IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v208y2025ics1364032124007147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life cycle assessment comparison of electric and internal combustion vehicles: A review on the main challenges and opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • da Costa, Vinicius Braga Ferreira
  • Bitencourt, Leonardo
  • Dias, Bruno Henriques
  • Soares, Tiago
  • de Andrade, Jorge Vleberton Bessa
  • Bonatto, Benedito Donizeti

Abstract

A notable shift from an internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) fleet to an electric vehicles (EVs) fleet is expected in the medium term due to increasing environmental concerns and technological breakthroughs. In this context, this paper conducts a systematic literature review on life cycle assessment (LCA) research of EVs compared to ICEVs based on highly impactful articles. Several essential aspects and characteristics were identified and discussed, such as the assumed EV types, scales, models, storage technologies, boundaries, lifetime, electricity consumption, driving cycles, combustion fuels, locations, impact assessment methods, and functional units. Furthermore, LCA results in seven environmental impact categories were gathered and evaluated in detail. The research indicates that, on average, battery electric vehicles are superior to ICEVs in terms of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (182.9 g CO2-eq/km versus 258.5 g CO2-eq/km), cumulative energy demand (3.2 MJ/km versus 4.1 MJ/km), fossil depletion (49.7 g oil-eq/km versus 84.4 g oil-eq/km), and photochemical oxidant formation (0.47 g NMVOC-eq/km versus 0.61 g NMVOC-eq/km) but are worse than ICEVs in terms of human toxicity (198.1 g 1,4-DCB-eq/km versus 64.8 g 1,4-DCB-eq/km), particulate matter formation (0.32 g PM10-eq/km versus 0.26 g PM10-eq/km), and metal depletion (69.3 g Fe-eq/km versus 19.0 g Fe-eq/km). Emerging technological developments are expected to tip the balance in favor of EVs further. Based on the conducted research, we propose to organize the factors that influence the vehicle life cycle into four groups: user specifications, vehicle specifications, local specifications, and multigroup specifications. Then, a set of improvement opportunities is provided for each of these groups. Therefore, the present paper can contribute to future research and be valuable for decision-makers, such as policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • da Costa, Vinicius Braga Ferreira & Bitencourt, Leonardo & Dias, Bruno Henriques & Soares, Tiago & de Andrade, Jorge Vleberton Bessa & Bonatto, Benedito Donizeti, 2025. "Life cycle assessment comparison of electric and internal combustion vehicles: A review on the main challenges and opportunities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:208:y:2025:i:c:s1364032124007147
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114988
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032124007147
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2024.114988?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:208:y:2025:i:c:s1364032124007147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.