GEOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCES OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTION FROM ELECTRIC VEHICLE DEPLOYMENT IN THE UNITED STATES

被引:0
|
作者
Yang, Fan [1 ]
Yuan, Chris [1 ]
Zhao, Xiang [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI 53201 USA
[2] Gen Motors Corp, Warren, MI USA
来源
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASME 9TH INTERNATIONAL MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING CONFERENCE, 2014, VOL 1 | 2014年
关键词
LIFE-CYCLE ASSESSMENT;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
The use of electric vehicle (EV) has been widely recognized as an effective way to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation sector. However, the geographic difference of GHG emission reduction from EV deployment is seldom explored. This paper presents a study on the total GHG emissions generated from the life cycle of an EV (represented by Nissan Leaf) and an internal combustion vehicle (ICV) (represented by Toyota Corolla) for benchmarking on the potential emission reductions in the United States. The differences of electricity mix and driving style in each state are considered in the analysis. The results indicate a 43% GHG emissions reduction from ICV with the deployment of EV under the current average United States' electricity generation scheme and transportation style. But the life cycle GHG emission reductions vary significantly from state to state in the U.S. Some states such as Indiana, Wyoming and West Virginia can only get 7237, 9501 and 9860 kg CO2 equivalent reduced, while some states such as Vermont, New Jersey and Idaho can get 57915, 57206 and 49039 kg CO2 equivalent GHG emissions reduced. This study can be useful in supporting future decision-making and strategy development for EV deployment in the U.S.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] VEHICLE REFUELING EMISSION CONTROL IN THE UNITED STATES.
    Koehl, W.J.
    McCabe, L.J.
    Becker, R.F.
    Oil Gas European Magazine, 1987, 13 (01): : 36 - 40
  • [42] The implications of scope and boundary choice on the establishment and success of metropolitan greenhouse gas reduction targets in the United States
    Markolf, Samuel A.
    Matthews, H. Scott
    Azevedo, Ines M. L.
    Hendrickson, Chris
    ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2018, 13 (12):
  • [43] Greenhouse gas reduction policy in the United States: Identifying winners and losers in an expanded permit trading system
    Rose, A
    Oladosu, G
    ENERGY JOURNAL, 2002, 23 (01): : 1 - 18
  • [44] Carbon Pricing for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction: Carbon Tax or Emission Trading?
    Karakaya, Etem
    Akkoyun, Gamze
    Hicyilmaz, Burcu
    EKONOMI POLITIKA & FINANS ARASTIRMALARI DERGISI, 2023, 8 (04): : 813 - 841
  • [45] Electric vehicle charging optimization to minimize marginal greenhouse gas emissions from power generation
    Tu, Ran
    Gai, Yijun
    Farooq, Bilal
    Posen, Daniel
    Hatzopoulou, Marianne
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2020, 277
  • [46] Predictive modeling of energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from autonomous electric vehicle operations
    Zhang, Cheng
    Yang, Fan
    Ke, Xinyou
    Liu, Zhifeng
    Yuan, Chris
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2019, 254
  • [47] Electric Rate Design and Greenhouse-Gas Emissions Reduction
    Blumsack, S.
    2009 IEEE POWER & ENERGY SOCIETY GENERAL MEETING, VOLS 1-8, 2009, : 2098 - 2101
  • [48] INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES FOR GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTION IN STEEL PRODUCTION
    Burchart-Korol, D.
    Pichlak, M.
    Kruczek, M.
    METALURGIJA, 2016, 55 (01): : 119 - 122
  • [49] The calculation of greenhouse gas emissions of a family and projections for emission reduction
    Yatarkalkmaz M.M.
    Özdemir M.B.
    Journal of Energy Systems, 2019, 3 (03): : 96 - 110
  • [50] Assessment of Sectoral Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Potentials for 2030
    Blok, Kornelis
    Afanador, Angelica
    van der Hoorn, Irina
    Berg, Tom
    Edelenbosch, Oreane Y.
    van Vuuren, Detlef P.
    ENERGIES, 2020, 13 (04)