost Savings of Class 8 Heavy-Duty Trucks Powered by Natural Gas , 2013 .

[49]  Dan Murray,et al.  Analysis of Operational Costs of Trucking , 2008 .

[50]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Comparative sustainability assessment of warm-mix asphalts: A thermodynamic based hybrid life cycle analysis , 2012 .

[51]  Mehdi Noori,et al.  Development of Regional Optimization and Market Penetration Models For Electric Vehicles in the United States , 2015 .

[52]  Hengbing Zhao,et al.  Analysis of Class 8 truck technologies for their fuel savings and economics , 2013 .

[53]  Jeremy J. Michalek,et al.  Valuation of plug-in vehicle life-cycle air emissions and oil displacement benefits , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[54]  Troy R. Hawkins,et al.  Life Cycle Assessment of Diesel and Electric Public Transportation Buses , 2013 .

[55]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  A Novel Life Cycle-based Principal Component Analysis Framework for Eco-efficiency Analysis: Case of the United States Manufacturing and Transportation Nexus , 2015 .

[56]  Omer Tatari,et al.  A hybrid life cycle assessment of public transportation buses with alternative fuel options , 2015, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment.

[57]  L. Gaines.  Lifecycle-analysis for heavy vehicles. , 1998 .

[58]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Combined application of multi-criteria optimization and life-cycle sustainability assessment for optimal distribution of alternative passenger cars in U.S. , 2016 .

[59]  David L. McCleese,et al.  Using monte carlo simulation in life cycle assessment for electric and internal combustion vehicles , 2002 .

[60]  Lin Zhu,et al.  Analysis of Class 8 hybrid-electric truck technologies using diesel, LNG, electricity, and hydrogen, as the fuel for various applications , 2013, 2013 World Electric Vehicle Symposium and Exhibition (EVS27).

[61]  Patrick Hofstetter,et al.  Monetization of health damages from road noise with implications for monetizing health impacts in life cycle assessment , 2005 .

[62]  Murat Kucukvar,et al.  Sustainability assessment of U.S. manufacturing sectors: an economic input output-based frontier approach , 2013 .

[63]  Freight Facts and Figures 2015 , 2015 .

[64]  E. Hertwich,et al.  Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked analysis. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.