Comparison of Climate Change Impact Between Power System of Electric Vehicles and Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

  • Xudong Zhang
  • Feng Gao
  • Xianzheng Gong
  • Zhihong Wang
  • Yu Liu
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Energy book series (SPE)


The substitution of electric vehicle (EV) for conventional gasoline vehicles is a promising new way to reduce greenhouse gases (GHG) emission in China. This study compared the environmental impact on climate change between electric vehicle power system and internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) power system. A life cycle analysis model was built with the GaBi software to analyze the GHG emission with IPCC methodology. The life cycle of vehicle was divided into four phases including raw material production phase, auto parts production and assembly phase, transportation phase and use phase. Three scenarios of the electric power mix were carried out for the sensitivity analysis. Overall, the global warming potential (GWP) of ICEV was reduced by 69.8% compared with that of EV. However, when considering the whole vehicle use phase, EV provided 45% benefits of carbon reduction than ICEV. The results of sensitivity analysis showed that GHG emission decreased with improving of cleaner energy utilization. The results concluded that EV can reduce GHG emission compared to ICEV. Electricity consumption in the use stage, raw materials stage and production stage were the key processes for controlling GHG emission during EV management.


Life cycle assessment Electric vehicles Internal combustion engine vehicles Power system Climate change 



This study was supported by the grant from National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, Project No. 51304009), and Beijing municipal science & technology commission project (D161100002416001), and National Key Research and Development Program (2016YFF0201501), and Science-Technology foundation of Beijing University of Technology (ykj-2016-00687).


  1. 1.
    Yang Guofeng, Analysis of China’s electric vehicles and its prospect. J. Int. Pet. Econ. 04, 59–65 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. Wang, China will build the largest market for global carbon emissions trading. J. Energ. Res. Inf. 32(4), (2016)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ai Jianghong, Analysis on impact of electric vehicle on environment in total life-cycle. J. Tech. Econ. 03, 35–39 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bunyamin, Assessment of electrically-driven vehicles in terms of emission impacts and energy requirements: a case study for Istanbul, Turkey. J. Clean. Prod. 96, 486–492 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boya Zhou, Energy real-world performance of battery electric buses and their life-cycle benefits with respect to energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions. J. Energ. 96, 603–613 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Singh, Total energy cycle assessment of electric and conventional vehicles: an energy and environmental analysis, Tech. Rep (ANL/ES/RP–96387-Vol. 3, Argonne National Lab., IL, USA, 1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Campanari, G. Manzolini, F.G. de la Iglesia, Energy analysis of electric vehicles using batteries or fuel cells through well-to-wheel driving cycle simulations. J. Power Sources 186, 464–477 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    L.C. Casals, E. Martinez-Laserna, B.A. García, N. Nieto, Sustainability analysis of the electric vehicle use in Europe for CO2 emissions reduction. J. Clean. Prod. 127, 425–437 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Michael, B. Michael, Assessment of the environmental impacts of electric vehicle concepts. J. Life Cycle Assess. 22, 138–147 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    CNMLCA (Centre of National Material Life Cycle Assessment) Material life cycle assessment databased-sinocenter. (Beijing University of Technology (BJUT), Beijing, China, 2013). (in Chinese, Accessed 20 Dec 2016)
  11. 11.
    Chen Yisong, Liu Zongwei et al., Study on impact assessment of life cycle environment of automobile engine considering scrap recycling. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39(12), 189–193 (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    X. Sun, P. Zhang, M.N. Zhao, Life cycle energy consumptions and environmental impact assessment of the gasoline engine, [J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae 36(8), 3059–3065 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A.J. Mark, Huijbregts, ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. Int J. Life Cycle Assess. 22, 138–147 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    L. Zhang, Z.F. Liu, J.J. Wang, Comparative analysis of life cycle environmental impact between power system of electric and internal combustion engine vehicles, J. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae 33(3), 931–940.56 (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mats Zackrisson, Life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles-critical issues. J. Clean. Prod. 18(15), 1519–1529 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Xiaoqing Shi, Xue Wang, Jianxin Yang, Zhaoxin Sun, Electric vehicle transformation in Beijing and the comparative eco-environmental impacts: A case study of electric and gasoline powered taxis. J. Clean. Prod. 137, 449–460 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xudong Zhang
    • 1
  • Feng Gao
    • 1
  • Xianzheng Gong
    • 1
  • Zhihong Wang
    • 1
  • Yu Liu
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Materials Science and EngineeringBeijing University of TechnologyChaoyang District, BeijingChina

Personalised recommendations