Bellin T.

Cardellini G.

Casadei S.

Cernuschi S.

Costa D.

Faedo D.

Grosso M.

Lonati G.

Messagie M.

Puricelli S.

Rigamonti L.

Rossi T.

van den Oever A. E. M.

English

Archivio istituzionale della ricerca - Politecnico di Milano

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365500214Reducing the environmental impacts of passenger cars: a comparisonbetween electricity and biofuelsPoster · November 2022DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.32280.88320CITATIONS0READS11313 authors, including:Stefano PuricelliPolitecnico di Milano13 PUBLICATIONS   211 CITATIONS   SEE PROFILESimone CasadeiInnovhub Stazioni Sperimentali per l'Industria18 PUBLICATIONS   281 CITATIONS   SEE PROFILETommaso BellinInnovhub Stazioni Sperimentali per l'Industria3 PUBLICATIONS   12 CITATIONS   SEE PROFILEGiuseppe CardelliniKU Leuven37 PUBLICATIONS   707 CITATIONS   SEE PROFILEAll content following this page was uploaded by Stefano Puricelli on 18 November 2022.The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.POSTER SESSIONStefano Puricelli et al.Politecnico di Milano – Innovhub-SSI – VUB. stefano.puricelli@polimi.itINTRODUCTIONThe exhaust emissions and life cycle impacts of a C-segment Euro 6d-TEMP GDI car, fed with four experimental blends of petrol and renewable fuels (Fuel A, B, C, D), were compared with those derived from:• the same car fed with commercial reference petrol (Fuel A with fossil ETBE)• an average C-segment battery electric vehicle (BEV) MATERIALS AND METHODSLaboratory and on-the-road tests were carried out by driving the car following respectively the European homologation cold-start WLTC (Worldwide harmonized Light vehicles Test Cycle) and the RDE (Real Driving Emission) regulations. Results were compared and utilised within an LCA performed following the ISO standards 14040 and 14044 and the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) guidelines.RESULTS: EXHAUST EMISSIONS• Compliancy with Euro 6 standard (for WLTC) and Not-To-Exceed limits (for RDE)• WLTC tests: 6.9% reduction in CO2 emissions and  6.4% reduction in fuel consumption with Fuel B (versus Fuel A)• RDE tests: 34%-43% increase in CO2 emissions and fuel consumption, and  87%-200% increase in NOx emissions (versus WLTC tests)Reducing the environmental impactsof passenger cars: a comparisonbetween electricity and biofuelsFuel Unit Fuel A Fuel B Fuel C Fuel DPetrol% v/v96.4 84.9 78.2 92.5Bio-ETBE(ethyl tert-butyl ether)3.6 - 21.8 -Bionaphtha - 7.0 - -Bio-EtOH(bioethanol)- 8.1 - 4.8Methanol orbiomethanol or e-methanol- - - 2.7Functional unit 1 kmSystem boundaryProduction. use, and end-of-life of the cars, including capital goods (road, infrastructure, andequipment)Modelling principle AttributionalGeographic horizon EuropeImpact assessmentmethodEF method 3.0Data qualityPrimary data only for the use phase of the petrol car3.50E-028.50E-021.35E-011.85E-012.35E-010 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140150160170180190200210kg CO2eq/kmkm * 1000Impact on climate change along the mileage Fuel A with ETBE  Fuel A with bio-ETBE  Fuel B  Fuel C  Fuel D  BEVBreak-even points of the BEV stay inside the 30,000-45,000 km window(land use change not included)Use of fossil resources:• Petrol cars: 1% - 11% reduction• BEV: 25% reductionOther 14 impact categories:• Picture less straightforward• Exhaust emissions are irrelevant when compared to the impacts of fuels and car productionRESULTS: LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENTClimate change:• Fuel A with fossil ETBE (reference fuel of the study): highest impact (244 g CO2 eq/km)• Fuel A: 1% reduction• Fuel B: 10% reduction • Fuel C: 3.5% reduction• Fuel D: 2% reduction• BEV: 41% reductionClimate changeOzone depletionIonising radiationPhotochemical ozone formationParticulate matterHuman toxicity, non-cancerHuman toxicity, cancerAcidificationEutrophication, freshwaterEutrophication, marineEutrophication, terrestrialEcotoxicity, freshwaterLand useWater useResource use, fossilsResource use, minerals and metalsFuel Abeet ETBE -0.8 0.0 0.0 -0.3 5.2 -0.8 0.0 10.6 -0.9 7.6 26.1 0.4 1.7 -4.2 -0.9 0.0Fuel Astraw ETBE -0.8 0.3 0.1 -0.1 0.5 1.1 0.5 0.5 -0.7 4.0 1.5 1.3 0.9 0.6 -0.8 0.0Fuel Bbeet EtOH -10.1 -12.5 -8.9 2.8 30.9 -3.4 0.8 52.8 1.5 116.8 140.2 5.5 23.5 28.1 -11.1 1.3Fuel Bstraw EtOH -9.9 -11.0 -8.4 3.6 8.0 5.9 3.5 4.0 2.4 99.3 21.0 9.7 19.4 51.3 -10.6 1.4Fuel Cbeet ETBE -3.6 -5.3 -4.6 0.1 30.5 -4.5 0.0 61.8 0.2 48.2 159.4 2.0 9.8 -5.3 -5.1 0.7Fuel Cstraw ETBE -3.4 -3.5 -4.1 1.2 1.7 7.2 3.5 0.4 1.3 26.2 9.5 7.3 4.6 24.0 -4.5 0.8Fuel Dbeet EtOH -2.3 -3.3 -1.7 0.3 16.6 -1.8 0.4 33.3 -0.9 17.7 84.7 1.1 6.8 -4.4 -3.4 0.3Fuel Dstraw EtOH -2.2 -2.4 -1.4 0.8 2.3 4.0 2.1 2.8 -0.3 6.8 10.3 3.7 4.2 10.1 -3.1 0.4BEV -40.8 -69.6 131.7 -30.5 -10.9 3.7 3.5 -1.8 221.5 32.9 12.9 -61.6 4.5 108.5 -24.6 -57.3View publication stats

Reducing the environmental impacts of passenger cars: a comparison between electricity and biofuels

https://re.public.polimi.it/bitstream/11311/1257239/1/Poster_402.pdf

Reducing the environmental impacts of passenger cars: a comparison between electricity and biofuels

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Archivio istituzionale della ricerca - Politecnico di Milano