Total versus urban: Well-to-wheels assessment of criteria pollutant emissions from various vehicle/fuel systems |
| |
| Authors: | Hong Huo Ye Wu Michael Wang |
| |
| Institution: | 1. University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA;2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Exposure Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA;3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, USA;1. Institute of Environmental Assessment and Water Research, Spanish Research Council (IDÆA-CSIC), c/Jordi Girona 18-26, 08034 Barcelona, Spain;2. Centre for Sustainability & Environmental Health, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands;3. Department of Climate, Air and Sustainability, Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research, TNO, Utrecht, The Netherlands;4. EMPA, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, Dubendorf, Switzerland;5. Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, Linköping, Sweden;6. Department of Environmental Protection, Municipality of Klagenfurt on Lake Worthersee, Austria;7. National Centre for Atmospheric Science, Division of Environmental Health and Risk Management, School of Geography, Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom;8. MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, School of Biomedical Sciences, King''s College London, 150 Stamford Street, London SE1 9NH, United Kingdom;9. Laboratory of Atmospheric Chemistry, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5232 Villigen, Switzerland;10. Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology, Barcelona, Spain;11. Department of Environmental Sciences/Center of Excellence in Environmental Studies, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80203, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia;12. Institute for Risk Assessment Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands;1. School of Environment, and State Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China;2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA;3. State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Sources and Control of Air Pollution Complex, Beijing 100084, China |
| |
| Abstract: | The potential impact on the environment of alternative vehicle/fuel systems needs to be evaluated, especially with respect to human health effects resulting from air pollution. We used the Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Transportation (GREET) model to examine the well-to-wheels (WTW) emissions of five criteria pollutants (VOCs, NOx, PM10, PM2.5, and CO) for nine vehicle/fuel systems: (1) conventional gasoline vehicles; (2) conventional diesel vehicles; (3) ethanol (E85) flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs) fueled with corn-based ethanol; (4) E85 FFVs fueled with switchgrass-based ethanol; (5) gasoline hybrid vehicles (HEVs); (6) diesel HEVs; (7) electric vehicles (EVs) charged using the average U.S. generation mix; (8) EVs charged using the California generation mix; and (9) hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (FCVs). Pollutant emissions were separated into total and urban emissions to differentiate the locations of emissions, and emissions were presented by sources. The results show that WTW emissions of the vehicle/fuel systems differ significantly, in terms of not only the amounts but also with respect to locations and sources, both of which are important in evaluating alternative vehicle/fuel systems. E85 FFVs increase total emissions but reduce urban emissions by up to 30% because the majority of emissions are released from farming equipment, fertilizer manufacture, and ethanol plants, all of which are located in rural areas. HEVs reduce both total and urban emissions because of the improved fuel economy and lower emissions. While EVs significantly reduce total emissions of VOCs and CO by more than 90%, they increase total emissions of PM10 and PM2.5 by 35–325%. However, EVs can reduce urban PM emissions by more than 40%. FCVs reduce VOCs, CO, and NOx emissions, but they increase both total and urban PM emissions because of the high process emissions that occur during hydrogen production. This study emphasizes the importance of specifying a thorough life-cycle emissions inventory that can account for both the locations and sources of the emissions to assist in achieving a fair comparison of alternative vehicle/fuel options in terms of their environmental impacts. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
