School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology , Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.
Environ Sci Technol. 2013 Jul 16;47(14):8022-30. doi: 10.1021/es400179w. Epub 2013 Jul 5.
We compare electric and diesel urban delivery trucks in terms of life-cycle energy consumption, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and total cost of ownership (TCO). The relative benefits of electric trucks depend heavily on vehicle efficiency associated with drive cycle, diesel fuel price, travel demand, electric drive battery replacement and price, electricity generation and transmission efficiency, electric truck recharging infrastructure, and purchase price. For a drive cycle with frequent stops and low average speed such as the New York City Cycle (NYCC), electric trucks emit 42-61% less GHGs and consume 32-54% less energy than diesel trucks, depending upon vehicle efficiency cases. Over an array of possible conditions, the median TCO of electric trucks is 22% less than that of diesel trucks on the NYCC. For a drive cycle with less frequent stops and high average speed such as the City-Suburban Heavy Vehicle Cycle (CSHVC), electric trucks emit 19-43% less GHGs and consume 5-34% less energy, but cost 1% more than diesel counterparts. Considering current and projected U.S. regional electricity generation mixes, for the baseline case, the energy use and GHG emissions ratios of electric to diesel trucks range from 48 to 82% and 25 to 89%, respectively.
我们比较了电动和柴油城市配送卡车在生命周期能源消耗、温室气体 (GHG) 排放和总拥有成本 (TCO) 方面的情况。电动卡车的相对优势在很大程度上取决于与驾驶循环相关的车辆效率、柴油价格、行驶需求、电动驱动电池更换和价格、发电和输电效率、电动卡车充电基础设施以及购买价格。对于像纽约市循环 (NYCC) 这样频繁停车且平均速度较低的驾驶循环，电动卡车比柴油卡车的 GHG 排放量少 42-61%，能源消耗少 32-54%，具体取决于车辆效率情况。在一系列可能的情况下，电动卡车在 NYCC 上的 TCO 中位数比柴油卡车低 22%。对于像城市-郊区重型车辆循环 (CSHVC) 这样停车频率较低且平均速度较高的驾驶循环，电动卡车的 GHG 排放量少 19-43%，能源消耗少 5-34%，但成本比柴油车高 1%。考虑到当前和预计的美国区域发电组合，对于基线情况，电动卡车与柴油卡车的能源使用和 GHG 排放比分别为 48 至 82%和 25 至 89%。
Zotero 插件