Quanlu Wang

Emission impacts of electric vehicles

Alternative vehicular fuels are proposed as a strategy to reduce urban air pollution. In this paper, we analyze the emission impacts of electric vehicles in California for two target years, 1995 and 2010. We consider a range of assumptions regarding electricity consumption of electric vehicles, emission control technologies for power plants, and the mix of primary energy sources for electricity generation. We find that, relative to continued use of gasoline-powered vehicles, the use of electric vehicles would dramatically and unequivocally reduce carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons. Under most conditions, nitrogen oxide emissions would decrease moderately. Sulfur oxide and particulate emissions would increase or slightly decrease. Because other areas of the United States tend to use more coal in electricity generation and have less stringent emission controls on power plants, electric vehicles may have less emission reduction benefits outside California.

Impacts of electric vehicles on primary energy consumption and petroleum displacement

We analyze the impact of the use of electric vehicles (EVs) on energy consumption in general and petroleum consumption in particular. The analysis is conducted for sub-compact cars, small vans, and large vans for the years 1995 and 2010. We compare per-mile primary energy consumption of EVs and gasoline internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs), for each of four primary energy sources: petroleum, coal, natural gas, and biomass. When petroleum, natural gas, or biomass is the primary energy source, EVs with current technology will consume more energy per mile than ICEVs, but EVs with advanced technology will consume less. If coal is the primary energy source, both current-and advanced-technology EVs will consume less energy per mile than ICEVs. We find that the magnitude of petroleum displacement by EVs depends mainly on the amount of petroleum used for electricity generation. In many areas of the U.S., EVs will reduce per-mile petroleum use by over 90%, because the vast majority of electricity is generated from non-petroleum fuels. In areas where a relatively large portion of electricity is generated from petroleum (such as New York), EVs will reduce per-mile petroleum use by 65%.

Emission Control Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative-Fuel Vehicles

Although various legislation and regulations have been adopted to promote the use of alternative-fuel vehicles for curbing urban air pollution problems, there is a lack of systematic comparisons of emission control cost-effectiveness among various alternative-fuel vehicle types. In this paper, life-cycle emission reductions and life-cycle costs were estimated for passenger cars fueled with methanol, ethanol, liquified petroleum gas, compressed natural gas, and electricity. Vehicle emission estimates included both exhaust and evaporative emissions for air pollutants of hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and air-toxic pollutants of benzene, formaldehyde, 1,3-butadiene, and acetaldehyde. Vehicle life-cycle cost estimates accounted for vehicle purchase prices, vehicle life, fuel costs, and vehicle maintenance costs. Emission control cost-effectiveness presented in dollars per ton of emission reduction was calculated for each alternative-fuel vehicle type from the estimated vehicle life-cycle emission reductions and costs. Among various alternative-fuel vehicle types, compressed natural gas vehicles are the most cost-effective vehicle type in controlling vehicle emissions. Dedicated methanol vehicles are the next most cost-effective vehicle type. The cost-effectiveness of electric vehicles depends on improvements in electric vehicle battery technology. With low-cost, high-performance batteries, electric vehicles are more cost-effective than methanol, ethanol, and liquified petroleum gas vehicles.

LIGHT-DUTY VEHICLE EXHAUST EMISSION CONTROL COST ESTIMATES USING A PART-PRICING APPROACH

The substantial reductions in motor vehicle emissions that have occurred since the late 1960s have been accompanied by continuous increases in vehicle emission control costs, and cost increases or decreases due to changes in vehicle performance such as driveability, power, fuel economy, and vehicle maintenance. In this paper, a systematic approach has been developed to estimate emission control costs for motor vehicles. The approach accounts for all emission control parts installed on vehicles, and the costs of these emission parts are estimated through their prices. This paper does not estimate costs of the changes in vehicle performance and maintenance caused by emission control. Using information on emission control parts and their prices for new light-duty vehicles sold in California in 1990, per-vehicle control costs and total control costs for all new light-duty vehicles have been estimated. The cost to vehicle manufacturers per vehicle for emission control ranges from

AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS AND ELECTRIC VEHICLES

220 to

Highway Electrification: An Exploration of Energy Supply Implications

1,460, depending on v...