Energy Efficiency and Ecological Impact of the Vehicles

  • Ivan Evtimov
  • Rosen IvanovEmail author
  • Hristo Stanchev
  • Georgi Kadikyanov
  • Gergana Staneva
  • Milen Sapundzhiev
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 124)


In this study, the energy characteristics of BEV and HEV were presented. Original experimental results for energy consumption are presented. The life cycle assessment of main types of ecological vehicles was done. As a base of comparison, the primary energy and CO2 emissions of conventional gasoline vehicle was used. An area, concerning vehicles, which are more effective in economic and ecological aspects, at average Emission factor of EU-28, is defined. For a separate country, this area will be different, depend on value of its Emission factor of electricity production. The study gives the evidences for the hypothesis that electric vehicles do not generate emissions at the place, where it runs, can be used for resolving the local problems with air pollutions, but not global.


Energy characteristics of electric and hybrid vehicles Life cycle assessment Ecological vehicles Emission factor CO2 emissions 


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Chapman L (2006) Transport and climate change: a review. J Transp Geogr 15:354–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Global Transportation Energy and Climate Roadmap (2012) International Council on Clean Transportation.
  4. 4.
    Urban Transport and Climate Change. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit. (2014).
  5. 5.
    Climate change effects on the land (2009) NZ Transport Agency Research Report 378. NZ Transport Agency.
  6. 6.
    Climate change: implications for transport (2014) University of Cambridge.
  7. 7.
    Larminie J, Lowry J (2012) Electric vehicle technology explained. 2nd edn. WileyGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bansal R (2014) Electric vehicles department of electrical, electronic and computer engineering.
  9. 9.
    Evtimov I (2015) Electrombility—a reality for sustainable development of the transport and environment protection. University of RuseGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gordić M, Stamenković D, Popović V, Muždeka S, Mićović A (2017) Electric vehicle conversion: optimisation of parameters in the design process. Tehnički vjesnik 24(4):446–454Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaleg S, Hapid A, Redho KM (2015) Electric vehicle conversion based on distance, speed and cost requirements. Energy Procedia 68:446–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leitmen S, Brant B (1994) Build your own electric vehicle. McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gis W, Zóltowski A, Bochenska A (2012) Testing of the electric vehicle in driving cycles. J KONES Powertrain Transp 19:207–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Ivanov R, Sapundzhiev M, Kadikyanov G, Staneva G (2018) Energy characteristics of Citroen Berlingo converted to electric vehicle. Transp Probl 3:151–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Del Duce A, Egede P, Öhlschläger G, Dettmer T, Althaus H, Bütler T, Szczechowicz E (2013) Guidelines for the LCA of electric vehicles.
  18. 18.
    Energy consumption of full electric vehicles.
  19. 19.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R (2016) Electromobiles. Ruse UniversityGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Technical Characteristic of Toyota Yaris Hybrid.
  21. 21.
    Toyota Hybrid System THS II (2003) Compiled by: Toyota Motor CorporationGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang H, Zhu Y, Tian G, Chen Q, Chen Y (2004) Optimal energy management strategy for hybrid electric vehicles, Tech Rep 2004-01-0576. SAE, Warrendale, PAGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ивaнoв P, Eвтимoв И, Ивaнoв Я (2016) Изcлeдвaнe paзxoдa нa гopивo нa xибpидeн и клacичecки aвтoмoбил в гpaдcки ycлoвия нa движeниe. Pyce, Hayчни тpyдoвe нa Pyceнcки Унивepcитeт, тoм 55, cepия 4, Pyce [In Bulgarian: Ivanov, R., Evtimov, I., Ivanov, Y. Investigation of the fuel consumption of the hybrid and conventional car in urban conditions]Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Conlon B (2005) Comparative analysis of single and combined hybrid electrically variable transmission operating modes. SAE, Warrendale, PA Tech. Rep. 2005-01-1162Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ivanov Y, Ivanov R, Kadikyanov G, Staneva G, Danilov I (2019) Study the fuel consumption of hybrid car Toyota Yaris. Transp Probl 1:155–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mattson J (2012) Use of alternative fuels and hybrid vehicles by small urban and rural transit systems. Transportation Institute North Dakota State University.
  27. 27.
    Toyota Yaris Hybrid Technical Specifications.
  28. 28.
    Jeeninga H, Van Arkel WG, Volkers CH (2002) Performance and acceptance of electric and hybrid vehicles. Determination of attitude shifts and energy consumption of electric and hybrid vehicles used in the ELCIDIS project. ECN-C–02-080Google Scholar
  29. 29.
  30. 30.
    Ehsani M et al (2003) Impact of hybrid electric vehicles on the world’s petroleum consumption and supply. In: Society of automotive engineers (SAE) future transportation technology conference. Paper no. 2003-01-2310Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ehsani M, Gao Y, Emadi A (2010) Modern electric, hybrid electric and fuel cell vehicles. In: Fundamentals, theory and design. 2nd edn. CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ehsani M, Gao Y, Miller M (2007) Hybrid electric vehicles: Architecture and motor drives. In: Proceedings of the IEEE, Special issue on Electric, hybrid and fuel cells vehicle 95(4):719–728Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Manzie C, Watson H, Halgamuge S (2007) Fuel economy improvements for urban driving: Hybrid versus intelligent vehicles. Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Vic. 3010, Australia, Transportation Research Part C15. P. 1–16. innovation/ au/think/traffic/pdf/hybrid_vs_intelligent_vehicles
  34. 34.
    Jinming L, Huei P (2008) Modeling and control of a power-split hybrid vehicle. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 16(6):1242–1251Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Бългapcкитe кapти. [In Bulgarian: Bulgarian maps]
  36. 36.
  37. 37.
    Peгиcтpиpaнитe aвтoмoбили в Бългapия ca нaд 4 млн. [In Bulgarian: Registrated vehicles in Bulgaria are over 4 mln.]
  38. 38.
  39. 39.
    Urban Mobility on a Human Scale—Promoting and Facilitating Active Travel in Cities.
  40. 40.
    PiCycle Factory Tour and Ride Report.
  41. 41.
  42. 42.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R, Valov N (2012) Research on the energy cost by electric bicycle at different moving regimes. Sozopol BulTrans-2012.20Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    IS0 14040/44:2006 Environmental management—Life cycle assessmentGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Schaltz E (2011) Electrical vehicle design and modeling. Electric vehicles—modelling and simulations.
  45. 45.
  46. 46.
    Santiangeli A, Fiori C, Zuccari F, Dell’Era A, Orecchini F, D’Orazio A (2014) Experimental analysis of the auxiliaries consumption in the energy balance of a pre-series plug-in hybrid-electric vehicle. Energy Procedia 45:779–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Schoettle B, Sivak M, Fujiyama Y (2008) Leds and power consumption of exterior automotive lighting: implications for gasoline and electric vehicles. Report No. UMTRI-2008-48Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Vražić M, Barić O, Virtič P (2014) Auxiliary systems consumption in electric vehicle. Przegląd elektrotechniczny 12:172–175Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Real-World Nissan LEAF Fleet Data Reveals…
  50. 50.
    Do Electric Cars Work in Cold Weather? Get the Facts…
  51. 51.
    Maшкoв П, Бepкaнт Г (2016) Изcлeдвaнe нa тoплиннoтo нaтoвapвaнe нa cвeтoдиoдни лaмпи зa aвтoмoбилни фapoвe. Hayчнa кoнф. PУ-CУ, тoм 5, cepия 4, P. 66–70 [In Bulgarian: Mashkov P, Gyoch B (2016) Thermal loading investigation of led bulbs for automotive headlights]Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Maшкoв П, Гьoч Б, Ивaнoв P (2016). Изcлeдвaнe xapaктepиcтики нa cвeтoдиoдни кpyшки зa aвтoмoбилни фapoвe, Бyлтpaнc-2016. P. 118–123 [In Bulgarian: Mashkov P, Gyoch B, Ivanov R (2016) An investigation on characteristics of led bulbs for car headlights]Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R, Staneva G, Kadikyanov G (2015) A study on electric bicycle energy efficiency. Transp Probl 3:131–140Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Mammosser D, Boisvert M, Micheau P (2013) Designing regenerative braking strategies for electric vehicles with an efficiency map. In: 21eme Congres Francais de MecaniqueGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ishihara K, Kihira N, Terada N, Iwahori T (2013) Environmental burdens of large lithium-ion batteries. Developed in a Japanese National Project, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, Tokyo, JapanGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bakey K (2015) The production of hydrogen gas: steam methane reforming. ENGL 202C—Process DescriptionGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Burmistrz P, Czepirsk L, Gazda-Grzywacz M (2016) Carbon dioxide emission in hydrogen production technology from coke oven gas with life cycle approach. In: E3S web of conferences 10Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Granovskii M, Dincer I, Rosen M (2006) Life cycle assessment of hydrogen fuel cell and gasoline vehicles. Int J Hydrogen Energy 31:337–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Mehmeti A et al (2018) Life cycle assessment and water footprint of hydrogen production methods: from conventional to emerging technologies. Environments 5(2):24Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ruether J et al (eds) (2005) Life-cycle analysis of greenhouse gas emissions for hydrogen fuel production in the United States from LNG and coal. DOE/NETL-2006/1227. National Energy Technology Laboratory, NETLGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Peng TD, Zhou S, Yuan Z, Ou XM (2017) Life cycle greenhouse gas analysis of multiple vehicle fuel pathways in China. Sustainability 9(2183):1–24Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Efficient Seawater Desalination and Hydrogen Production Possible with New Catalyst (2019).
  63. 63.
    Hydrogen production—Steam Methane Reforming (SMR) (2015) New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Hydrogen Fact Sheet.
  64. 64.
    Пapo-гaзoви eлeктpoцeнтpaли (2010) Cп. Eнepджи peвю, бp. 3. [In Bulgarian: Steam-gas power stations (2010) Energy Review. 3]
  65. 65.
  66. 66.
    Moro A, Lonza L (2017) Electricity carbon intensity in European Member States: impacts on GHG emissions of electric vehicles. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ 64:5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Jechura J (2015) Hydrogen production natural gas via steam methane reforming (SMR). Colorado School of mines.
  68. 68.
    Aguirre K, Eisenhardt L, Lim Ch, Nelson B, Norring A, Slowik P, Tu N (2012) Lifecycle analysis comparison of a battery electric vehicle and a conventional gasoline vehicle.
  69. 69.
    Hydrogen Made by the Electrolysis of Water is Now Cost-Competitive and Gives us Another Building Block for the Low-Carbon Economy (2017)
  70. 70.
    Thomas CE (2008) Fuel cell and battery electric vehicles compared. Comparison of transportation options in a carbon-constrained world: hydrogen, plug-in hybrids and biofuels. In: The national hydrogen association annual meeting, SacramentoGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Bakker D (2010) Battery electric vehicles. Performance, CO2 emissions, lifecycle costs and advanced battery technology development. Master thesis. Sustainable Development, Energy and Resources, Copernicus institute University of UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Brennan J, Barder T (2016) Battery electric vehicles versus internal combustion engine vehicles. A United States-based comprehensive assessment, Arthur D. Little 48Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R, Kadikyanov G (2016) A comparative analysis of the vehicles energy performance. BulTrans-2016, SozopolGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R, Kadikyanov G, Staneva G (2018) Life cycle assessment for electric and conventional cars concerning energy consumption and CO2 emissions. In: MATEC web of conferences, 234, 02007, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Ivanov R, Evtimov I, Ivanova D, Staneva G, Kadikyanov G, Sapundjiev M (2019) Impact of renewable energy on the environmental efficiency of electric vehicles. Wroclaw, ISC RESRB-19Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Nemes A, Dobó Z, Árpád BP (2014) Fully electric vehicles in practice. Mater Sci Eng 39(2):69–75Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Palou-Rivera I et al (2011) Updates to petroleum refining and upstream emissions. Center for Transportation Research Argonne National Laboratory, CTR/ArgonneGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Petroleum diesel life cycle energy demand.
  79. 79.
  80. 80.
    Fischer R, Elfgren E, Toffolo A (2018) Energy supply potentials in the northern counties of Finland, Norway and Sweden towards sustainable Nordic electricity and heating sectors. Energy Engineering, Luleå University of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Real world hydropower calculation (2019) The renewable energy website.
  82. 82.
    Scott A, Wedmaier R (2019) The assessment and control of coal damage and loss. Project Number C3017 University of Queensland.
  83. 83.
  84. 84.
    Wang M (2008) Estimation of energy efficiencies of U.S. petroleum refineries. Center for Transportation Research, Argonne National LaboratoryGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    UK Government GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting (2015) Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy.
  86. 86.
    Louwen A (2011) Comparison of life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of shale gas with conventional fuels and renewable alternatives. Comparing a possible new fossil fuel with commonly used energy sources in the Netherlands.
  87. 87.
    Comparison of Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Various Electricity Generation Sources (2011) WNA Report. World Nuclear Association.
  88. 88.
    Weisser D (2007) A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies. Energy 32(9):1543–1559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Yun H (2016) Lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions from power generation: a comparative analysis between the United States and the European Union and its implication for developing economies using the example of China.
  90. 90.
  91. 91.
  92. 92.
    Askari MB et al (2015) Types of solar cells and application. Am J Opt Photonics 3(5):94–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Pehnt M (2003) Life-cycle analysis of fuel cell system components. Volume 4, Part 13 in Handbook of fuel cells—fundamentals, technology and applications. Wiley, Chichester, pp 1293–1317Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Dhanushkodi S, Mahinpey N, Srinivasan A, Wilson M (2008) Life cycle analysis of fuel cell technology. J Environ Inf 11(1):36–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Braga LB et al (2017) Hydrogen production processes. In: Silveira JL (ed) Sustainable hydrogen production processes green energy and technology. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Eriksson O (2017) Nuclear power and resource efficiency—a proposal for a revised primary energy factor. Department of Building, Energy and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Sustainable Development, University of Gävle SE 801 76 SwedenGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Dodds PE, McDowall WAS (2012) A review of hydrogen production technologies for energy system models. UCL Energy Institute University College London. UKSHEC Working Paper No. 6Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Biagini E et al (2008) Process optimization of hydrogen production from coal gasification. In: 29th meeting on combustion, Conference paper.
  99. 99.
    Cumulative efficiency of coal power plant.
  100. 100.
    Stala-Szlugaj K, Grudzinski Z (2016) Energy efficiency and steam coal transport over long distances. In: E3S web of conferences 10, SEED 00089Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Ptasinski K (2008) Efficiency analysis of hydrogen production methods from biomass. Int J Alterna Propuls 2(1):39–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Bhandari R, Trudewind C, Zapp P (2014) Life cycle assessment of hydrogen production methods—a review. Forschungszentrum Jülich, Institute of Energy and Climate Research—Systems Analysis and Technology Evaluation (IEK-STE)Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Pehnt M (2002) Life cycle assessment of fuel cell systems. Erscheint in fuel cell handbook. Volume 3—Fuel cell technology and applications. J. WileyGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Bartolozzi I, Rizzi F, Frey M (2013) Comparison between hydrogen and electric vehicles by life cycle assessment: a case study in Tuscany. Appl Energy 101:103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Mirabal S (2003) An economic analysis of hydrogen production technologies using renewable energy resources. A thesis, presented to the graduate school of the University of Florida for the Degree of Master of science, University of FloridaGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Bossel U, Eliasson B (2003) Energy and the hydrogen economy, ABB Switzerland Ltd. Corporate Research.
  107. 107.
    Makridis S (2016) Hydrogen storage and compression. Chapter 1, University of Western Macedonia, GR50132 Kozani, Greece, CH001Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Petitpas G, Simon AJ (2017) Liquid hydrogen infrastructure analysis. DOE hydrogen and fuel cells annual merit review. Washington D.C. LLNL-PRES-727907, Project ID#: PD135 June 6thGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Bielaczyc P, Szczotka A, Woodburn J (2016) A comparison of exhaust emissions from vehicles fuelled with petrol LPG and CNG. In: Scientific conference on automotive vehicles and combustion engines (KONMOT 2016) IOP Conf. Series: Mater Sci Eng 148(1):012060, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Learn about the environmental and economic benefits of natural gas vehicles.
  111. 111.
    Natural Gas Vehicle Emissions. Alternative Fuels Data Center. U.S. Department of Energy.
  112. 112.
    Tollefson J (2013) Methane leaks erode green credentials of natural gas. Nature 493.
  113. 113.
    Seebregts AJ (2010) Gas-fired power. Energy Tech. System Analysis Program (IEA-ETSAP), Agency Energy TechGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    McKain K, Down A, Raciti SM, Budney J, Hutyra LR, Floerchinger C, Herndon SC, Nehrkorn T, Zahniser MS, Jackson RB, Phillips N, Wofsy SC (2015) Methane emissions from natural gas infrastructure and use in the urban region of Boston, Massachusetts. PNAS 112(7):1941–1946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Conoco Phillips (2015) Value chain methane loss update. Review of publicly available studies.
  116. 116.
    Environmental Impacts of Natural Gas. Union of Concerned Scientists. Science for a Healthy Planet and Safer World (2014).
  117. 117.
    Abdelmajeed MA, Onsa MH, Rabah AA (2009) Management of evaporation losses of gasoline’s storage tanks. Sudan Eng Soc J 55(52):39–43Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Magaril E (2015) Reducing gasoline loss from evaporation by the introduction of a surface-active fuel additive. Urban Transp XXI. WIT Trans Built Environ 146:233–242Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Kimeu JM (2012) Development of optimum energy use model for a petrol station. A research project report submitted in partial fulfillment for the degree of master of science (energy management) of the University of NairobiGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Liquified Natural Gas (LNG). SPE International (2018).
  121. 121.
    Oil Tanker Spill Statistics (2018) ITOPF, promoting effective spill response.
  122. 122.
    Unnasch S, Goyal L (2017) Life cycle analysis of LPG transportation fuels under the Californian LCFS. LCA.8103.177.2017Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Meтoдикa зa oпpeдeлянe интeнзитeтa нa eмиcиитe нa пapникoви гaзoвe oт цeлия жизнeн цикъл нa гopивaтa и eнepгиятa oт нeбиoлoгичeн пpoизxoд в тpaнcпopтa (2017). [In Bulgarian: Methodology for density determination of green gases emissions during life cycle of fuels and energy from non-biological sources in the transport]
  124. 124.
    Paczuski M, Marchwiany M, Puławski R, Pankowski A, Kurpiel K, Przedlacki M (2016) liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) as a fuel for internal combustion engines. Alternative fuels, technical and environmental conditions.
  125. 125.
    Димитpoв A, Бoгдaнoв К (2002) Eкcплoaтaциoнни мaтepиaли в тpaнcпopтнaтa тexникa. Bapнa [In Bulgarian: Dimitrov A, Bogdanov K (2002) Exploatation materials in transport machinery]Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Pimentel D et al (2009) Food versus biofuels: environmental and economic costs. Hum Ecol 37:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Pawlowska M, Pawlowski A (2017) Advances in Renewable Energy Research. CRC Press, ScienceGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Биoдизeл - aлтepнaтивa зa дизeлoви двигaтeли (2011) Eнepгия. III(6).биoдизeл-aлтepнaтивa-зa-дизeлoви-двигaтeли_00337.html [In Bulgarian: Biodiesel—an alternative for diesel engines]
  129. 129.
    Joseph H Jr (2013) Flex fuel vehicles in Brazil. ANFAVEA Energy & Environment Affairs Commission.
  130. 130.
    Nogueira T et al (eds) (2015) Bioethanol and biodiesel as vehicular fuels in Brazil—Assessment of atmospheric impacts from the long period of biofuels use.
  131. 131.
    Abhay T (2015) Converting a diesel engine to dual-fuel engine using natural gas. Int J Energy, Sci Eng 1(5):163–169Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Weaver C, Turner S (1994) Dual fuel natural gas/diesel engines: technology, performance and emissions. In: SAE international, international congress & exposition, Technical Paper 940548Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Papson A, Creutzig F, Schipper L (2010) Compressed air vehicles. Drive-cycle analysis of vehicle performance, environmental impacts and economic costs. Transp Res Record: J Transp Res Board 2191:67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Creutzig F, Papson A, Schipper L, Kammen DM (2009) Economic and environmental evaluation of compressed-air cars. Environ Res Lett 4(4):044011. PP 1–9Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Dimitrova Z, Marechal F (2015) Gasoline hybrid pneumatic engine for efficient vehicle powertrain hybridization. Appl Energy 151(C):168–177Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Dimitrova Z, Lourdais P, Marecha F (2015) Performance and economic optimization of an organic rankine cycle for a gasoline hybrid pneumatic powertrain. Energy 86:574–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Kumar S, Karthik A (2016) Design and fabrication of compressed air engine bike. Int J Eng Sci Comput 6(7):182–188Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Midhun VS, Ramesh A, Sathyanandan M (2014) Comparison of fully pneumatic and pneumatic—electric hybrid configurations for propulsion of a refrigerated vehicle. J Green Eng 1:49–70Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Qihui Yu, Cai Maolin (2015) Experimental analysis of a compressed air engine. J Flow Control, Meas Vis 03(04):144–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R, Sapundjiev M (2017) Energy consumption of auxiliary systems of electric cars. In: MATEC web of conferences 133, 06002, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R, Stanchev H, Kadikyanov G, Staneva G (2019) Life cycle assessment of fuel cells electric vehicles. In: XI international scientific conference, transport problems, KatowiceGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R, Stanchev H (2019) Life cycle assessment of vehicles, using LPG and NG. BulTrans 48–58Google Scholar
  143. 143.
    Evtimov I, Ivanov R, Kadikyanov G, Staneva G (2019) Life cycle assessment for compressed air and conventional cars concerning energy consumption and CO2 emissions. In: 58th science conference of Ruse UniversityGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Padula AD et al (eds) (2014) Liquid biofuels: emergence development and prospects, Lecture Notes in Energy 27. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivan Evtimov
    • 1
  • Rosen Ivanov
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hristo Stanchev
    • 1
  • Georgi Kadikyanov
    • 1
  • Gergana Staneva
    • 1
  • Milen Sapundzhiev
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Engines and Vehicles, Faculty of TransportUniversity of RuseRuseBulgaria
  2. 2.Department of Technical and Natural SciencesSilistra Branch of University of RuseSilistraBulgaria

Personalised recommendations