Life cycle cost of conventional, battery electric, and fuel cell electric vehicles considering traffic and environmental policies in China

被引:63
|
作者
Li, Junjie [1 ]
Liang, Mei [2 ,3 ]
Cheng, Wanjing [4 ]
Wang, Shuhao [5 ]
机构
[1] China Univ Min & Technol, Sch Chem & Environm Engn, Beijing Campus, Beijing 100083, Peoples R China
[2] Guangzhou Dev Grp Inc, Guangzhou 510623, Peoples R China
[3] China Univ Petr, Sch Econ & Management, Beijing 102249, Peoples R China
[4] China Longyuan Power Grp, New Energy Dev & Res Ctr, Beijing 100034, Peoples R China
[5] Univ Warwick, Warwick Mfg Grp, Coventry CV4 7AL, W Midlands, England
关键词
Battery electric vehicle; Fuel cell electric vehicle; Life cycle cost; Traffic policy; Environmental policy; GREENHOUSE-GAS EMISSIONS; HYDROGEN-PRODUCTION; ENERGY-CONSUMPTION; IMPACT; MODEL; COMPETITIVENESS; OWNERSHIP;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.12.100
中图分类号
O64 [物理化学(理论化学)、化学物理学];
学科分类号
070304 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Electric vehicles (EVs) are considered a promising alternative to conventional vehicles (CVs) to alleviate the oil crisis and reduce urban air pollution and carbon emissions. Consumers usually focus on the tangible cost when choosing an EV or CV but overlook the time cost for restricting purchase or driving and the environmental cost from gas emissions, falling to have a comprehensive understanding of the economic competitiveness of CVs and EVs. In this study, a life cycle cost model for vehicles is conducted to express traffic and environmental policies in monetary terms, which are called intangible cost and external cost, respectively. Battery electric vehicles (BEVs), fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs), and CVs are compared in four first-tier, four new first-tier, and 4 s-tier and below cities in China. The comparison shows that BEVs and FCEVs in most cities are incomparable with CVs in terms of tangible cost. However, the prominent traffic and environmental policies in first-tier cities, especially in Beijing and Shanghai, greatly increase the intangible and external costs of CVs, making consumers more inclined to purchase BEVs and FCEVs. The main policy benefits of BEVs and FCEVs come from three aspects: government subsidies, purchase and driving restrictions, and environmental taxes. With the predictable reduction in government subsidies, traffic and environmental policies present important factors influencing the competitiveness of BEVs and FCEVs. In first-tier cities, BEVs and FCEVs already have a competitive foundation for large-scale promotion. In new first-tier and second-tier and below cities, stricter traffic and environmental policies need to be formulated to offset the negative impact of the reduction in government subsidies on the competitiveness of BEVs and FCEVs. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis reveals that increasing the mileage and reducing fuel prices can significantly improve the competitiveness of BEVs and FCEVs, respectively. (c) 2020 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:9553 / 9566
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Life-cycle private-cost-based competitiveness analysis of electric vehicles in China considering the intangible cost of traffic policies
    Diao, Qinghua
    Sun, Wei
    Yuan, Xinmei
    Li, Lili
    Zheng, Zhi
    APPLIED ENERGY, 2016, 178 : 567 - 578
  • [2] Comparative life cycle analysis of hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles and battery electric vehicles: An Indian perspective
    Shet, K. Harshendra N.
    Moholkar, Vijayanand S.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2025, 103 : 729 - 739
  • [3] Fuel Cycle Environmental Assessment for Electric Vehicles in China
    Li, Shuhua
    Cao, Qinxing
    Li, Jun
    Gao, Ying
    2018 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF GREEN BUILDINGS AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT (GBEM 2018), 2018, 186
  • [4] Comparative Environmental Life Cycle and Cost Assessment of Electric, Hybrid, and Conventional Vehicles in Lithuania
    Petrauskiene, Kamile
    Galinis, Arvydas
    Kliaugaite, Daina
    Dvarioniene, Jolanta
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2021, 13 (02) : 1 - 17
  • [5] Comparative Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and Electric Vehicles
    Hawkins, Troy R.
    Singh, Bhawna
    Majeau-Bettez, Guillaume
    Stromman, Anders Hammer
    JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY, 2013, 17 (01) : 53 - 64
  • [6] Prospective cost and environmental impact assessment of battery and fuel cell electric vehicles in Germany
    Bekel, Kai
    Pauliuk, Stefan
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT, 2019, 24 (12): : 2220 - 2237
  • [7] Prospective cost and environmental impact assessment of battery and fuel cell electric vehicles in Germany
    Kai Bekel
    Stefan Pauliuk
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2019, 24 : 2220 - 2237
  • [8] A cost comparison of fuel-cell and battery electric vehicles
    Eaves, S
    Eaves, J
    JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES, 2004, 130 (1-2) : 208 - 212
  • [9] Modeling and Analysis of Life Cycle Cost for (LCC) Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) and Conventional Combustion Engine Vehicles
    Fang, Jiamin
    IAEDS15: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE IN APPLIED ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT, 2015, 46 : 601 - 606
  • [10] Correction to: prospective cost and environmental impact assessment of battery and fuel cell electric vehicles in Germany
    Kai Bekel
    Stefan Pauliuk
    The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2020, 25 : 831 - 831