determining-environmental-impacts-ricardo.pdf - International ...

© Ricardo plc 2021

Creating a world

fit for the future

© Ricardo plc 2020

Determining the

environmental impacts of

conventional and alternatively

fuelled vehicles through Life

Cycle AssessmentSofia Amaral, Workshop on life cycle assessment

methods to support India’s efforts to decarbonise

transport, 13 April 2021

2ED11344 Workshop on LCAPublic© Ricardo plc 13 April 2021

• Brief introduction

• Why are we interested in LCA?

• The Ricardo project for the European Commission:

– What is the scope?

– What approaches have we applied?

– What are the key results and conclusions?

Contents


Ricardo is a Global Engineering & Environmental Consultancy with over 3000

employees: engineers, scientists and consultants in all major regions

Sectors

Automotive

Commercial

Vehicles

Defence

Energy &

Environment

Motorsport

Motorcycle

Off-Highway

Vehicles

Rail


Carpet tiles

Ricardo has performed LCA studies on an extremely wide range of products

The McLaren P2 engine

Water footprint of a brickA timber building I-joist

Light-weighting a Dutch

passenger train

Railway cable troughs made

from recycled plastic

The by-products from whisky

production

Using ammonia as an energy

storage vector

The entire portfolio of Green

Investment Group projectsNew powertrains for Dutch

region’s rolling stock

Making jet fuel from waste

materials

Hybrid vs diesel powertrains for

buses

A high-speed train Alternative truck engine designs

Design choices for in-line printers

and their inks

High thermal-efficiency wall

cladding fixture

Rolling stock for Thailand

Electric aircraft


The European Green Deal will transform the EU into a modern, resource efficient

and competitive economy

Source: European Commission

Sustainability, climate neutrality, resource

efficiencyAll sectors, all impacts LCA is key


Interest in and relevance of LCA has been building over the years driven by changes

in the regulatory environment and uptake of new fuels/powertrains

41.737.5

0.0

52.5 50.4

14.7

61.5 59.4

29.1

54.952.5

16.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

GasolineICE

G-ICE(+10%bio)

BEV GasolineICE

G-ICE(+10%bio)

BEV GasolineICE

G-ICE(+10%bio)

BEV GasolineICE

G-ICE(+10%bio)

BEV

Exhaust Only Well-To-Wheel Vehicle Life Cycle Vehicle Life Cycle

2020 2030

GH

G E

mis

sio

ns [tC

O2e

]

Vehicle Use Vehicle Use (CO Regs) Fuel / Electricity Production Vehicle Embedded Emissions Total2

-10% - 0 -100% -4% -72% -3.4% -53% -4.3% -70%Passenger Car:

ILLUSTRATIVE

Tailpipe

counted as

zero for bio

component

for GHG

inventories

Uneven uncertainties

Vehicle Policy Energy Policy OEM Product LCA

Historical; CO2

Regulations

Biofuels

deployed; RED

Increase in xEV

DeploymentFuture DevelopmentsContext

41.7 : CO2 regs.

: Inventories,

CSR

Source: Ricardo Vehicle LCA analysis (June 2020) for average EU lower-medium passenger car: Assumes lifetime 225,000 km, real-world fuel consumption. GHG from fuel/electricity consumption is based on the average fuel/grid electricity factor over

the life of the vehicle (Baseline scenario); Calculated 89.0 kgCO2e/kWh battery in 2020, 30.0 kgCO2e/kWh in 2030. Includes EoL recycling credits


Vehicle Policy LCA project led by Ricardo with E4tech,

ifeu for DG CLIMA (EC):

• Objective to develop and apply LCA methodology across

a range of road vehicle types, powertrains and energy

chains:

– Literature review and data collection

– LCA Methodological Development

– Application of the LCA methodology to provide results,

explore hotspots and key sensitivities to the outcome

• Focus is on LCA for policy-making/strategy

Ricardo project for the European Commission (EC) provided holistic insights on

the impacts of different vehicles, powertrains & fuels and the circular economy


End-of-Life

Adds assessment of environmental

impact of “end of life” scenario (i.e.

-to-Grave). Can include: re-using

or re-purposing components,

recycling materials, energy

recovery and disposal to landfill

Vehicle Production

Assessment of ‘Cradle-to-Gate’

environmental impact of producing

the vehicle, including extract of raw

materials, processing, component

manufacture, logistics, vehicle

assembly and painting

Vehicle cycle “Embedded”

emissions result from vehicle

manufacturing, maintenance

and end-of-life (EoL) disposal

Well-to-Wheel (WTW)

Analysis on the production of

fuels and electricity, and

operational emissions Fuel & Electricity

Production

Assessment of (WTT)

environmental impact of producing

the energy vector(s) from primary

energy source, generation plants,

through to distribution point

The Vehicle Policy LCA project considers environmental impacts over the whole

life of the vehicle

Vehicle Life Cycle

Use/Operation

• Environmental impact of driving

(TTW emissions)

• Impact from maintenance and

servicing

Study Boundary: The whole vehicle life cycle

includes embedded emissions

from vehicle production,

maintenance and servicing,

and end-of-life activities, and

WTW (WTT+TTW) emissions

from fuels and electricity

Transport Infrastructure - charging/ refuelling; roads etc. Not in scope

Ele

ctr

icity S

tora

ge

Vehic

le M

anuf. P

lants

Not

in s

cope


The Vehicle Policy LCA covered many different dimensions – this required a

streamlined approach for the development and application of the methodology

Scope of our study vis-à-vis reference studies

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%GHG

Other impacts

No. vehicle types

No. powertrain types

VehicleProd./Use/EoL

No./detail on fuelchains

No./detail onelectricity chains

Temporal variation(2020-2050)

Spatial variation

Our Study THELMA Project JEC WTW Study GREET Model

Level of coverage and detail

Options for LCA coverage, detail

DG CLIMA Vehicle

LCA Project

Many degrees

of freedom

➔ needed to

manage both

complexity

and coverage

Future

Work

65 Vehicle

/Powertrain

combinations

14 generation types

+ 34 Generation Mix

60 fuel production

chains + 12 Fuel Blends

EU + 28

countries, CN,

KR, JP, US,

World

14 impact

categories,

+ 12 individual

pollutants


The Ricardo Lifecycle Protocol (RLP) has been

implemented in our bespoke Vehicle LCA Model, with:

• A Modular Excel-based modelling framework

developed by Ricardo

• A Results Viewer to review the final outputs

The Ricardo Lifecycle Protocol (RLP) was applied in a modular framework developed

by Ricardo to generate results and conclusions for the project:

Electricity

Production

Chains

Fuel

Production

Chains

Results

Viewer

Underlying background LCI / materials data base(s) (ecoinvent, GREET, etc.)

Generic LCA dataset, incl. temporal development of materials impacts, etc.

Vehicle Chain: Vehicle

Specification, Manufacturing, Use and EoL

Key interfaces

Indirect interfaces

/links

Outputs

General conclusions

and reporting

Delivered to the European Commission

Application of the LCA

methodology

Ricardo internal models*

1

23 4

5

0

ifeu Refinery

Model

ifeu Umberto

Model


0%20%40%60%80%

100%120%140%

GWP

CED

POCP

PMFHTP

ARD_MM

WaterS

ICEV-G [2020]

ICEV-G

HEV-G

PHEV-G

BEV

FCEV

2020

The Vehicle Policy LCA results are provided for each impact category, with a wide

range of sensitivities – e.g. for Lower Medium Cars (i.e. European Segment C)

273

168

232

124

257

226

202

140

212

123

191

104

150

60

145

59

129

43

188

64

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

2020

2050

2020

2050

2020

2050

2020

2050

2020

2050

2020

2050

2020

2050

2020

2050

2020

2050

2020

2050

ICE

V-

GIC

EV

-D

ICE

V-

LP

GIC

EV

-C

NG

HE

V-

GH

EV

-D

PH

EV

-GP

HE

V-D

BE

VF

CE

V

GWP [gCO2e/vehicle-km]

Production WTT TTW Maintenance End-of-Life Total

Lower Medium Car – Tech1.5 Scenario

Opera

tio

n

Sensitivity Impact

1 Regional Variation High

2 Lifetime km Medium

3 PHEV fuel share Medium

4 Loading Medium

5 Future ICE air quality

plan (AQP)

Low

6 Ambient temperature Low

7 Fuels methodology Low-Mid

8 Trajectories for glider

material composition

Low

9 Electric range Low

10 Battery energy

density

Low

11 Battery EU

sustainable value

chain

Low

12 Battery 2nd life Low

13 Vehicle EU sustainable

value chainLow

Reference powertrain

0%20%40%60%80%

100%120%140%

GWP

CED

POCP

PMFHTP

ARD_MM

WaterS

ICEV-G [2020]

ICEV-G

HEV-G

PHEV-G

BEV

FCEV

2050

Notes: GWP = Global Warming Potential; CED = Cumulative Energy Demand; POCP = Photochemical Ozone Creation Potential, PMF = Particulate

Matter Formation; HPT = Human Toxicity Potential; ARD_MM = Abiotic Resource Depletion, minerals and metals; WaterS = Water Scarcity

Additional information: 225,000km, 15 year lifetime. 2020 BEV battery 57 kWh, 300km range, with av. lifetime EU28 fuel/electricity mix (age-dependant mileage weighted). No battery replacement calculated to be needed for xEVs.

Veh

. S

pe

c.

Pro

d.+

EoL


Example – Regional variation impacts of comparison of ICEVs vs BEVs shows that

in the vast majority of EU countries BEVs already show significant GHG benefits

Source: Ricardo LCA modelling, June 2020. Results shown for the lower medium car in the baseline scenario. Production = production of raw materials, manufacturing of components and vehicle assembly; WTT = fuel/electricity production cycle;

TTW = impacts due to emissions from the vehicle during operational use; Maintenance = impacts from replacement parts and consumables; End-of-Life = impacts/credits from collection, recycling, energy recovery and disposal of vehicles and

batteries. Additional information on key input assumptions and derived intermediate data include the following: a lifetime activity of 225,000 km over 15 years. 2020 BEV battery has a 58 kWh, a 300km WLTP range, and with average lifetime

EU28 fuel/electricity mix (age-dependant mileage weighted). No battery replacement is calculated to be needed for BEVs, based on the assumptions on the capacity of the battery, battery cycle life and lifetime km of the vehicle.

Lower Medium Car

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350IC

EV

-G

ICE

V-D

BE

V

EE

PL

CZ

DE

BG

MT

GR

NL

RO SI

CY

HR IT LT IE LU

BE

ES

AT

SK

HU

DK

LV

PT

UK FI

FR

SE

EU28 BEV

GW

P [g

CO

2e

/ve

hic

le-k

m]

% EU28 ICEV-G

End-of-Life

Maintenance

TTW

WTT

Production

Total 2030

EU28 BEV,

2020


Similar trends are seen for HDVs as for passenger cars, even when accounting for

lost load capacity (which particularly reduces benefits for Artic BEVs in 2020). BEVs

have lowest GHG from 2030 for all HDVs

264 206 221 216430 338 284 386

576

1,111

335 187 220 261536

717566 608

930793

212

887

503

942

100%

81% 86%

31%

50%

100%

86%

51%56%

92%100%

62%

95%

34%

52%

-250

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

1750

2000D

iese

l IC

EV

Die

se

l H

EV

LN

G H

PD

I IC

EV

BE

V

FC

EV

Die

se

l IC

EV

LN

G H

PD

I IC

EV

Die

se

l H

EV

-ER

S

BE

V

FC

EV

Die

se

l IC

EV

Die

se

l H

EV

CN

G IC

EV

BE

V

FC

EV

12t Rigid Lorry 40t Artic Lorry 12m Urban Bus

GH

G E

mis

sio

ns [gC

O2e

/ve

hic

le-k

m]

Production WTT TTW Maintenance End-of-Life % EU28 ICEV-D Total Total 2050

Source: Ricardo vehicle LCA analysis, June 2020

EU Av. for EC “Tech1.5” Scenario (2020 breakdown; 2050 total)

• Rigid / Artic / Bus: Lifetime 570,000 / 800,000 / 675,000 km. BEV electric range 200 / 500 / 250 km in 2020, 350 / 1500 / 400 km in 2050

• GHG from fuel/electricity consumption is based on the average fuel/grid electricity factor over 12 / 10 / 15 year vehicle life

Urban Delivery Long Haul Urban Bus


Key findings and benefits of vehicle LCA

+ Helped to confirm significant GWP benefits for

xEVs over other types of powertrain that also

increase over time

+ Highlighted hotspots, e.g. for xEVs due to

certain materials through Abiotic Resource

Depletion and Human Toxicity Potential

+ Cumulative energy demand is much higher for

Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEVs) than

Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) due to the

less efficient end-to-end energy chain

+ EoL methodologies help illustrate the benefits

(also for the circular economy) for vehicle

recycling and battery 2nd life applications

What has / can vehicle LCA tell us about the impacts of different

powertrain options and circular economy? What are the key challenges for LCA

and areas where other complementary approaches are needed?

Challenges for LCA and future improvements

! Highly complex; further standardisation /

vehicle LCA PCR (product category rules)

needed to facilitate comparisons

• Different methodologies and assumptions can

have significant impacts on the result

! Resource issues not always captured well by

current LCA impact categories (e.g. Li /Co /Ni)

• Complimentary fleet/system modelling needed

to capture resource flows / implications

! Uncertainty on future battery recycling /

recovery levels and impacts

Thank you!

Sofia Amaral

Ricardo Energy & Environment

30 Eastbourne Terrace

London

W2 6LA

United Kingdom

T: +44 (0)1235 75 3048

E: [email protected]

E: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

determining-environmental-impacts-ricardo.pdf - International ...

Documents

Transcript of determining-environmental-impacts-ricardo.pdf - International ...