IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i20p11285-d655086.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Life Cycle Assessment of Autonomous Electric Field Tractors in Swedish Agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Oscar Lagnelöv

    (Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Gunnar Larsson

    (Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Anders Larsolle

    (Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Per-Anders Hansson

    (Department of Energy and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

Abstract

There is an increased interest for battery electric vehicles in multiple sectors, including agriculture. The potential for lowered environmental impact is one of the key factors, but there exists a knowledge gap between the environmental impact of on-road vehicles and agricultural work machinery. In this study, a life cycle assessment was performed on two smaller, self-driving battery electric tractors, and the results were compared to those of a conventional tractor for eleven midpoint characterisation factors, three damage categories and one weighted single score. The results showed that compared to the conventional tractor, the battery electric tractor had a higher impact in all categories during the production phase, with battery production being a majority contributor. However, over the entire life cycle, it had a lower impact in the weighted single score (−72%) and all three damage categories; human health (−74%), ecosystem impact (−47%) and resource scarcity (−67%). The global warming potential over the life cycle of the battery electric tractor was 102 kg CO 2 eq.ha −1 y −1 compared to 293 kg CO 2 eq.ha −1 y −1 for the conventional system. For the global warming potential category, the use phase was the most influential and the fuel used was the single most important factor.

Suggested Citation

  • Oscar Lagnelöv & Gunnar Larsson & Anders Larsolle & Per-Anders Hansson, 2021. "Life Cycle Assessment of Autonomous Electric Field Tractors in Swedish Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-24, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11285-:d:655086
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11285/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/20/11285/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christian Aichberger & Gerfried Jungmeier, 2020. "Environmental Life Cycle Impacts of Automotive Batteries Based on a Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-27, December.
    2. Sebastian Wolff & Moritz Seidenfus & Karim Gordon & Sergio Álvarez & Svenja Kalt & Markus Lienkamp, 2020. "Scalable Life-Cycle Inventory for Heavy-Duty Vehicle Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-22, July.
    3. Greg Cooney & Troy R. Hawkins & Joe Marriott, 2013. "Life Cycle Assessment of Diesel and Electric Public Transportation Buses," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 17(5), pages 689-699, October.
    4. Richard Plevin & Mark Delucchi & Felix Creutzig, 2014. "Response to Comments on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate-Change Mitigation …”," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 468-470, May.
    5. Rickard Arvidsson & Anne‐Marie Tillman & Björn A. Sandén & Matty Janssen & Anders Nordelöf & Duncan Kushnir & Sverker Molander, 2018. "Environmental Assessment of Emerging Technologies: Recommendations for Prospective LCA," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(6), pages 1286-1294, December.
    6. Lucas, Alexandre & Alexandra Silva, Carla & Costa Neto, Rui, 2012. "Life cycle analysis of energy supply infrastructure for conventional and electric vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 537-547.
    7. Peters, Jens F. & Baumann, Manuel & Zimmermann, Benedikt & Braun, Jessica & Weil, Marcel, 2017. "The environmental impact of Li-Ion batteries and the role of key parameters – A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 491-506.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Emmanouil Tziolas & Eleftherios Karapatzak & Ioannis Kalathas & Chris Lytridis & Spyridon Mamalis & Stefanos Koundouras & Theodore Pachidis & Vassilis G. Kaburlasos, 2023. "Comparative Assessment of Environmental/Energy Performance under Conventional Labor and Collaborative Robot Scenarios in Greek Viticulture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Kumar, Girish & James, Ajith Tom & Choudhary, Krishna & Sahai, Rishi & Song, Weon Keun, 2022. "Investigation and analysis of implementation challenges for autonomous vehicles in developing countries using hybrid structural modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    3. Chandrasekhar Reddy Gade & Razia Sultana Wahab, 2023. "Conceptual Framework for Modelling of an Electric Tractor and Its Performance Analysis Using a Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-24, September.

    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. 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.
    2. Porcelli, Roberto & Gibon, Thomas & Marazza, Diego & Righi, Serena & Rugani, Benedetto, 2023. "Prospective environmental impact assessment and simulation applied to an emerging biowaste-based energy technology in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Oda, Hiromu & Noguchi, Hiroki & Fuse, Masaaki, 2022. "Review of life cycle assessment for automobiles: A meta-analysis-based approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    4. Karlsson, Ida & Rootzén, Johan & Johnsson, Filip, 2020. "Reaching net-zero carbon emissions in construction supply chains – Analysis of a Swedish road construction project," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. Michael Samsu Koroma & Nils Brown & Giuseppe Cardellini & Maarten Messagie, 2020. "Prospective Environmental Impacts of Passenger Cars under Different Energy and Steel Production Scenarios," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-17, November.
    6. Kristoffer W. Lie & Trym A. Synnevåg & Jacob J. Lamb & Kristian M. Lien, 2021. "The Carbon Footprint of Electrified City Buses: A Case Study in Trondheim, Norway," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-21, February.
    7. Junming Zhu, 2020. "Suggested use? On evidence‐based decision‐making in industrial ecology and beyond," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(5), pages 943-950, October.
    8. Manzolli, Jônatas Augusto & Trovão, João Pedro & Antunes, Carlos Henggeler, 2022. "A review of electric bus vehicles research topics – Methods and trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    9. Andreas von Döllen & YoungSeok Hwang & Stephan Schlüter, 2021. "The Future Is Colorful—An Analysis of the CO 2 Bow Wave and Why Green Hydrogen Cannot Do It Alone," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-20, September.
    10. Desreveaux, A. & Bouscayrol, A. & Trigui, R. & Hittinger, E. & Castex, E. & Sirbu, G.M., 2023. "Accurate energy consumption for comparison of climate change impact of thermal and electric vehicles," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).
    11. Tharsis Teoh & Oliver Kunze & Chee-Chong Teo & Yiik Diew Wong, 2018. "Decarbonisation of Urban Freight Transport Using Electric Vehicles and Opportunity Charging," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    12. Marit Mohr & Jens F. Peters & Manuel Baumann & Marcel Weil, 2020. "Toward a cell‐chemistry specific life cycle assessment of lithium‐ion battery recycling processes," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(6), pages 1310-1322, December.
    13. Cai, Yanpeng & Applegate, Scott & Yue, Wencong & Cai, Jianying & Wang, Xuan & Liu, Gengyuan & Li, Chunhui, 2017. "A hybrid life cycle and multi-criteria decision analysis approach for identifying sustainable development strategies of Beijing's taxi fleet," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 314-325.
    14. Daina Paulikas & Steven Katona & Erika Ilves & Saleem H. Ali, 2022. "Deep‐sea nodules versus land ores: A comparative systems analysis of mining and processing wastes for battery‐metal supply chains," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(6), pages 2154-2177, December.
    15. Parlikar, Anupam & Truong, Cong Nam & Jossen, Andreas & Hesse, Holger, 2021. "The carbon footprint of island grids with lithium-ion battery systems: An analysis based on levelized emissions of energy supply," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    16. Angela Malara & Fabiola Pantò & Saveria Santangelo & Pier Luigi Antonucci & Michele Fiore & Gianluca Longoni & Riccardo Ruffo & Patrizia Frontera, 2021. "Comparative life cycle assessment of Fe2O3-based fibers as anode materials for sodium-ion batteries," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 6786-6799, May.
    17. Onat, Nuri Cihat & Kucukvar, Murat & Tatari, Omer, 2015. "Conventional, hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric vehicles? State-based comparative carbon and energy footprint analysis in the United States," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 36-49.
    18. Piotr Krawczyk & Anna Śliwińska, 2020. "Eco-Efficiency Assessment of the Application of Large-Scale Rechargeable Batteries in a Coal-Fired Power Plant," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    19. Pinto, Edwin S. & Serra, Luis M. & Lázaro, Ana, 2020. "Evaluation of methods to select representative days for the optimization of polygeneration systems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 488-502.
    20. Mattia Rapa & Laura Gobbi & Roberto Ruggieri, 2020. "Environmental and Economic Sustainability of Electric Vehicles: Life Cycle Assessment and Life Cycle Costing Evaluation of Electricity Sources," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-16, November.

    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:13:y:2021:i:20:p:11285-:d:655086. 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.