IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p4139-d783802.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Environmental Performance of Micromobility Using LCA and Self-Reported Modal Change: The Case of Shared E-Bikes, E-Scooters, and E-Mopeds in Barcelona

Author

Listed:
  • Pol Felipe-Falgas

    (Grup d’Estudis en Mobilitat, Transport i Territori (GEMOTT), Geography Department, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Cristina Madrid-Lopez

    (Institute on Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Oriol Marquet

    (Grup d’Estudis en Mobilitat, Transport i Territori (GEMOTT), Geography Department, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain
    Institute on Environmental Science and Technology (ICTA), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Spain)

Abstract

Micromobility is often thought of as a sustainable solution to many urban mobility challenges. The literature to date, however, has struggled to find consensus on the sustainability of shared and electric scooters, e-bikes, and e-mopeds. This paper uses a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approach to calculate the impacts of micromobility modes in three categories: Global Warming Potential (GWP), Particulate Matter Formation, and Ozone Formation. It does so by incorporating the self-reported modal change of each transportation mode: shared e-moped, shared e-bicycle, shared bicycle, and personal e-scooter. The results show that modal change brought by the introduction of shared e-mopeds and shared e-bicycles caused an increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, while shared bicycles and personal electric scooters decreased GHG emissions. All micromobility modes except personal e-scooters increased particulate matter emissions, but decreased those which were emitted within the city, while they all decreased NOx. The findings of this study suggest new micromobility services are not always the best environmental solution for urban mobility, unless the eco-design of vehicles is improved, and they are strategically used and deployed as part of a holistic vision for transport policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Pol Felipe-Falgas & Cristina Madrid-Lopez & Oriol Marquet, 2022. "Assessing Environmental Performance of Micromobility Using LCA and Self-Reported Modal Change: The Case of Shared E-Bikes, E-Scooters, and E-Mopeds in Barcelona," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-17, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:4139-:d:783802
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4139/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/4139/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julia Winslow & Oksana Mont, 2019. "Bicycle Sharing: Sustainable Value Creation and Institutionalisation Strategies in Barcelona," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-27, January.
    2. Zhang, Yongping & Mi, Zhifu, 2018. "Environmental benefits of bike sharing: A big data-based analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 296-301.
    3. Marquet, Oriol & Miralles-Guasch, Carme, 2014. "Walking short distances. The socioeconomic drivers for the use of proximity in everyday mobility in Barcelona," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 210-222.
    4. Anne de Bortoli, 2021. "Environmental performance of shared micromobility and personal alternatives using integrated modal LCA," Papers 2103.04464, arXiv.org.
    5. Hélie Moreau & Loïc de Jamblinne de Meux & Vanessa Zeller & Pierre D’Ans & Coline Ruwet & Wouter M.J. Achten, 2020. "Dockless E-Scooter: A Green Solution for Mobility? Comparative Case Study between Dockless E-Scooters, Displaced Transport, and Personal E-Scooters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, February.
    6. Fanying Zheng & Fu Gu & Wujie Zhang & Jianfeng Guo, 2019. "Is Bicycle Sharing an Environmental Practice? Evidence from a Life Cycle Assessment Based on Behavioral Surveys," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-25, March.
    7. Marquet, Oriol & Miralles-Guasch, Carme, 2016. "City of Motorcycles. On how objective and subjective factors are behind the rise of two-wheeled mobility in Barcelona," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 37-45.
    8. Cox, Brian L. & Mutel, Christopher L., 2018. "The environmental and cost performance of current and future motorcycles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1013-1024.
    9. Ricardo Javier Bonilla‐Alicea & Bryan C. Watson & Ziheng Shen & Laura Tamayo & Cassandra Telenko, 2020. "Life cycle assessment to quantify the impact of technology improvements in bike‐sharing systems," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(1), pages 138-148, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cubells, Jerònia & Miralles-Guasch, Carme & Marquet, Oriol, 2023. "E-scooter and bike-share route choice and detours: Modelling the influence of built environment and sociodemographic factors," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    2. Medina-Molina, Cayetano & Pérez-Macías, Noemí & Fernández-Fernádez, José Luis, 2023. "The use of micromobility in different contexts. An explanation through the multilevel perspective and QCA," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    3. Bach, Xavier & Marquet, Oriol & Miralles-Guasch, Carme, 2023. "Assessing social and spatial access equity in regulatory frameworks for moped-style scooter sharing services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 154-162.
    4. Paweł Ziemba & Izabela Gago, 2022. "Compromise Multi-Criteria Selection of E-Scooters for the Vehicle Sharing System in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-26, July.
    5. Cubells, Jerònia & Miralles-Guasch, Carme & Marquet, Oriol, 2023. "Gendered travel behaviour in micromobility? Travel speed and route choice through the lens of intersecting identities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).

    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. Bach, Xavier & Marquet, Oriol & Miralles-Guasch, Carme, 2023. "Assessing social and spatial access equity in regulatory frameworks for moped-style scooter sharing services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 154-162.
    2. Naroa Coretti Sanchez & Luis Alonso Pastor & Kent Larson, 2022. "Can autonomy make bicycle-sharing systems more sustainable? Environmental impact analysis of an emerging mobility technology," Papers 2202.12405, arXiv.org.
    3. Koide, R. & Murakami, S. & Nansai, K., 2022. "Prioritising low-risk and high-potential circular economy strategies for decarbonisation: A meta-analysis on consumer-oriented product-service systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    4. Bretones, Alexandra & Marquet, Oriol, 2022. "Sociopsychological factors associated with the adoption and usage of electric micromobility. A literature review," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 230-249.
    5. Christian Spreafico & Davide Russo, 2020. "Exploiting the Scientific Literature for Performing Life Cycle Assessment about Transportation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    6. Zhao, Chunkai & Wang, Yuhang & Ge, Zhenyu, 2023. "Is digital finance environmentally friendly in China? Evidence from shared-bike trips," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 129-143.
    7. Ghasri, Milad & Ardeshiri, Ali & Zhang, Xiang & Waller, S. Travis, 2024. "Analysing preferences for integrated micromobility and public transport systems: A hierarchical latent class approach considering taste heterogeneity and attribute non-attendance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    8. Nora Schelte & Semih Severengiz & Jaron Schünemann & Sebastian Finke & Oskar Bauer & Matthias Metzen, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment on Electric Moped Scooter Sharing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-20, July.
    9. Zhang, Guangnan & Lin, Junjie, 2024. "The local driving safety effect of motorcycle restrictions: Evidence from China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 222-236.
    10. Haotian Ma & Xinlu Chen & Zhilei Zhen & Qian Wang, 2023. "Bicycle-sharing in Beijing: An Assessment of Economic, Environmental, and Health Effects, and Identification of Key Drivers of Environmental Performance," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 285-316, March.
    11. Franklin Oliveira & Dilan Nery & Daniel G. Costa & Ivanovitch Silva & Luciana Lima, 2021. "A Survey of Technologies and Recent Developments for Sustainable Smart Cycling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-28, March.
    12. Luca D’Acierno & Matteo Tanzilli & Chiara Tescione & Luigi Pariota & Luca Di Costanzo & Salvatore Chiaradonna & Marilisa Botte, 2022. "Adoption of Micro-Mobility Solutions for Improving Environmental Sustainability: Comparison among Transportation Systems in Urban Contexts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-20, June.
    13. Xinwei Ma & Ruiming Cao & Jianbiao Wang, 2019. "Effects of Psychological Factors on Modal Shift from Car to Dockless Bike Sharing: A Case Study of Nanjing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-16, September.
    14. Hélie Moreau & Loïc de Jamblinne de Meux & Vanessa Zeller & Pierre D’Ans & Coline Ruwet & Wouter M.J. Achten, 2020. "Dockless E-Scooter: A Green Solution for Mobility? Comparative Case Study between Dockless E-Scooters, Displaced Transport, and Personal E-Scooters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Li, Yue & Luo, Hao & Cai, Hua, 2023. "Photovoltaic-battery powered bike share stations are not necessarily energy self-sufficient," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 348(C).
    16. Yixiao Liu & Wenshan Liu & Rui Zhao & Lixin Tian, 2023. "Can Docked Bike-Sharing Systems Reach Their Dual Sustainability in Terms of Environmental Benefits and Financial Operations? A Comparative Study from Nanjing, 2017 and 2023," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-39, December.
    17. Mehzabin Tuli, Farzana & Mitra, Suman & Crews, Mariah B., 2021. "Factors influencing the usage of shared E-scooters in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 164-185.
    18. Gu, Tianqi & Kim, Inhi & Currie, Graham, 2019. "To be or not to be dockless: Empirical analysis of dockless bikeshare development in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 122-147.
    19. Shah, Nitesh R. & Ziedan, Abubakr & Brakewood, Candace & Cherry, Christopher R., 2023. "Shared e-scooter service providers with large fleet size have a competitive advantage: Findings from e-scooter demand and supply analysis of Nashville, Tennessee," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    20. Yi, Wenjing & Yan, Jie, 2020. "Energy consumption and emission influences from shared mobility in China: A national level annual data analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 277(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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:4139-:d:783802. 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.