IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/itsdav/qt3427b1cn.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Life Cycle Modeling of Technologies and Strategies for a Sustainable Freight System in California

Author

Listed:
  • Ambrose, Hanjiro
  • Kendall, Alissa

Abstract

California’s freight transportation system is a vital part of the state’s economy but is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and generates an even higher portion of regional and local air pollution. The state’s primary strategy for reducing emissions from the on-road freight sector relies on deploying new vehicle and fuel technologies, such as electric medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. The market for electric truck technologies is developing rapidly. The goal of this research is to quantify the life cycle environmental impacts and life cycle costs for on-road goods movement in California to estimate the abatement potential and economic costs and benefits of electrifying California’s freight truck sector. The study compares the emissions and costs of urban conventional gasoline and diesel Class 3–8 vehicles with electric heavy-duty vehicles (i.e., electric trucks) for a range of freight and commercial vocations. A model of freight vehicle operations is developed based on representative vehicle location data, and linked with life cycle emissions inventory, technology cost, and pollution health damage cost data. The model is then used to assess energy and capacity requirements for electric trucks and battery systems and explore the impacts of a range of charging strategies and vehicle duty cycles (i.e., vocations) on energy, costs, and emissions between 2020 and 2040. Where emissions occur, and how emissions of different pollutants are affected by factors including vocation, duty cycle, powertrain configuration, and fuel pathway, will influence the effectiveness and economic costs of emissions reduction strategies. On a per mile basis, replacing a conventional gasoline or diesel truck can reduce CO2-equivalent (CO2e) emissions by 50%–75% compared to conventional gas and diesel vehicles. Statewide, 100% electrification of in-state Class 8 vehicles by 2040 could reduce annual CO2e emissions by nearly than 30% (50 million metric tonnes per year), and electrification of Class 3 trucks statewide would likely half current PM2.5 emissions from transportation. The costs of emissions abatement from truck electrification ranged from $0.25 to $182 per metric tonne of CO2e for trucks deployed in 2020, but these costs are likely to fall dramatically by 2040. Full electrification of the in-state registered Class 3–8 vehicle fleet by 2040 would significantly reduce criteria pollutants and aerosols emissions; this in turn could reduce pollution related damages in the state by $507 million per year by 2025, and by some $1.6 billion by 2040. View the NCST Project Webpage

Suggested Citation

  • Ambrose, Hanjiro & Kendall, Alissa, 2019. "Life Cycle Modeling of Technologies and Strategies for a Sustainable Freight System in California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt3427b1cn, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:itsdav:qt3427b1cn
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/3427b1cn.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lade, Gabriel E. & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2015. "The design and economics of low carbon fuel standards," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 91-99.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & Kern, Florian & McCollum, David, 2020. "Why have multiple climate policies for light-duty vehicles? Policy mix rationales, interactions and research gaps," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 309-326.
    2. Scheitrum, Daniel, 2017. "Renewable Natural Gas as a Solution to Climate Goals: Response to California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard," MPRA Paper 77193, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Plevin, Richard J. & Delucchi, Mark A. & O’Hare, Michael, 2017. "Fuel carbon intensity standards may not mitigate climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 93-97.
    4. Huseynov, Samir & Palma, Marco A., 2018. "Does California’s LCFS Reduce CO2 Emissions?," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274200, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Yeh, Sonia & Witcover, Julie, 2014. "Status Review of California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard - January 2014 Issue," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt9gk6w15t, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    6. Ahmad Karnama & João Abel Peças Lopes & Mauro Augusto da Rosa, 2018. "Impacts of Low-Carbon Fuel Standards in Transportation on the Electricity Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, July.
    7. Gabriel E Lade & C -Y Cynthia Lin Lawell & Aaron Smith, 2018. "Policy Shocks and Market-Based Regulations: Evidence from the Renewable Fuel Standard," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 707-731.
    8. Upham, Paul & Virkamäki, Venla & Kivimaa, Paula & Hildén, Mikael & Wadud, Zia, 2015. "Socio-technical transition governance and public opinion: The case of passenger transport in Finland," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 210-219.
    9. Gasia, Jaume & Miró, Laia & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2017. "Review on system and materials requirements for high temperature thermal energy storage. Part 1: General requirements," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1320-1338.
    10. Christensen, Adam & Hobbs, Benjamin, 2016. "A model of state and federal biofuel policy: Feasibility assessment of the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 799-812.
    11. Lade, Gabriel E & Lawell, C-Y Cynthia Lin, 2015. "Mandating green: On the Design of Renewable Fuel Policies and Cost Containment Mechanisms," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5zj382t4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.

    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:cdl:itsdav:qt3427b1cn. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/itucdus.html .

    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.