5th IFAC Conference on

5th IFAC Conference on

Engine
5th IFACand Powertrain
Conference onControl, Simulation and Modeling
Engine and Powertrain Available
Control, Simulation and online at www.sciencedirect.com
Modeling
5th IFACand
Engine Conference
Changchun, onControl,20-22,
China, September
Powertrain 2018 and Modeling
Simulation
Changchun, China, September 20-22, 2018
Engine and Powertrain Control, Simulation
Changchun, China, September 20-22, 2018 and Modeling
Changchun, China, September 20-22, 2018
ScienceDirect
IFAC PapersOnLine 51-31 (2018) 188–194
Converting
Converting a
a Conventional
Conventional Car
Car into
into a
a
Converting
Hybrid Solar
Converting a
a Conventional
Vehicle:
Conventionala LCA Car into
Approach
Car into a
a
Hybrid Solar Vehicle: a LCA
Hybrid Solar Vehicle: a LCA Approach Approach
Hybrid Solar Vehicle: a LCA Approach
Francesco Antonio Tiano ∗∗ Gianfranco Rizzo ∗∗
Francesco Antonio Tiano ∗ ∗ ∗ Gianfranco Rizzo
∗ ∗
∗
Giovanni
Francesco Antonio
Giovanni De
De Feo ∗ Silvio
Tiano
Feo Landolfi
Gianfranco
Silvio Landolfi Rizzo
∗
Francesco Antonio ∗ ∗ Gianfranco
Tiano
∗ Rizzo
∗
∗
∗
Giovanni De Feo ∗
Silvio Landolfi ∗
∗ Giovanni De Feo Silvio Landolfi
∗ University of Salerno, Department of Industrial Engineering,
∗ University
∗
University
Fisciano, SA
of Salerno, Department of Industrial Engineering,
of Salerno, Department of Industrial Engineering,
Fisciano,
∗ SA 84040
University 84040 Italy
Italy (e-mail:
of Salerno, (e-mail: ftiano,
ftiano,
Department
grizzo,
grizzo, g.defeo
g.defeo
of Industrial
@unisa.it,
@unisa.it,
Engineering,
Fisciano, SA 84040 s.landolfi2@studenti.unisa.it).
Italy (e-mail: ftiano, grizzo,
s.landolfi2@studenti.unisa.it). g.defeo @unisa.it,
Fisciano, SA 84040 Italy (e-mail: ftiano, grizzo, g.defeo @unisa.it,
s.landolfi2@studenti.unisa.it).
s.landolfi2@studenti.unisa.it).
Abstract:
Abstract:
The growth
growth of
Abstract:
The of world
world energy
energy consumption
consumption and and the
the increase
increase of of passenger
passenger vehicles
vehicles areisareis setting
setting newnew
Abstract:
The growthtoofenvironmental
challenges world energy consumption
protection. and the
Large increaseofofelectric
diffusion passenger vehicles
vehicles and areis setting
hybrid new
electric
challenges
The growth toofenvironmental
world energy protection. Large
consumption and diffusion
the increase ofofelectric
passenger vehicles
vehicles andareishybrid electric
setting new
vehicles
challenges
vehicles seems
to
seems to be the
environmental most feasible
protection.
to be the most protection. solution.
Large
feasible solution. However,
diffusion
However, the
of
the need
electricof fast charging
vehicles
need of vehicles
fast charging and infrastructure,
hybrid electric
infrastructure,
challenges
the still to environmental Large diffusion of electric and hybrid electric
the still low
vehicles
vehicles
seems
low
seems
penetration
penetration
to be of
of
of renewable
to be the most
thethis
feasible electricity
renewable
most feasible electricity
production
solution. However,
production
solution. However,
theand
theand
need
need
the
theof massive
fast charging
ofmassive
fast charging
reconversion of
of fleets
infrastructure,
reconversion fleets
infrastructure,
limit
the
limit the
still
the feasibility
low penetration
feasibility of of
this solution.
renewable
solution. electricity production and the massive reconversion of fleets
the
limit
A still
thelow
life-cycle penetration
feasibility
assessment of renewable
of this
studysolution.
of electricity production and the massive reconversionanalyses,
of fleets
A life-cycle
limit assessment
the feasibility of ofstudy
this of several
several mobility
solution. mobility options
options isis presented
presented in in the
the paper.
paper. The The analyses,
performed
A life-cycle
performed by
by the use
assessment
the use ofstudythe
study GREET
of
the GREET severalmodel software,
mobility
model show
options
software, showis that
presenteda suitable
that a suitablein the solution
paper.
solution to
The reduction
analyses,
to reduction
A
of life-cycle
total
performed assessment
energy
by consumption
the use of the GREET of several
and greenhousemobility
model options
gases is presented
emissions
software, show in
that the in the
short
a suitable to paper.
medium
solution The analyses,
toterm could
reduction
of total
performed energy
by consumption
the use of the and
GREET greenhouse
model gases emissions
software, show in
that the
a short
suitable to medium
solution toterm could
reduction
of
be total
the energy
conversion consumption
of conventionaland greenhouse
vehicles intogases emissions
hybrid solar in the
vehicles, short
as in to
the medium
system term could
developed
be
of the conversion of conventional vehicles into hybrid solar vehicles, as in the system developed
be total
at energy consumption
the University
the conversion of Salerno.
of conventionaland greenhouse
vehicles into gases emissions
hybrid in the short
solar vehicles, as intothe medium
systemterm could
developed
at
be the
the University
conversion of of Salerno.
conventional vehicles into hybrid solar vehicles, as in the system developed
at the University of Salerno.
© 2018,
at IFAC (International
the University of Salerno. Federation of Automatic Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Keywords: Hybrid Hybrid Electric
Electric Vehicles,
Vehicles, Life-Cycle
Life-Cycle Assessment,
Assessment, Automotive,
Automotive, Greenhouse
Greenhouse Gases, Gases,
Keywords:
Energy Hybrid Electric
Consumption, Solar Vehicles,
Vehicles Life-Cycle Assessment, Automotive, Greenhouse Gases,
Energy
Keywords: Consumption,
Hybrid Solar
Electric Vehicles
Vehicles, Life-Cycle Assessment, Automotive, Greenhouse Gases,
Energy Consumption, Solar Vehicles
Energy Consumption, Solar Vehicles
1. INTRODUCTION
1. INTRODUCTION (International Organization
Organization of of Motor
Motor Vehicle
Vehicle Manufac-
Manufac-
(International
1. INTRODUCTION (International
tures (2015)). Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufac-
1. INTRODUCTION tures (2015)). Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufac-
(International
The economic
The economic growth, growth, with with particular
particular emphasis
emphasis on Or- tures
on Or- (2015)).
Internal
tures Combustion Engines
(2015)). Engines Vehicles
Vehicles (ICEVs)
(ICEVs) are are fre-
fre-
The economic
ganization for growth,
Economicwith particular and
Cooperation emphasis Internal
on Or- Internal
Development Combustion
ganization for Economic Cooperation and Development quently Combustion
criticized and Engines
new Vehiclesto(ICEVs)
regulations control areenvi-
the fre-
The economic
ganization
nonmembers growth,
Economicwith
for(non-OECD) particular
Cooperation
regions, emphasis
and
would Development
cause Or- quently
onworld Internal criticized
Combustion and new Engines regulations
Vehicles to(ICEVs)
control the areenvi-
fre-
nonmembers
ganization for(non-OECD)
Economic regions,
Cooperation would
andcause aa world
Development
quently
ronmental
ronmental
criticized
impact and
impact of
new
of vehicles
vehicles regulations
(e.g.,
(e.g.,
to control
Directive
Directive
the
2017/1347
2017/1347
envi-
of
of
nonmembers
energy (non-OECD)
consumption increase regions,
by 28% would cause
between a world
2015 and quently
ronmental
13 July criticized
impact
2017) set and new
of vehicles
new regulations
challenges (e.g.,to to
Directive
the control the
2017/1347
automotive envi-
of
sector.
energy consumption increase by 28% between 2015 and
nonmembers
energy
2040. World (non-OECD)
consumption
gross increase
domestic regions,
by 28%
product would
(GDP) cause2015
between
would and 13
a world
increase 13
July 2017)
ronmental
July 2017)
Furthermore,
set new
impact
set
the newso
challenges
of vehicles
challenges
called (e.g.,to Directive
the automotive
affair2017/1347
to the automotive
”dieselgate” opened
sector.
of
sector.
the
2040.
energy World gross
consumption domestic
increase product
by 28%(GDP) would
between increase
2015 and Furthermore, the so called ”dieselgate” affair opened the
2040.
by World
3.0% per gross
year domestic
from 2015product
to (GDP)
2040, while would
the increase
price of 13 July 2017)
Furthermore,
Pandora’s box set
the new
which so challenges
called
led to to the automotive
”dieselgate”
the approval affair
of a opened
new, sector.
the
stricter
by
2040.3.0%
Worldpergrossyear domestic
from 2015 to 2040,
product (GDP)while the increase
would price of Pandora’s box which led to the approval of a new, stricter
by
North
North
3.0%Seaper
Sea Brent
Brent
yearcrude
fromoil2015
crude would
oil2015
would
to reach
2040,
reach
while
109
109 $/barrel.
the price
$/barrel. These
These
of Pandora’s
Furthermore,
emission boxthe
standardwhich soEuro
called
led 7toin ”dieselgate”
thethe approval
EU in in affair
of
late opened
a new,
2018 the
stricter
(Sinay
by
North3.0%
forecasts per
Seaare Brentyear
valid from
crude
for aoil to 2040,
would reach
Reference case while
109
determinedthe
$/barrel. price
These
on of emission
the Pandora’s standard
box which Euro
led 7tointhe the EU
approval late
of a 2018
new, (Sinay
stricter
forecasts are validcrude
for aoilReference case109determined
$/barrel. on the emission
et al. standard Euro 7 in the EU in late 2018 (Sinay
al. (2018)).
(2018)).
North of
forecasts
views
views
Seaeconomic
of
areBrent
economic
valid for
and
would reach
andademographic
Reference
demographic case determined
trends
trends for OECD
for OECD These
on re- et
the
re-
emission
et standard Euro 7 in the EU in late 2018 (Sinay
al. (2018)).
forecasts
views
gions. of areand
economic
High validLow for
and ademographic
Reference
scenario have case determined
trends
been for OECD
addressed on the
re- The
as-well. The best
et al. best opportunity to
(2018)). to reduce
reduce pollutants
pollutants and and GreenGreen
gions. High and Low scenario have been addressed as-well. opportunity
views
gions.
In theseof economic
High
two and Low and
scenarios, demographic
scenario
GPD have been
would trends for
addressed
increase, OECD re- The
as-well.
respectively, House best
Gasesopportunity
(GHGs) to reduce (Nemry
emissions pollutants et and
al. Green
(2009))
In these twoand scenarios, GPD would increase, respectively, House
The the Gases
best (GHGs) emissions
opportunity to (Nemry et and
al. (2009))
gions.
In
by theseHigh Low
two scenarios,
3.3%/year and scenario
GPD would
2.7%/year. have been addressed
increase,
Analogously, priceas-well.
would House
oilrespectively, and
and the
Gases (GHGs)
relative
relative effect on reduce
effect emissions
on population
population
pollutants
(Nemry et al.(Hawkins
health
health
Green
(2009))
(Hawkins
by
In 3.3%/year
these two and 2.7%/year.
scenarios, GPD Analogously,
would increase, oil price would
respectively, House
and
et the
al. Gases (GHGs)
relative
(2012)) is effect
given emissions
onby (Nemry
population
the et
health
penetration al. (2009))
(Hawkins
of Hybrid
by 3.3%/year
reach
reach 43 $/barrel
43 $/barrel and 2.7%/year.
in the
in Low Analogously,
the Low Oil Price
Oil
oil price
Price scenario,
scenario, and
and
would
226 et al. (2012)) is given by the penetration of Hybrid
226
by 3.3%/year $/barreland 2.7%/year. Low Analogously, oil price would
226 et andal.the(2012))
Electric relativeis (HEVs)
Vehicles effect
given on by
and population
the health of(Hawkins
penetration
Electric Vehicles Hybrid
(EVs) in
$/barrel
reach 43 in the Highin Oil
the Price Oil
one Price
(EIA scenario,
(2017)). and Electric Vehicles (HEVs) and Electric Vehicles
$/barrel
reach 43 in
$/barrel
in the
$/barrel High
the High
Oil
in Oil Price
the Price
Low Oil one (EIA
onePrice
(2017)).
(EIA scenario,
(2017)). and 226 Electric et
the al. (2012)) is
Vehiclescars’
passengers given
(HEVs)market. by the
and The penetration
Electric Vehicles
benefits of of(EVs)
Hybrid
(EVs)
HEVs and
in
in
Although
$/barrel inthe
Although the exploitation
theexploitation
High Oil Price of renewable
of renewable energy
one (EIAenergy (2017)).sources will the
sources will the
EVs
passengers
Electric Vehicles
passengers
in the
the
cars’
(HEVs)
cars’
operating
market.
market.
phase andare
The
The
benefits
Electric Vehicles
benefits
evident,
of HEVs
butoftheir (EVs)
HEVs
their
and
and
impact in
Although
increase, the exploitation
fossil fuels are of renewable
expected to energy sources
continue to meetwilla EVs in
the passengers operating
cars’ phase
market. areThe evident,
benefitsbut oftheir
HEVs impact
and
increase, fossil fuels are expected to continue to meet EVs
from in the
productionoperating
phase phase
and are
energy evident,
a from production phase and energy supply (well-to-wheel) supply but impact
(well-to-wheel)
Although
increase, the
partfossil exploitation
fuels energy ofdemand.
renewable
are expected energy sources
toPetroleum
continue to
andmeet willa from
EVsbe in the operating
large
large part of world’s
of world’s energy demand. Petroleum and other
other can production
even thanphase
worstphase are evident,
and energy
conventional supply
ICEVs but their impact
(well-to-wheel)
(Helmers et al.
al.
increase,
large
liquid part fossil
fuels ofare fuels
world’s
expected are
energy expected
to demand.
have a to continue
Petroleum
large share ofto
and meet
world other
en-a canfrom beproduction
even worst than
phase conventional
and energy ICEVs
supply (Helmers
(well-to-wheel) et
liquid fuels are expected to have a large share of world en- can be even
(2017)). In worst
fact, than
if, and conventional
only if, theICEVs
charging(Helmers et al.
electricity
largeeven
liquid
ergy
ergy
part
fuelsifofare
even
world’s
their
if are
their
expected
usage
usage
energy
would
would
demand.
to have a large
decrease
decrease
Petroleum
share
from
from 33%
33%
and
of in
world
in
other
2015
2015 to (2017)).
en-
to
can EVs
be even
(2017)).
for
In worst
fact, if,
In fact,
and Plug-inthan
if,
and
and
HEVs
only if, the
conventional
only(PHEVs)
if, the
charging
ICEVs
has (Helmers
charging
electricity
low et
very electricityCOal.2
liquid
ergy
31% infuels
even if
2040. their
It expected
usage
is also to
would have
forecasted a large
decrease
that share
from
liquid 33% of world
in 2015
consumption en-
to for EVs
(2017)). and Plug-in
In emissions,
fact, if, andHEVs only (PHEVs)
if, has
thetheir
charging very low CO
electricity 2
31% in 2040. It isusage
also forecasted that from
liquid consumption for
and EVs
GHGs and Plug-in HEVs
they can (PHEVs)
reach has very
full low
potential CO in
ergy increase
31%
will even if their
in 2040. It is
in would
also forecasted
industrial and decrease
that liquid33%
transportation in 2015and
consumption
sector, to andfor GHGs
EVs and emissions,
Plug-in they
HEVs can reach their
(PHEVs) has full
verypotential
low CO in222
will sector, and and mitigating
GHGs globalemissions,warmingthey can (Girardi
reachet al.
al. (2015)).
their full potential in
31% increase
will in 2040.
increase
decline
in
in
in electric
electric
industrial
It is also
industrial
power
and transportation
forecasted that The
and transportation
generation. sector, and mitigating
liquidtransportation
consumption and GHGs globalemissions,warmingthey can (Girardi
reachet their (2015)).
full potential in
decline in
will increase in the power
industrial generation.
and The
transportation transportation
sector, mitigating
and Penetration global
of EVs warming
and PHEVs (Girardiin et al.
everyday (2015)).
life
decline
sector
sector
in electric
remains
remains
power
largest
the power
generation.
consumer
largestgeneration.
consumer ofTheofThe transportation
refined
refined petroleum mitigating
Penetration
petroleum Penetration
global
of EVs warming
and PHEVs (Girardiin everyday life has
et al. (2015)). has several
several
decline
sector
and in electric
remains
other liquids the largest
growing consumer
from 54% inof transportation
refined
2015 to petroleum
56% in 2040 aspects. Their
of deployment
EVs and PHEVs and in their
everyday need lifeofhasfast and
several
and other liquids growing aspects. Their deployment and their need of fast and
sector
and
(EIA remains
other liquids
(2017)). the largestfrom
growing from
54% inof2015
consumer
54% in 2015
to 56%
refined
to 56%
in 2040 Penetration
petroleum diffuse
in 2040 aspects. of EVs
recharging
Their and with
clash
deployment PHEVs the
and in everyday
present
their lifeofhas
infrastructure
need several
fast and
(EIA (2017)). diffuse recharging
aspects.recharging
Their clash
deployment with the
and present
their infrastructure
need In of addition,and
fast and
and other
(EIA liquids growing from 54% in 2015 to 56% in 2040 topology
(2017)). diffuse of the clash(Marra
grid with the et present
al. infrastructure
(2017)). and
In the decade 2005 to 2015 the worldwide number topology
diffuse of the grid
recharging clash (Marra
with theetpresent
al. (2017)). In addition,
infrastructure and
(EIA (2017)). large penetration
topology
In the decade 2005 to 2015 the worldwide number large penetration of the EVs and PHEVs can have great of the of
grid the EVs
(Marra and
et PHEVs
al. (2017)). can In have great
addition,
In
of the decade
vehicles has 2005 to increased.
sensibly 2015 the Passengers
worldwide cars number
and topology
impact on of the grid (Marra et al. (2017)). In addition,
of
In vehicles
of the decade
vehicles
commercial
has sensibly
has
vehicles to increased.
2005increased
sensibly the Passengers
2015 from
increased. worldwide
Passengers
892,028
cars and large
number
in cars
2005 andto impact
large on toto the
penetration
penetration the power
of the grid,
power
of the
EVs particularly
grid, and PHEVsin
EVs particularly
and PHEVs incan
can
the case
thehave
have
with
case great
with
great
commercial vehicles increased from 892,028 in 2005 to poor
impact
poor coordination
on to
coordinationthe of
power
of charging
grid,
charging times
times (Gong
particularly
(Gong in et
et al.
the
al. (2012)).
case with
(2012)).
of vehicles
commercial has
in vehiclessensibly increased.
increased Passengers
from 892,028 cars and
in 2005 to impact on to the power grid, particularly
1,282,270 in
1,282,270 2015. The
2015. The largest growth
largest growth rate is
rate is represented
represented poor coordination of charging times (Gonginetthe al.case with
(2012)).
commercial
1,282,270
by in vehicles
2015. The
Asia/Oceania/Middle increased
largest
East fromthat
growth
area 892,028
rate ina 2005
is represented
signed +141% to poor coordination of charging times (Gong et al. (2012)).
by Asia/Oceania/Middle
1,282,270 in 2015. The largest East area
growth thatratesigned a +141%
is represented
by Asia/Oceania/Middle East area that signed a +141%
by Asia/Oceania/Middle East area that
2405-8963 © 2018, IFAC (International Federation of Automatic signed a +141%Control) Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 211
Copyright
Peer review© under
2018 IFAC 211 Control.
responsibility of International Federation of Automatic
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 211
10.1016/j.ifacol.2018.10.035
Copyright © 2018 IFAC 211
IFAC E-CoSM 2018
Changchun, China, September 20-22, Francesco
2018 Antonio Tiano et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-31 (2018) 188–194 189
In this study the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method is
used to evaluate the total energy usage and environmental
impact when a driver continues to use a conventional
ICEV, fueled with gasoline or diesel, after a certain period
of time or chooses to demolish and replace it with an EV or
a HEV. The option of hybridizing the ICEV into a hybrid
solar electric vehicle by the installation of the so called
”HySolarKit” is evaluated as well.
HySolarKit is a kit developed by University of Salerno that
allows to hybridize a conventional vehicle to a Through the
Road (TTR) parallel hybrid. The hybridization is obtained
by the integration of motors in rear wheels, the installation
of an additional battery, of flexible photovoltaic panels
on the vehicle body and an additional management unit
using data from On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) port. In
particular, the electrification of rear wheels with two wheel
motors of 7 kW has been realized, converting the original
FIAT Grande Punto in a TTR HEV with a Degree of
Hybridization (DoH) of about 16% (Mild Hybridization)
(Rizzo et al. (2018); Guzzella and Sciarretta (2013)).
The benefits, apart reduction of fuel consumption and
emissions as detailed in next chapters, are enhanced per-
formance, acceleration and vehicle control due to two ad-
ditional electric motors, possibility of electric driving and
access to Low Emission Zones. The results of large survey
on potential users have also shown a good inclination to
adopt such innovation (de Luca et al. (2015)).
The project, awarded with the ”Seal of Excellence” by
Horizon 2020, has been financed by the European program
LIFE (LIFE-SAVE, Solar Aided Vehicle Electrification),
with a participation of four Italian industrial partners
(eProInn, Landi Renzo, Mecaprom and Solbian). The goal
is to bring to industrialization (TRL=9) 4/5 prototypes of
cars, and to foster a joint-venture between the partners to
go to the market. Further details are available in the web
site www.life-save.eu.
Argonne National Laboratory (U.S. Department of En-
ergy) has a recognized leadership in performing LCA anal-
yses. Its work led to the development of a tool, called
GREET (Greenhouses gases, Regulated Emissions, and
Energy use in Transportation) model, specific for the
automotive sector. This software provides a comprehen-
sive, lifecycle based approach to compare energy use and
emissions of conventional (ICEVs) and advanced vehicle
technologies (HEVs, PHEVs and EVs). The tool, whose
latest update was in 2017, is developed in Microsoft Excel.
It was used in this study but some modifications - such
as fuel mix for electricity generation and fuel economy of
vehicles - to the model were needed to adapt it to the
Italian energy and vehicles market.
2. STATE-OF-THE-ART OF LCA IN AUTOMOTIVE
Among the LCA literature, it is possible to notice that only
few studies considered the traditional vehicles conversion
into HEV or EV. By these studies it emerged that the
conversion of a traditional vehicle allows to save CO2
emissions, also taking into account the production of
electric supply, electric motors and batteries (Helmers
et al. (2017)).
212
Every study, however, is based on simulation, made up
by generic LCA softwares, using a definite mileage and
specifying the drive cycle used (Bauer et al. (2015); Castro
et al. (2003); Samaras and Meisterling (2008); Bartolozzi
et al. (2013)); for the data evaluation are considered the
CO2 and GHGs emissions and the energy consumption in
every phase of vehicle life.
Each study agrees on the fact that the use phase is the
most critical one for emissions and energy consumption
of traditional vehicles because of the large use of fossil
fuels, while for the electric ones the energy supply phase
is the most critical phase. One of the most frequent topic
in vehicle LCA studies is how to reduce fuel consumption
during the vehicle use, making the vehicle lighter using
alternative material like plastic reinforced material or
aluminum instead of steel (Suzuki and Takahashi (2005);
Kim and Wallington (2013); Lewis et al. (2014)).
Another topic is the comparison of a vehicle line up to
evaluate how the performance raised during the years
(Danilecki et al. (2017)). Other studies, instead, focused
on the environmental performance of vehicles, considering
various energy sources for the electric production (Hawkins
et al. (2012); Girardi et al. (2015)); some studies have
shown that if the electricity is generated using coal fired
plant, the emissions of traditional PHEVs or EVs vehicle
are higher than the emission or traditional ICEVs vehicle,
while using the German average mix for electricity supply,
as in (Helms et al. (2010)) the emissions are quite similar to
each other (Rangaraju et al. (2015)). This underlines that
for the advent of electric mobility is necessary to increase
the production of electricity by renewable source (Nordelöf
et al. (2014)). In any case, the electric vehicle is the
best option for urban mobility because it has no emission
during the vehicle use; this could contribute to refine
the air quality of urban place. Moreover, electric motors
have a better energy conversion than internal combustion
engine, particularly at low loads occurring in urban driving
(Althaus (2012)).
Large attention is placed in the end of life of vehicle,
because about 75% of end-of-life vehicles materials, mainly
metals, are recyclable in the European Union (Kanari et al.
(2003); Nicolli et al. (2012); Lashlem et al. (2013)). The
rest of the vehicle is considered waste and generally goes
to landfills. Many studies focused on the environmental
impact of batteries used for vehicle energy storage, and
on the technologies used for recycling or reusing them.
Applying the LCA study to these, in fact, results that
batteries have a small incidence in energy consumption
or emission compared with the total vehicle life (Matheys
et al. (2009); Ramoni and Zhang (2013); Zackrisson et al.
(2010)).
3. THE GREET MODEL
The GREET model tool, as mentioned, has been de-
veloped by Argonne National Laboratory to determine
greenhouse gases and regulated emissions in addition to
the energy use in transportation. The tool consists of two
separated Excel files: the first one focuses on the fuel-
cycle and calculates energy consumption and emissions
during the production, transport and usage phases of fuels;
the second file, instead, focuses on the vehicle-cycle and
IFAC E-CoSM 2018
190
Changchun, China, September 20-22, Francesco
2018 Antonio Tiano et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-31 (2018) 188–194

determines energy consumption and emissions during the Table 1. Total Vehicles Weight
life of a vehicle, including manufacturing, disposal and
recycle/reuse of vehicles’ components. ICEV HEV PHEV EV
1286 kg 1320 kg 1739 kg 1482 kg
The fuel-cycle model contains aggregate data on the fol-
lowing processes per each fuel type:
Table 2. Battery and fluids weights of ICEVs,
• Production, transport and storage of the primary HEVs, PHEVs and EVs
energy source;
• Production, transport, storage and supply of fuel; SYSTEM ICEV HEV PHEV EV
• Usage of fuel, taking into account combustion and Battery - Lead-Acid 16 kg 10 kg 10 kg 10 kg
other chemical reactions. Battery - Li-Ion 0 kg 0 kg 144 kg 202 kg
Battery - Ni-MH 0 kg 40.4 kg 0 kg 0 kg
Analogously, the vehicle-cycle model contains the aggre- Engine oil 3.9 kg 3.9 kg 3.9 kg 0 kg
gate data on: Brake fluid 0.9 kg 0.9 kg 0.9 kg 0.9 kg
Trasmission fluid 11 kg 0.8 kg 0.8 kg 0.8 kg
• Extraction, recycle and processing of raw materials; Powertrain coolant 10 kg 10 kg 10 kg 7 kg
• Manufacturing and assembly of vehicle’s components; Windshield fluid 2.7 kg 2.7 kg 2.7 kg 2.7 kg
• Disposal and recycle of the vehicle. Adhesives 13.6 kg 13.6 kg 13.6 kg 13.6 kg

The two Excel files interact with each other to determine

the total energy consumption and emissions in a vehicle Table 3. Composition of ICEVs, HEVs,
life-cycle, as shown in Figure 1. PHEVs and EVs (excluding batteries, fluids
and fuel)
SYSTEM ICEV HEV PHEV EV
Body System (includ-
ing BIW, interior, exte- 46.1% 41.9% 38.2% 47.5%
rior, and glass)
Powertrain System 24.7% 22.5% 23.9% 4.8%
Transmission System 5.3% 5.0% 4.7% 5.7%
Chassis (w/o battery) 23.9% 24.5% 24.9% 28.9%
Traction Motor 0.0% 2.1% 3.2% 7.2%
Generator 0.0% 2.1% 3.2% 0.0%
Electronic control 0.0% 1.8% 1.8% 5.9%

substitution of batteries (both standard starting battery

Fig. 1. GREET model
Outputs of the GREET model can be grouped into three
main categories:
• Well-to-Pump (WTP), comprehending the produc-
tion and distribution phase of fuels;
• Vehicle Cycle, which includes all the operation of
manufacturing and disposal of the vehicle;
• Vehicle Operation, which consists of vehicle use and
maintenance phase.
3.1 Tool assumptions
In GREET a vehicle is considered as aggregate of several
components, due to the large number of variables to take
into account. Those components are included in the tool’s
systems.
The mass of vehicles varies significantly according to their
type. Total mass is shown in Table 1. Table 2 shows the
battery and fluids mass per vehicle typology, while Table 3
summarizes the components composition of ICEVs, HEVs
and EVs expressed as percentage of the total (excluding
batteries, fluids and fuel). Each material is associated with
energy consumption and CO2 and GHGs emissions.
Particular attention was given by the development team on
the vehicle maintenance throughout its life cycle. In fact,
and storage battery for EVs and HEVs), tires and fluids
(refrigerant, brake, engine oil, etc) are considered. Brake
pads, spark plugs, air filters and wiper blades are aggre-
gated with other components that are not substituted dur-
ing the life of the vehicle due to their minimal contribution
to the total energy consumption and emission.
HEVs battery size is set equal to 23 kW, while for PHEVs
and EVs the battery size is expressed in energy and it
is equal, respectively, to 15 kWh and 27 kWh. Nickel-
Metal Hydrate (Ni-MH) battery is assumed for HEVs,
whilst EVs and PHEVs are equipped with Lithium-Ion
(Li-Ion) batteries. The software expects that Ni-MH and
Li-Ion should be substituted after traveling 250,000 km.
This value agrees with the range of 150,000 to 300,000 km
in literature (Duvall et al. (2004)).
Vehicle tires are changed every 65,000 km, while fluids are
substituted depending on its typology:
• lubricant oil is changed every 6,500 km;
• power steering oil is not changed. HEVs and EVs are
equipped with an electrified power steering system;
• brake fluid is changed every 65,000 km;
• transmission oil is substituted once during the life of
the vehicle.
Analogously, each fuel and electricity generation is care-
fully analyzed, taking into account every phase of extrac-
tion, refinery and transportation (for fuels) and the fuel
mix used for generation (for electricity generation).

213
IFAC E-CoSM 2018
Changchun, China, September 20-22, Francesco
2018 Antonio Tiano et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-31 (2018) 188–194 191
3.2 Modifications to the GREET model
As mentioned, the fuel mix for electricity production was
substituted with the Italian one. Table 4 reports the Italian
fuel mix in 2016 which includes the electricity imported
by other European countries (such as, electricity from
nuclear).
Table 4. Italian fuel mix
Source Value
Renewables 38.4%
Natural Gas 37.6%
Carbon 15.9%
Nuclear 3.9%
Biomass 3.2%
Petrol 1.0%
The fuel economy of conventional cars has been changed
to 5.5 liters per 100 km according to the European average
(Pavlovic et al. (2018)). Diesel vehicle fuel economy is
automatically calculated by the tool itself by dividing the
gasoline fuel economy by a factor equal to 1.21.
3.3 Integration of HySolarKit
In order to integrate HySolarKit into the GREET model,
the main components of the kit have been individually
analyzed (photovoltaic panels, batteries and electric mo-
tors). The impact of the components’ material is derived
by the tool itself. In detail, photovotaic panels made in
monocrystalline silicon with a mass equal to 1.7 kg have
been considered. Lithium-ion batteries with 4 kWh ca-
pacity is assumed, while for the electric motors it has
been assumed that they have the same impact, during the
construction phase, of the electric motors of HEVs and
EVs.
Fuel consumption savings (and corresponding emission
reductions) are due to two concurrent mechanisms:
• mild hybridization, allowing partial recovery of the
energy during braking and downhills and an increase
of the mean engine efficiency, due to cooperation with
the electric propulsion; this benefit would depend on
type of driving, and is maximum in urban driving;
• photovoltaics, providing a free partial recharge of
the battery along all the day (including parking
time); thanks to this contribution, the vehicle can
operate in charge depleting mode, rather than in
charge sustaining, as for pure hybrids. The daily
harvested energy depends on location, season and
weather conditions, while the relative weight of this
contribution depends on the daily energy spent for
traction, function of driving type and time; its relative
contribution is maximum for typical urban use (about
one hour per day driving).
An analysis of fuel consumption reduction for differ-
ent driving cycles, component sizing and driving habits
has been performed using a longitudinal dynamic model
(Marano et al. (2013); Rizzo et al. (2014)). The effects of
different vehicle configurations (i.e. Drive by Wire vs direct
pedal actuation) on driveability and on energy manage-
ment have been studied by Dynamic Programming (Rizzo
et al. (2018)), and specific aspects related to regenerative
214
braking actuation have been analysed (Grandone et al.
(2016)). The results show that for typical urban use (i.e.
FUDS cycle, about 1 h driving per day), the savings due
to combined effects of hybridization and solar recharge can
be of the order of 20% in sunny days. Therefore, regarding
the fuel consumption of the vehicle equipped with the
HySolarKit two separate conditions have been considered:
• best case: the use of the kit allows a 20% reduction
of fuel consumption;
• standard case: the use of the kit allows a 10% reduc-
tion of fuel consumption.
In the use period of the kit there is no need to refurbish
the photovoltaic modules installed on the vehicle, while the
batteries are substituted as in the HEVs and EVs cases.
4. DESCRIPTION OF SIMULATIONS
This study is divided into two temporal periods, one
following the other. In the first period, lasting 10 years,
the purchase and use of a conventional passenger vehicle
is considered. This vehicle travels 50 km per day, thus a
total of 182,500 km, of which 70% traveled on urban cycle.
In the second period, having the same length of the first
one and drive-cycle, three different scenarios have been
analyzed:
(1) the driver keeps using the conventional vehicle;
(2) the driver purchases a new alternative vehicle (HEV,
PHEV or EV);
(3) the driver converts his vehicle with HySolarKit.
In both time periods, the life-cycle of vehicles is accounted
in terms of :
• Total Energy: the total energy used for the manufac-
ture, disposal, use and maintenance (kJ/km);
• GHGs: GHGs emissions (g/km);
5. RESULTS
5.1 First time period
The results of the analysis relating to the first hypothetical
scenario are explained in this section.
Figure 2 shows the total energy consumption for produc-
tion (including disposal) and use of both gasoline and
diesel cycle. As expected, the diesel-fueled vehicle shows
lower consumption in Vehicle Operation phase since the
diesel vehicle’s fuel economy is better than the gasoline
one. The lower consumption in the Well to Pump phase is
due to the fact that diesel fuel is less refined than gasoline.
These aspects lead to a reduction of 461 kJ/km (17.6%)
in case of use of a diesel vehicle.
The same behavior is found when GHGs emission are
evaluated. Figure 3 shows a reduction of 23 g/km (12.6%)
of GHGs.
Both figures show that the most critical phase of life of a
vehicle in the selected scenario is its use, while vehicle cycle
and fuel cycle affect to a lesser extent. In fact, the vehicle
operation phase represents about the 65% of the overall
total energy consumption for both vehicles and about the
70% of CO2 and GHGs emissions.
IFAC E-CoSM 2018
192
Changchun, China, September 20-22, Francesco
2018 Antonio Tiano et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-31 (2018) 188–194

Total Energy Consumption [kJ/km] Total Energy Consumption [kJ/km]

HSK diesel best case 29233 1117

HSK diesel standard case 29233 1256

Diesel 292 463 1396 HSK gasoline best case 464 33 1348

HSK gasoline standard case 464 33 1517

Well to Pump Well to Pump
Vehicle Cycle EV 493 623 516 Vehicle Cycle
Vehicle Operation Vehicle Operation
PHEV 648 671 1048

HEV 333 470 1209

Gasoline 464 463 1685
Same diesel vehicle 292 1396

Same gasoline vehicle 464 1685

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Fig. 2. First period: Total Energy Consumption Fig. 4. Second period: Total Energy Consumption

GHGs Emissions [g/km]

The analysis of GHGs emission confirms some of the
results from the total energy consumption. Also in this
case, the substitution of the diesel vehicle with a PHEV
Diesel 25 29 106 or a HEV is not convenient. Only the disposal of the
gasoline ICEV allow a small reduction (about 10%). For
Well to Pump the PHEV the well-to-pump has a considerable share of
Vehicle Cycle
Vehicle Operation
the overall GHGs emission which depends on the fuel mix
for electricity generation. Conversely, even if the HEV has
Gasoline 31 29 123
the lowest well-to-pump dependency, the vehicle operation
phase assumes the greatest contribution to GHGs emis-
sions.
0 50 100 150 200
Results corroborate what has been found in the total
Fig. 3. First period: GHGs Emissions energy consumption analysis. A vehicle converted with
HySolarKit has lower GHGs emission than HEVs and
PHEVs three times out of four. In particular, hybridized
5.2 Second time period diesel ICEVs have the lowest GHGs emissions, outdone
only by EVs which are characterized of not having vehicle
In the second time period, the mobility options for the operation emission since there is no fuel burned.
driver are analyzed. The following figures summarize the
results. Before commenting them, it has to be specified GHGs Emissions [g/km]
HSK diesel best case 25 2 85
that for the case in which the driver keeps using its vehicle
the LCA analysis does not include the vehicle cycle phase HSK diesel standard case 25 2 95

since it has already been considered in the previous time HSK gasoline best case 31 2 98

period. HSK gasoline standard case 31 2 110

Well to Pump
EV 48 39 Vehicle Cycle
The analysis of the total energy consumption highlights Vehicle Operation
PHEV 59 42 38
some results that could not be expected. If on one hand
it was expected to find a lower energy consumption from HEV 22 30 88

EVs, HEVs and PHEVs on the vehicle operation side, on Same diesel vehicle 25 106

the other a total energy consumption higher or comparable Same gasoline vehicle 31 123

with the one of the use of the same diesel or gasoline 0 50 100 150

engine was not predictable. As shown in Figure 4 the

vehicle cycle and well-to-pump phase play a critical role Fig. 5. Second period: GHGs Emissions
in the total energy consumption for EVs, PHEVs and
EVs. Moreover, the PHEV has the greatest total energy
consumption. In this case, the well-to-pump phase assumes 6. CONCLUSIONS
a great importance because it includes the fuel mix for the
generation of the electricity that is supplied to the vehicle The paper presents the application of LCA for the eval-
during charging. uation of total energy consumption and GHGs emissions
when a driver is in front to several mobility options. The
Figure 4 also shows that the conversion of the vehicle
analysis includes the option of converting a conventional
by the installation of the HySolarKit allows, both in the
car into a solar hybrid vehicle with HySolarKit which
standard and in the best case, the vehicle to have a lower
allows fuel economy improvement up to 20%.
total energy consumption than PHEVs and HEVs. This is
due to the fact that the vehicle cycle phase only includes A wide literature analysis on LCA applied to the au-
the manufacturing of the kit components, thus resulting in tomotive sector has been performed. This showed that
much lower energy consumption than those of new PHEVs only few studies focused on the conversion of vehicles,
and HEVs. In particular, a diesel vehicle converted with while the majority of them focused on the reduction of
HySolarKit has a lower total energy consumption that a energy consumption and GHGs emissions by operating on
full electric vehicle in the examined scenario. manufacturing materials and traction options.

215
IFAC E-CoSM 2018
Changchun, China, September 20-22, Francesco
2018 Antonio Tiano et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-31 (2018) 188–194 193
The LCA analysis of this study has been performed by
the use of the GREET model tool developed by Argonne
National Laboratory. The life-cycle analysis included gaso-
line and diesel ICEVs, HEVs, PHEVs, EVs and converted
ICEVs with HySolarKit. Two separated time periods have
been analyzed. In the first one, lasting 10 year, a driver
uses its conventional vehicle on a 70% urban drive cycle.
In the second time period, with same time length and drive
cycle, the substitution of the vehicle with an alternative
vehicle (HEV, PHEV and EV) or the conversion with
HySolarKit has been confronted.
Results of the first time period prove that the conventional
diesel ICEVs have lower total energy consumption and
GHGs emission due to the fact that diesel fuel is less
refined that gasoline and that the diesel ICEV is more
efficient than a gasoline one.
The second time period analysis showed that the hy-
bridization of the vehicle with HySolarKit entails a lower
total energy consumption that HEVs and PHEVs because
of, mainly, the lower contribution of the manufacturing of
the kit in respect of the manufacturing of a new vehicle.
In addition, diesel ICEVs converted with HySolarKit have
the lowest total energy consumption in the examined sce-
nario.
In terms of GHGs emissions, only the full electric option
allows the best reduction. Also in this case, the conversion
of ICEVs with HySolarKit leads to lower GHGs emission
than PHEVs and HEVs three times out of four.
In conclusion, results showed that that electric mobility
(PHEVs and EVs) options have a strong dependency on
the fuel mix for electricity generation. Only if it is charac-
terized of a large share of renewable energy, it is possible
to sensibly reduce total energy consumption and GHGs
emissions. In addition, the installation of HySolarKit gives
better results than the purchase of a brand-new HEV and
even compete with EVs in terms of total energy consump-
tion.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study is supported by a grant from European
Union (LIFE-SAVE Solar Aided Vehicle Electrification
LIFE16 ENV/IT/000442) and by European Funds for the
OPTimised Energy Management and USe (OPTEMUS)
Project.
REFERENCES
Althaus, H.J. (2012). Modern individual mobility. The
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 17(3),
267–269. doi:10.1007/s11367-011-0365-8.
Bartolozzi, I., Rizzi, F., and Frey, M. (2013). Comparison
between hydrogen and electric vehicles by life cycle
assessment: A case study in tuscany, italy. Applied
Energy, 101, 103 – 111. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2012.03.021. Sustainable Development of
Energy, Water and Environment Systems.
Bauer, C., Hofer, J., Althaus, H.J., Duce, A.D., and Si-
mons, A. (2015). The environmental performance of cur-
rent and future passenger vehicles: Life cycle assessment
based on a novel scenario analysis framework. Applied
216
Energy, 157, 871 – 883. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2015.01.019.
Castro, M.B.G., Remmerswaal, J.A.M., and Reuter, M.A.
(2003). Life cycle impact assessment of the average
passenger vehicle in the netherlands. The International
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 8(5), 297–304. doi:
10.1007/BF02978922.
Danilecki, K., Mrozik, M., and Smurawski, P. (2017).
Changes in the environmental profile of a popular pas-
senger car over the last 30 years – results of a simplified
lca study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 141, 208 –
218. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.050.
de Luca, S., Pace, R.D., and Marano, V. (2015). Modelling
the adoption intention and installation choice of an auto-
motive after-market mild-solar-hybridization kit. Trans-
portation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 56,
426 – 445. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2015.04.
023. URL http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S0968090X15001643.
Duvall, M., Browning, L., Kalhammer, F., Warf, W., Tay-
lor, D., Wehrey, M., and Pinsky, N. (2004). Advanced
batteries for electric-drive vehicles: a technology and
cost-effectiveness assessment for battery electric vehi-
cles, power assist hybrid electric vehicles, and plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles. Technical report, Electric Power
Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
EIA, U.E.I.A. (2017). International energy outlook 2017.
Technical report, U.S. Energy Information Administra-
tion.
Girardi, P., Gargiulo, A., and Brambilla, P.C. (2015). A
comparative lca of an electric vehicle and an internal
combustion engine vehicle using the appropriate power
mix: the italian case study. The International Journal of
Life Cycle Assessment, 20(8), 1127–1142. doi:10.1007/
s11367-015-0903-x.
Gong, Q., Midlam-Mohler, S., Marano, V., and Rizzoni, G.
(2012). Study of pev charging on residential distribution
transformer life. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid,
3(1), 404–412. doi:10.1109/TSG.2011.2163650.
Grandone, M., Naddeo, M., Marra, D., and Rizzo,
G. (2016). Development of a regenerative braking
control strategy for hybridized solar vehicle.
IFAC-PapersOnLine, 49(11), 497 – 504. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.08.073. URL
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
pii/S2405896316314148. 8th IFAC Symposium on
Advances in Automotive Control AAC 2016.
Guzzella, L. and Sciarretta, A. (2013). Vehicle Propulsion
Systems - Introduction to Modeling and Optimization.
Springer, 3rd edition. ISBN: 978-3-642-35913-2.
Hawkins, T.R., Singh, B., Majeau-Bettez, G., and
Strømman, A.H. (2012). Comparative environmental
life cycle assessment of conventional and electric vehi-
cles. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 17(1), 53–64. doi:
10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00532.x.
Helmers, E., Dietz, J., and Hartard, S. (2017). Electric
car life cycle assessment based on real-world mileage
and the electric conversion scenario. The International
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 22(1), 15–30. doi:
10.1007/s11367-015-0934-3.
Helms, H., Pehnt, M., Lambrecht, U., and Liebich, A.
(2010). Electric vehicle and plug-in hybrid energy ef-
ficiency and life cycle emissions. In In proceedings of
IFAC E-CoSM 2018
194
Changchun, China, September 20-22, Francesco
2018 Antonio Tiano et al. / IFAC PapersOnLine 51-31 (2018) 188–194
18th International Symposium Transport and Air Pol-
lution Session 3: Electro and Hybrid Vehicles. Zurich,
Switzerland.
International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufactures
(2015). Vehicle in use. URL https://goo.gl/4fUH8A.
Kanari, N., Pineau, J.L., and Shallari, S. (2003). End-of-
life vehicle recycling in the european union. JOM, 55(8),
15–19. doi:10.1007/s11837-003-0098-7.
Kim, H.C. and Wallington, T.J. (2013). Life-cycle energy
and greenhouse gas emission benefits of lightweighting in
automobiles: Review and harmonization. Environmental
Science & Technology, 47(12), 6089–6097. doi:10.1021/
es3042115. PMID: 23668335.
Lashlem, A., Wahab, D., Abdullah, S., and Che Haron, C.
(2013). A review on end-of-life vehicle design process
and management. Journal of Applied Sciences, 13, 654–
662. doi:10.3923/jas.2013.654.662.
Lewis, A.M., Kelly, J.C., and Keoleian, G.A. (2014). Ve-
hicle lightweighting vs. electrification: Life cycle energy
and ghg emissions results for diverse powertrain vehicles.
Applied Energy, 126, 13 – 20. doi:https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.apenergy.2014.03.023.
Marano, V., Medina, H., Sorrentino, M., and Rizzo, G.
(2013). A model to assess the benefits of an after-market
hybridization kit based on realistic driving habits and
charging infrastructure. SAE International Journal of
Alternative Powertrains, 2(3), 471–481. URL http://
www.jstor.org/stable/26169030.
Marra, D., Rizzo, G., Siano, P., Tiano, F.A., and Shafie-
khah, M. (2017). Vehicle electrification: a further vari-
able toward integrated intelligent energy systems. In In
proceedings of 17th International Conference on Envi-
ronment and Electrical Engineering. Milan, Italy.
Matheys, J., Timmermans, J.M., Mierlo, J.V., Meyer, S.,
and den Bossche, P.V. (2009). Comparison of the en-
vironmental impact of five electric vehicle battery tech-
nologies using lca. International Journal of Sustainable
Manufacturing, 1(3), 318–329. doi:10.1504/IJSM.2009.
023977.
Nemry, F., Leduc, G., and Muñoz, A. (2009). Plug-
in Hybrid and Battery-Electric Vehicles: State of the
research and development and comparative analysis
of energy and cost efficiency. JRC Working Papers
JRC54699, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
Nicolli, F., Johnstone, N., and Söderholm, P. (2012).
Resolving failures in recycling markets: the role of
technological innovation. Environmental Economics
and Policy Studies, 14(3), 261–288. doi:10.1007/
s10018-012-0031-9.
Nordelöf, A., Messagie, M., Tillman, A.M., Ljung-
gren Söderman, M., and Van Mierlo, J. (2014). En-
vironmental impacts of hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and
battery electric vehicles—what can we learn from life
cycle assessment? The International Journal of Life
Cycle Assessment, 19(11), 1866–1890. doi:10.1007/
s11367-014-0788-0.
Pavlovic, J., Anagnostopoulos, K., Clairotte, M., Arcidia-
cono, V., Fontaras, G., Rujas, I.P., Morales, V.V., and
Ciuffo, B. (2018). Dealing with the gap between type-
approval and in-use light duty vehicles fuel consump-
tion and co2 emissions: Present situation and future
perspective. Transportation Research Record, 1(10),
0361198118756894. doi:10.1177/0361198118756894.
217
Ramoni, M.O. and Zhang, H.C. (2013). End-of-life (eol)
issues and options for electric vehicle batteries. Clean
Technologies and Environmental Policy, 15(6), 881–891.
doi:10.1007/s10098-013-0588-4.
Rangaraju, S., Vroey, L.D., Messagie, M., Mertens, J.,
and Mierlo, J.V. (2015). Impacts of electricity mix,
charging profile, and driving behavior on the emissions
performance of battery electric vehicles: A belgian case
study. Applied Energy, 148, 496 – 505. doi:https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.121.
Rizzo, G., Naddeo, M., and Pisanti, C. (2018).
Upgrading conventional cars to solar hybrid
vehicles. International Journal of Powertrains,
7(1-3), 249–280. doi:10.1504/IJPT.2018.090352. URL
https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.
1504/IJPT.2018.090352.
Rizzo, G., Sorrentino, M., and Arsie, I. (2014).
Numerical analysis of the benefits achievable by
after-market mild hybridisation of conventional
cars. International Journal of Powertrains, 3(4),
420–435. doi:10.1504/IJPT.2014.066432. URL
https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.
1504/IJPT.2014.066432. PMID: 66432.
Samaras, C. and Meisterling, K. (2008). Life cycle assess-
ment of greenhouse gas emissions from plug-in hybrid
vehicles: Implications for policy. Environmental Science
& Technology, 42(9), 3170–3176. doi:10.1021/es702178s.
PMID: 18522090.
Sinay, J., Puškár, M., and Kopas, M. (2018). Reduction
of the nox emissions in vehicle diesel engine in order to
fulfill future rules concerning emissions released into air.
Science of the Total Environment, 624, 1421–1428.
Suzuki, T. and Takahashi, J. (2005). Lca of lightweight
vehicles by using cfrp for mass-produced vehicles. In In
proceedings of 15th International Committee on Com-
posite Materials Conference.
Zackrisson, M., Avellán, L., and Orlenius, J. (2010). Life
cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles – critical issues. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 18(15), 1519 – 1529. doi:https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.06.004.