IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p171-d1011599.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comprehensive Sustainability Assessment of Battery Electric Vehicles, Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles, and Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles through a Comparative Circular Economy Assessment Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Aser Alaa Ahmed

    (Mechanical Engineering Department, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Mohammad A. Nazzal

    (Mechanical Engineering Department, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Basil M. Darras

    (Mechanical Engineering Department, American University of Sharjah, Sharjah 26666, United Arab Emirates)

  • Ibrahim M. Deiab

    (School of Engineering, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Rd. E, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada)

Abstract

Transitioning to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) is thought to substantially curb emissions, promoting sustainable development. However, the extent of the problem extends beyond tailpipe emissions. To facilitate decision-making and planning of future infrastructural developments, the economic, social, and technological factors of ZEVs should also be addressed. Therefore, this work implements the circular economy paradigm to identify the most suitable vehicle type that can accelerate sustainable development by calculating circularity scores for Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles (ICEVs) and two ZEVs, the Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs), and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEVs). The circularity assessment presents a novel assessment procedure that interrelates the environmental, economic, social, and technological implications of each vehicle type on the three implementation levels of the circular economy (i.e., The macro, meso, and micro levels). The results of our analysis suggest that not all ZEVs are considered sustainable alternatives to ICEVs. BEVs scored the highest relative circularity score of 36.8% followed by ICEVs and FCEVs scoring 32.9% and 30.3% respectively. The results obtained in this study signify the importance of conducting circular economy performance assessments as planning tools as this assessment methodology interrelate environmental, social, economic, and technological factors which are integral for future infrastructural and urban planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Aser Alaa Ahmed & Mohammad A. Nazzal & Basil M. Darras & Ibrahim M. Deiab, 2022. "A Comprehensive Sustainability Assessment of Battery Electric Vehicles, Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles, and Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles through a Comparative Circular Economy Assessment Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-25, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:171-:d:1011599
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/171/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/171/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donato A. Melchiorre. & Sinan Küfeoglu, 2018. "Economic Assessment of Using Electric Vehicles and Batteries as Domestic Storage Units in the United Kingdom," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1858, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    2. Yijiao Wang & Guoguang Zhou & Ting Li & Xiao Wei, 2019. "Comprehensive Evaluation of the Sustainable Development of Battery Electric Vehicles in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-27, October.
    3. Donato A. Melchiorre & Sinan Küfeoglu, 2018. "Economic Assessment of Using Electric Vehicles and Batteries as Domestic Storage Units in the United Kingdom," Working Papers EPRG 1830, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    4. Liu, Zhe & Song, Juhyun & Kubal, Joseph & Susarla, Naresh & Knehr, Kevin W. & Islam, Ehsan & Nelson, Paul & Ahmed, Shabbir, 2021. "Comparing total cost of ownership of battery electric vehicles and internal combustion engine vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Gavin Harper & Roberto Sommerville & Emma Kendrick & Laura Driscoll & Peter Slater & Rustam Stolkin & Allan Walton & Paul Christensen & Oliver Heidrich & Simon Lambert & Andrew Abbott & Karl Ryder & L, 2019. "Recycling lithium-ion batteries from electric vehicles," Nature, Nature, vol. 575(7781), pages 75-86, November.
    7. Mario Martín-Gamboa & Paula Quinteiro & Ana Cláudia Dias & Diego Iribarren, 2021. "Comparative Social Life Cycle Assessment of Two Biomass-to-Electricity Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-15, May.
    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. Küfeoğlu, Sinan & Pollitt, Michael G., 2019. "The impact of PVs and EVs on domestic electricity network charges: A case study from Great Britain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 412-424.
    2. Georgios Archimidis Tsalidis & Maria Batsioula & George F. Banias & Evina Katsou, 2024. "A Review Analysis of Electricity Generation Studies with Social Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-13, June.
    3. Guido Busca, 2024. "Critical Aspects of Energetic Transition Technologies and the Roles of Materials Chemistry and Engineering," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-32, July.
    4. Gu, Xubo & Bai, Hanyu & Cui, Xiaofan & Zhu, Juner & Zhuang, Weichao & Li, Zhaojian & Hu, Xiaosong & Song, Ziyou, 2024. "Challenges and opportunities for second-life batteries: Key technologies and economy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Iogansen, Xiatian & Wang, Kailai & Bunch, David & Matson, Grant & Circella, Giovanni, 2023. "Deciphering the factors associated with adoption of alternative fuel vehicles in California: An investigation of latent attitudes, socio-demographics, and neighborhood effects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    7. Gutsch, Moritz & Leker, Jens, 2024. "Costs, carbon footprint, and environmental impacts of lithium-ion batteries – From cathode active material synthesis to cell manufacturing and recycling," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 353(PB).
    8. Kılkış, Şiir & Ulpiani, Giulia & Vetters, Nadja, 2024. "Visions for climate neutrality and opportunities for co-learning in European cities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    9. Guanjun Ji & Di Tang & Junxiong Wang & Zheng Liang & Haocheng Ji & Jun Ma & Zhaofeng Zhuang & Song Liu & Guangmin Zhou & Hui-Ming Cheng, 2024. "Sustainable upcycling of mixed spent cathodes to a high-voltage polyanionic cathode material," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-10, December.
    10. Shahjalal, Mohammad & Roy, Probir Kumar & Shams, Tamanna & Fly, Ashley & Chowdhury, Jahedul Islam & Ahmed, Md. Rishad & Liu, Kailong, 2022. "A review on second-life of Li-ion batteries: prospects, challenges, and issues," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    11. Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene & Dalia Streimikiene, 2022. "Sustainable Development of Road Transport in the EU: Multi-Criteria Analysis of Countries’ Achievements," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-25, November.
    12. Wang, Mengmeng & Liu, Kang & Dutta, Shanta & Alessi, Daniel S. & Rinklebe, Jörg & Ok, Yong Sik & Tsang, Daniel C.W., 2022. "Recycling of lithium iron phosphate batteries: Status, technologies, challenges, and prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    13. Fatmawati Fatmawati & Nuryanti Mustari & Haerana Haerana & Risma Niswaty & Abdillah Abdillah, 2022. "Waste Bank Policy Implementation through Collaborative Approach: Comparative Study—Makassar and Bantaeng, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-15, June.
    14. 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.
    15. Andrzej Pacana & Dominika Siwiec & Robert Ulewicz & Malgorzata Ulewicz, 2024. "A Novelty Model Employing the Quality Life Cycle Assessment (QLCA) Indicator and Frameworks for Selecting Qualitative and Environmental Aspects for Sustainable Product Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-24, September.
    16. Ma, Tian & Zhang, Qi & Tang, Yanyan & Liu, Boyu & Li, Yan & Wang, Lu, 2024. "A review on the industrial chain of recycling critical metals from electric vehicle batteries: Current status, challenges, and policy recommendations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    17. Hongxia Chen & Jeongsoo Yu & Xiaoyue Liu, 2022. "Development Strategies and Policy Trends of the Next-Generation Vehicles Battery: Focusing on the International Comparison of China, Japan and South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-12, September.
    18. Guwen Tang & Meng Zhang & Fei Bu, 2023. "Vehicle Environmental Efficiency Evaluation in Different Regions in China: A Combination of the Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and Two-Stage Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-24, August.
    19. Costa, C.M. & Barbosa, J.C. & Castro, H. & Gonçalves, R. & Lanceros-Méndez, S., 2021. "Electric vehicles: To what extent are environmentally friendly and cost effective? – Comparative study by european countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    20. Yongyou Nie & Yuhan Wang & Lu Li & Haolan Liao, 2023. "Literature Review on Power Battery Echelon Reuse and Recycling from a Circular Economy Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-28, February.

    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:15:y:2022:i:1:p:171-:d:1011599. 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.