IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v16y2023i19p6782-d1246278.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

LCA of a Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Considering Different Power System Architectures

Author

Listed:
  • Gianmarco Gottardo

    (Department of Chemistry, Materials and Chemical Engineering “Giulio Natta”, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Andrea Basso Peressut

    (Department of Chemistry, Materials and Chemical Engineering “Giulio Natta”, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Silvia Colnago

    (Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Via Giuseppe Ponzio 34, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Saverio Latorrata

    (Department of Chemistry, Materials and Chemical Engineering “Giulio Natta”, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Luigi Piegari

    (Department of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Via Giuseppe Ponzio 34, 20133 Milano, Italy)

  • Giovanni Dotelli

    (Department of Chemistry, Materials and Chemical Engineering “Giulio Natta”, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy)

Abstract

Fuel cell electric vehicles are a promising solution for reducing the environmental impacts of the automotive sector; however, there are still some key points to address in finding the most efficient and less impactful implementation of this technology. In this work, three electrical architectures of fuel cell electric vehicles were modeled and compared in terms of the environmental impacts of their manufacturing and use phases. The three architectures differ in terms of the number and position of the DC/DC converters connecting the battery and the fuel cell to the electric motor. The life cycle assessment methodology was employed to compute and compare the impacts of the three vehicles. A model of the production of the main components of vehicles and fuel cell stacks, as well as of the production of hydrogen fuel, was constructed, and the impacts were calculated using the program SimaPro. Eleven impact categories were considered when adopting the ReCiPe 2016 midpoint method, and the EF (adapted) method was exploited for a final comparison. The results highlighted the importance of the converters and their influence on fuel consumption, which was identified as the main factor in the comparison of the environmental impacts of the vehicle.

Suggested Citation

  • Gianmarco Gottardo & Andrea Basso Peressut & Silvia Colnago & Saverio Latorrata & Luigi Piegari & Giovanni Dotelli, 2023. "LCA of a Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Considering Different Power System Architectures," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-19, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:19:p:6782-:d:1246278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/19/6782/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/19/6782/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alessandro Arrigoni & Valeria Arosio & Andrea Basso Peressut & Saverio Latorrata & Giovanni Dotelli, 2022. "Greenhouse Gas Implications of Extending the Service Life of PEM Fuel Cells for Automotive Applications: A Life Cycle Assessment," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Offer, G.J. & Howey, D. & Contestabile, M. & Clague, R. & Brandon, N.P., 2010. "Comparative analysis of battery electric, hydrogen fuel cell and hybrid vehicles in a future sustainable road transport system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 24-29, January.
    3. Eugene Yin Cheung Wong & Danny Chi Kuen Ho & Stuart So & Chi-Wing Tsang & Eve Man Hin Chan, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Electric Vehicles and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles Using the GREET Model—A Comparative Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, April.
    4. Yisong Chen & Xu Hu & Jiahui Liu, 2019. "Life Cycle Assessment of Fuel Cell Vehicles Considering the Detailed Vehicle Components: Comparison and Scenario Analysis in China Based on Different Hydrogen Production Schemes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-24, August.
    5. Das, Vipin & Padmanaban, Sanjeevikumar & Venkitusamy, Karthikeyan & Selvamuthukumaran, Rajasekar & Blaabjerg, Frede & Siano, Pierluigi, 2017. "Recent advances and challenges of fuel cell based power system architectures and control – A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 10-18.
    6. Bartolozzi, I. & Rizzi, F. & Frey, M., 2013. "Comparison between hydrogen and electric vehicles by life cycle assessment: A case study in Tuscany, Italy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 103-111.
    7. Roberta Olindo & Nathalie Schmitt & Joost Vogtländer, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessments on Battery Electric Vehicles and Electrolytic Hydrogen: The Need for Calculation Rules and Better Databases on Electricity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-22, May.
    8. Christina Wulf & Martin Kaltschmitt, 2018. "Hydrogen Supply Chains for Mobility—Environmental and Economic Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-26, May.
    9. Olivier Bethoux, 2020. "Hydrogen Fuel Cell Road Vehicles: State of the Art and Perspectives," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-28, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Halder, Pobitra & Babaie, Meisam & Salek, Farhad & Shah, Kalpit & Stevanovic, Svetlana & Bodisco, Timothy A. & Zare, Ali, 2024. "Performance, emissions and economic analyses of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    2. Lázaro V. Cremades & Lluc Canals Casals, 2022. "Analysis of the Future of Mobility: The Battery Electric Vehicle Seems Just a Transitory Alternative," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Eugene Yin Cheung Wong & Danny Chi Kuen Ho & Stuart So & Chi-Wing Tsang & Eve Man Hin Chan, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Electric Vehicles and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles Using the GREET Model—A Comparative Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-14, April.
    4. Mariano Gallo & Mario Marinelli, 2022. "The Impact of Fuel Cell Electric Freight Vehicles on Fuel Consumption and CO 2 Emissions: The Case of Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Ibrahim M. Hezam & Arunodaya Raj Mishra & Pratibha Rani & Fausto Cavallaro & Abhijit Saha & Jabir Ali & Wadim Strielkowski & Dalia Štreimikienė, 2022. "A Hybrid Intuitionistic Fuzzy-MEREC-RS-DNMA Method for Assessing the Alternative Fuel Vehicles with Sustainability Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-32, May.
    6. Bizon, Nicu, 2019. "Real-time optimization strategies of Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems based on Load-following control: A new strategy, and a comparative study of topologies and fuel economy obtained," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C), pages 444-460.
    7. Das, Himadry Shekhar & Tan, Chee Wei & Yatim, A.H.M., 2017. "Fuel cell hybrid electric vehicles: A review on power conditioning units and topologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 268-291.
    8. Sanjeevikumar Padmanaban & Mahajan Sagar Bhaskar & Pandav Kiran Maroti & Frede Blaabjerg & Viliam Fedák, 2018. "An Original Transformer and Switched-Capacitor (T & SC)-Based Extension for DC-DC Boost Converter for High-Voltage/Low-Current Renewable Energy Applications: Hardware Implementation of a New T & SC Bo," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-23, March.
    9. Nadia Belmonte & Carlo Luetto & Stefano Staulo & Paola Rizzi & Marcello Baricco, 2017. "Case Studies of Energy Storage with Fuel Cells and Batteries for Stationary and Mobile Applications," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Behiri, Walid & Belmokhtar-Berraf, Sana & Chu, Chengbin, 2018. "Urban freight transport using passenger rail network: Scientific issues and quantitative analysis," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 227-245.
    11. Hong, Sanghyun & Kim, Eunsung & Jeong, Saerok, 2023. "Evaluating the sustainability of the hydrogen economy using multi-criteria decision-making analysis in Korea," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 485-492.
    12. Ruffini, Eleonora & Wei, Max, 2018. "Future costs of fuel cell electric vehicles in California using a learning rate approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 329-341.
    13. Bizon, Nicu, 2019. "Efficient fuel economy strategies for the Fuel Cell Hybrid Power Systems under variable renewable/load power profile," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Wojciech Rabiega & Artur Gorzałczyński & Robert Jeszke & Paweł Mzyk & Krystian Szczepański, 2021. "How Long Will Combustion Vehicles Be Used? Polish Transport Sector on the Pathway to Climate Neutrality," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-19, November.
    15. Nenming Wang & Guwen Tang, 2022. "A Review on Environmental Efficiency Evaluation of New Energy Vehicles Using Life Cycle Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-35, March.
    16. Akito Ozawa & Yuki Kudoh, 2021. "Assessing Uncertainties of Life-Cycle CO 2 Emissions Using Hydrogen Energy for Power Generation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-23, October.
    17. Bizon, Nicu, 2019. "Hybrid power sources (HPSs) for space applications: Analysis of PEMFC/Battery/SMES HPS under unknown load containing pulses," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 14-37.
    18. Mediavilla, Margarita & de Castro, Carlos & Capellán, Iñigo & Javier Miguel, Luis & Arto, Iñaki & Frechoso, Fernando, 2013. "The transition towards renewable energies: Physical limits and temporal conditions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 297-311.
    19. Marmiroli, Benedetta & Venditti, Mattia & Dotelli, Giovanni & Spessa, Ezio, 2020. "The transport of goods in the urban environment: A comparative life cycle assessment of electric, compressed natural gas and diesel light-duty vehicles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    20. Yadav, Deepak & Banerjee, Rangan, 2020. "Net energy and carbon footprint analysis of solar hydrogen production from the high-temperature electrolysis process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).

    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:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2023:i:19:p:6782-:d:1246278. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.