Life Cycle Prediction Assessment of Battery Electrical Vehicles with Special Focus on Different Lithium-Ion Power Batteries in China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Literature Review
1.2. Contribution of This Work
2. Methodology
2.1. Assessment Object and Functional Unit
2.2. System Boundary
2.3. Calculation Model
2.3.1. CTG Calculation Model
- (1)
- Calculation model of energy consumption
- (2)
- Calculation model of pollution emission
2.3.2. WTW Calculation Model
- (1)
- Calculation model of energy consumption
2.3.3. GTC Calculation Model
- (1)
- Calculation model of energy consumption
- (2)
- Calculation model of pollution emission
2.4. Life Cycle Inventory
2.4.1. Power Battery
LFP Battery/kg | NCM Battery/kg | LMO Battery/kg | LTO Battery/kg | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total | 335 | Total | 326 | Total | 429 | Total | 950 | |
Cathode | LFP (1) | 82 | NCM (2) | 92 | LMO (3) | 144 | NCM | 228 |
Aluminum | 68 | Aluminum | 64 | Aluminum | 79 | Aluminum | 112 | |
Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) | 4 | PVDF | 4 | PVDF | 5 | PVDF | 10 | |
Anode | Graphite (4) | 51 | Graphite | 60 | Graphite | 63 | LTO (5) | 170 |
Copper | 41 | Copper | 37 | Copper | 47 | Carbon black | 24 | |
PVDF | 4 | PVDF | 4 | PVDF | 5 | PVDF | 10 | |
Electrolyte | LiPF6 | 9 | LiPF6 | 6 | LiPF6 | 8 | LiPF6 | 18 |
Ethylene carbonate (6) | 26 | Ethylene carbonate | 18 | Ethylene carbonate | 23 | Ethylene carbonate | 51 | |
Dimethyl carbonate (7) | 26 | Dimethyl carbonate | 18 | Dimethyl carbonate | 23 | Dimethyl carbonate | 51 | |
Diaphragm | Polypropylene (PE) | 6 | PE | 6 | PE | 8 | PE | 35 |
Polyethylene (PP) | 1 | PP | 1 | PP | 1 | |||
Shell | PP | 4 | PP | 4 | PP | 6 | Aluminum | 177 |
Steel | 5 | Steel | 5 | Steel | 6 | 0 | ||
Glass fiber | 1 | Glass fiber | 1 | Glass fiber | 1 | 0 | ||
Cooling liquid | Ethylene glycol | 3 | Ethylene glycol | 3 | Ethylene glycol | 4 | Ethylene glycol | 35 |
BMS | Transistor | 2 | Transistor | 2 | Transistor | 2 | Transistor | 14 |
Resistor | 2 | Resistor | 2 | Resistor | 2 | Resistor | 15 | |
References | [25,41,42,43] | [25,41,42] | [25,41,42] | [18,26] |
2.4.2. Glider
2.4.3. ICEV
Component | Vehicle Type | Material Proportion | Mass/kg | Electricity Energy Consumption/MJ | Thermal Energy Consumption/MJ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Engine | ICEV | 35.7% steel, 42% aluminum, 12.3% iron, 1% copper, 4.5% rubber and 4.5% plastic | 150 | 1653 | / |
Transmission | ICEV | 30% steel, 30% aluminum, 30% iron, 5% rubber and 5% plastic | 125 | 2246.25 | 1337.5 |
Lead-acid battery | ICEV | 69% lead, 7.9% sulfuric acid, 6.1% polypropylene, 2.1% glass fiber, 14.1% water and 0.8% others | 19 | 51.68 | / |
Motor | BEV | 31.5% steel, 39.5% aluminum, 15.8% copper, 12.3% neodymium iron boron | 35 | 184.8 | 66.5 |
Electronic controller | BEV | 5% steel, 47.5% aluminum, 8.3% copper, 23% plastic, 3.8% rubber and 12.4% organics | 10 | 13.8 | / |
Final drive | BEV | 60.6% steel, 20% aluminum, 19% copper, 0.2% plastic and 0.2% organics | 35 | 630 | 352.45 |
Body | ICEV | 68.7% steel, 0.8% aluminum, 0.1% magnesium, 6.6% glass fiber, 17.4% plastic, 1.9% copper and 4.5% others | 626 | 2147.18 | / |
BEV | 690 | 2366.7 | / | ||
Chassis | ICEV | 82.3% steel, 6.3% iron, 1.0% aluminum, 2.3% copper, 3.3% plastic, 4.2% rubber and 0.6% others | 541 | 751.99 | 232.63 |
BEV | 516 | 717.24 | 221.88 | ||
Fluid | ICEV | 3.2% lubricating oil, 3.6% braking liquid, 28.6% cooling liquid, 10.7% wiper liquid and 53.9% additive | 29 | 2102.5 | / |
BEV | 29 | 2102.5 | / |
2.4.4. Vehicle Assembly
2.4.5. Prediction Scenarios
3. Results
3.1. CTG Phase of Different Power Battery
3.2. Life Cycle BEV Based on Different Batteries
4. Sensitivity Analysis
4.1. Power Battery Energy Density
4.2. Battery Manufacturing Energy Consumption
4.3. Electricity Structure
4.4. Battery Charge Efficiency
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
ADP(f) | Abiotic depletion (fossil) |
AP | Acidification potential |
BEV | Battery electrical vehicle |
BMS | Battery management system |
CTG | Cradle-to-gate |
GTC | Grave-to-cradle |
GWP | Global warming potential |
HTP | Human toxicity potential |
ICEV | Internal combustion engine vehicles |
LCA | Life cycle assessment |
LFP | Lithium-ion phosphate |
LMO | Lithium manganese oxide |
NCM | Lithium-ion nickel-cobalt-manganese |
PE | Polyethylene |
PP | Polypropylene |
PVDF | Polyvinylidene fluoride |
LTO | Lithium titanate oxide |
WTW | Well-to-wheel |
References
- China Association of Automobile Manufacturers. An Overview of the Automobile Industry in 2021; China Association of Automobile Manufacturers: Beijing, China, 2022. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- ISO 14040; Environmental Management-Life Cycle Assessment Principles and Framework. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
- Xia, X.N.; Li, P.W. A review of the life cycle assessment of electric vehicles: Considering the influence of batteries. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 814, 152870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sisani, F.; Dimaria, F.; Cesari, D. Environmental and human health impact of different powertrain passenger cars in a life cycle perspective. A focus on health risk and oxidative potential of particulate matter components. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 805, 150171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yu, A.; Wei, Y.Q.; Chen, W.W.; Peng, N.J.; Peng, L.H. Life cycle environmental impacts and carbon emissions: A case study of electric and gasoline vehicles in China. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2018, 65, 409–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Souza, L.; Lora, E.; Palacio, J.; Rocha, M.; Reno, M.; Venturini, O. Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional vehicles with different fuel options, plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles for a sustainable transportation system in Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 203, 444–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Held, M.; Schücking, M. Utilization effects on battery electric vehicle life-cycle assessment: A case-driven analysis of two commercial mobility applications. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2019, 75, 87–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shafique, M.; Azam, A.; Rafiq, M.; Luo, X.W. Life cycle assessment of electric vehicles and internal combustion engine vehicles: A case study of Hong Kong. Res. Transp. Econ. 2021, 91, 101112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bauer, C.; Hofer, J.; Althaus, H.; Del, D.; Simons, A. The environmental performance of current and future passenger vehicles: Life cycle assessment based on a novel scenario analysis framework. Appl. Energy 2015, 157, 871–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evangelisti, S.; Tagliaferri, C.; Brett, D.J.; Lettieri, P. Life cycle assessment of a polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell system for passenger vehicles. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 4339–4355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Notter, D.; Gauch, M.; Widmer, R.; Wager, P.; Stamp, A.; Zah, R.; Althaus, H.J. Contribution of Li-ion batteries to the environmental impact of electric vehicles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 6550–6556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Z.X.; Wang, M.; Zheng, J.H.; Sun, X.; Zhao, M.N.; Wang, X. Life cycle greenhouse gas emission reduction potential of battery electric vehicle. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 190, 462–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shafique, M.; Luo, X. Environmental life cycle assessment of battery electric vehicles from the current and future energy mix perspective. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 303, 114050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Qiao, Q.Y.; Zhao, F.Q.; Liu, Z.W.; He, X.; Hao, H. Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of electric vehicles in China: Combining the vehicle cycle and fuel cycle. Energy 2019, 117, 222–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiao, Q.Y.; Zhao, F.Q.; Liu, Z.W.; Jiang, S.H.; Hao, H. Cradle-to-gate greenhouse gas emissions of battery electric and internal combustion engine vehicles in China. Appl. Energy 2017, 204, 1399–1411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tagliaferri, C.; Evangelisti, S.; Acconcia, F.; Domenechc, T.; Ekinsc, P.; Barlettab, D.; Lettieri, P. Life cycle assessment of future electric and hybrid vehicles: A cradle-to-grave systems engineering approach. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2016, 112, 298–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burchart, K.D.; Jursova, S.; Folęga, P.; Korol, J.; Pustejovska, P.; Blaut, A. Environmental life cycle assessment of electric vehicles in Poland and the Czech Republic. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 202, 476–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, R.S.; Hu, S.H.; Yang, Y. Life cycle inventories of the commonly used materials for lithium-ion batteries in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 227, 960–971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cusenza, M.A.; Bobba, S.; Ardente, F.; Cellura, M.; Persio, D.F. Energy and environmental assessment of a traction lithium-ion battery pack for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 215, 634–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, H.C.; Wallington, T.J.; Arsenault, R.; Bae, C.; Ahn, S.; Lee, J. Cradle-to-Gate emissions from a commercial electric vehicle Li-ion battery: A comparative analysis. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 7715–7722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellingsen, L.A.W.; Majeau, G.; Singh, B.; Srivastava, A.K.; Valøen, L.O.; Strømman, A.H. Life cycle assessment of a lithium-ion battery vehicle pack. J. Ind. Ecol. 2014, 18, 113–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marques, P.; Garcia, R.; Kulay, L.; Freire, F. Comparative life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles addressing capacity fade. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 229, 787–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shu, X.; Guo, Y.F.; Yang, W.X.; Zhu, G.H. Life-cycle assessment of the environmental impact of the batteries used in pure electric passenger cars. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 2302–2315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, X.; Luo, X.L.; Zhang, Z.; Meng, F.R.; Yang, J.X. Life cycle assessment of lithium nickel cobalt manganese oxide (NCM) batteries for electric passenger vehicles. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 273, 123006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hao, H.; Mu, Z.X.; Jiang, S.H.; Liu, Z.W.; Zhao, F.Q. GHG Emissions from the Production of Lithium-ion Batteries for Electric Vehicles in China. Sustainability 2017, 9, 504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yin, R.S.; Yang, Y.P.; Yang, Y.; Chen, Z.L. Life cycle assessment of the lithium titanate batteries used for electric vehicles. China Environ. Sci. 2018, 38, 2371–2381. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Hua, Y.; Liu, X.H.; Zhou, S.; Huang, Y.; Ling, H.P.; Yang, S.C. Toward sustainable reuse of retired lithium-ion batteries from electric vehicles. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2021, 168, 105249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bobba, S.; Mathieux, F.; Ardente, F.; Blengini, G.A.; Cusenza, M.A.; Podias, A.; Pfrang, A. Life cycle assessment of repurposed electric vehicle batteries: An adapted method based on modelling energy flows. J. Energy Storge 2018, 19, 213–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cusenza, M.A.; Guarino, F.; Longo, S.; Mistretta, M.; Cellura, M. Reuse of electric vehicle batteries in buildings: An integrated load match analysis and life cycle assessment approach. Energy Build. 2019, 186, 339–354. [Google Scholar]
- Ahmadi, L.; Young, S.B.; Fowler, M.; Fraser, R.A.; Achachlouei, M.A. A cascaded life cycle: Reuse of electric vehicle lithium-ion battery packs in energy storage systems. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2015, 22, 111–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, B.X.; Su, X.J.; Wang, D.; Zhang, L.; Liu, Y.; Yang, Y.; Liang, H.; Gong, M.; Zhang, W.; Jiang, J. Economic analysis of lithium-ion batteries recycled from electric vehicles for secondary use in power load peak shaving in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 276, 123327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamath, D.; Shukla, S.; Arsenault, R.; Kim, H.C.; Anctil, A. Evaluating the cost and carbon footprint of second-life electric vehicle batteries in residential and utility-level applications. Waste Manag. 2020, 113, 497–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harper, G.; Sommerville, R.; Kendrick, E.; Driscoll, L.; Slater, P.; Stolkin, R.; Walton, A.; Christensen, P.; Heidrich, O.; Lambert, S.; et al. Recycling lithium-ion batteries from electric vehicles. Nature 2019, 575, 75–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Fan, E.; Li, L.; Wang, Z.; Lin, J.; Huang, Y.; Yao, Y.; Chen, R.; Wu, F. Sustainable recycling technology for Li-ion batteries and beyond: Challenges and future prospects. Chem. Rev. 2020, 120, 7020–7063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Burnham, M.; Wang, Y. Development and Applications of GREET 2.7—The Transportation Vehicle-Cycle Model; USA Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory: Argonne, IL, USA, 2006.
- Liu, Y.T.; Qiao, J.; Xu, H.B.; Liu, J.H.; Chen, Y.S. Optimal vehicle size and driving condition for extended-range electric vehicles in China: A life cycle perspective. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0241967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.M.; Ha, N.N.; Li, T.T. Research on carbon emissions of electric vehicles throughout the life cycle assessment taking into vehicle weight and grid mix composition. Energies 2019, 12, 3612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Halabi, E.E.; Third, M.; Doolan, M. Machine-based dismantling of end of life vehicles: A life cycle perspective. Procedia CIRP 2015, 29, 651–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.S.; Hu, X.; Liu, J.H. Life cycle assessment of fuel cell vehicles considering the detailed vehicle components: Comparison and scenario analysis in China based on different hydrogen production schemes. Energies 2019, 12, 3031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, Y.S.; Ding, Z.S.; Wang, W.J.; Liu, J.H. Life-cycle assessment and scenario simulation of four hydrogen production schemes for hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. China J. Highw. Transp. 2019, 32, 172–180. [Google Scholar]
- Li, S.H. Life Cycle Assessment and Environmental Benefits Analysis of Electric Vehicles. Ph.D. Thesis, Jilin University, Changchun, China, 2014. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Q. Comparative Analysis of Cathode Materials Based on Life Cycle Assessment. Ph.D. Dissertation, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China, 2012. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
- Ma, J.Q. Life cycle Assessment on a Specific BEV with Different Power-Batteries. Ph.D. Thesis, Chang’an University, Xi’an, China, 2019. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
- Xiong, X.Q. Key Technology Analysis and Production Evaluation of Intelligent Connected Vehicle from the Perspective of Patent. Ph.D. Thesis, Hunan University, Changsha, China, 2020. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
- Sullivan, A.; Burnham, M. Energy-Consumption and Carbon-Emission Analysis of Vehicle and Component Manufacturing; USA Argonne National Laboratory: Argonne, IL, USA, 2010.
- Safari, F.; Dincer, I. Assessment and optimization of an integrated wind power system for hydrogen and methane production. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018, 177, 693–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE-China). Technology Roadmap for Energy Saving and New Energy Vehicles 2.0; China Machine Press: Beijing, China, 2020. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Power Planning and Design Institute. China Power Development Report 2020, China; Power Planning and Design Institute: Beijing, China, 2021. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Q.; Xue, M.; Lin, B.; Lei, Z.; Zhang, Z. Well-to-wheel analysis of energy consumption, greenhouse gas and air pollutants emissions of hydrogen fuel cell vehicle in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 275, 123061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mamkhezri, J.; Malczynski, L.A.; Chermak, J.M. Assessing the economic and environmental impacts of alternative renewable portfolio standards: Winners and losers. Energies 2021, 14, 3319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shahzad, M.W.; Burhan, M.; Ang, L.; Ng, K.C. Energy-water-environment nexus underpinning future desalination sustainability. Desalination 2017, 413, 52–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Vehicle Type | BEV | ICEV |
---|---|---|
Body size/mm | 4765 × 1837 × 1515 | 4500 × 1855 × 1690 |
Life time mileage/km | 150,000 | 150,000 |
Battery capacity/kWh | 57 | / |
Fuel economy/kWh or L∙(100 km)−1 | 12.3 | 8.5 |
Battery type | LiFePO4 | Lead-acid |
Curb weight/kg | 1650 | 1490 |
Lithium-ion power battery (mass fraction) | 20.3% | / |
Lead-acid battery | / | 1.3% |
Engine | / | 10.1% |
Transmission | / | 8.4% |
Motor | 2.1% | / |
Electronic controller | 0.6% | / |
Final drive | 2.1% | / |
Body | 41.8% | 42.0% |
Chassis | 31.3% | 36.3% |
Fluid | 1.8% | 1.9% |
Painting | Air Conditioning and Lighting | Heating | Material Handling | Welding | Workshop Compressed Air Utilization | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Electricity/MJ∙kg−1 | 2.72 | 2.18 | / | 0.45 | 0.61 | 0.9 |
Thermal energy/MJ∙kg−1 | / | / | 2.03 | / | / | / |
Key Parameters | Object | 2020 | 2025 | 2030 | References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Battery energy density/W∙h∙kg−1 | LFP | 170 | 200 | 225 | [25,26,47] |
NCM | 175 | 205 | 230 | ||
LMO | 133 | 150 | 175 | ||
LTO | 60 | 90 | 100 | ||
Battery manufacturing energy consumption/MJ∙kg−1 | Electricity consumption | 20 | 15 | 10 | [11,16,21,41] |
Natural gas consumption | 8.8 | 6 | 5 | ||
Cathode carbon emission factors/kg CO2∙kg−1 | LFP | 26 | 23.4 | 20.8 | [26,41,42] |
NCM | 36.8 | 33.1 | 29.4 | ||
LMO | 19.6 | 17.6 | 15.7 | ||
Anode carbon emission factors/kg CO2∙kg−1 | Graphite | 1.12 | 1.0 | 0.9 | |
LTO | 18.3 | 16.5 | 14.6 | ||
Electricity structure | Coal electricity | 71% | 60% | 48% | [48,49] |
Wind electricity | 4% | 10% | 14% | ||
Nuclear electricity | 3% | 4% | 8% | ||
Hydroelectric electricity | 15% | 17% | 18% | ||
Photovoltaic electricity | 2% | 6% | 11% | ||
Other electricity | 5% | 3% | 1% | ||
Glider mass reduction proportion | / | 0% | 15% | 25% | [47] |
Battery charge efficiency | / | 90% | 95% | 99% | [14,47] |
Assessment Indictors | GWP/kg CO2-eq | ADP(f)/MJ | AP/kg SO2-eq | HTP/kg DCB-eq | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Component | LFP | NMC | LMO | LTO | LFP | NMC | LMO | LTO | LFP | NMC | LMO | LTO | LFP | NMC | LMO | LTO |
2020 | Cathode | 3540.0 | 4710.0 | 4496.0 | 10,730.0 | 13,200.0 | 12,300.0 | 15,570.0 | 21,874.0 | 12.7 | 15.3 | 13.1 | 33.1 | 903.0 | 853.0 | 1064.5 | 1489.0 |
Anode | 262.0 | 252.0 | 304.0 | 3190.0 | 3970.0 | 4050.0 | 4720.0 | 1980.0 | 3.0 | 2.7 | 3.4 | 0.1 | 326.0 | 292.0 | 367.0 | 2.8 | |
Electrolyte | 86.3 | 66.5 | 87.5 | 194.0 | 2850.0 | 2200.0 | 2890.0 | 6400.0 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 10.9 | 8.4 | 11.1 | 24.6 | |
Diaphragm | 19.1 | 15.6 | 20.5 | 78.5 | 631.0 | 513.0 | 675.0 | 2690.0 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 1.0 | 3.8 | |
Shell | 28.2 | 25.1 | 34.2 | 3655.0 | 551.0 | 491.0 | 669.0 | 33,700.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 17.7 | 423.0 | 384.0 | 523.8 | 2343.0 | |
Cooling liquid | 2.9 | 2.8 | 3.7 | 30.0 | 120.0 | 117.0 | 153.0 | 1256.0 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 1.9 | |
BMS | 0.9 | 0.9 | 1.2 | 8.3 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 13.0 | 86.6 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.4 | |
Manufacturing | 1400.0 | 1370.0 | 1800.0 | 3980.0 | 17,800.0 | 17,300.0 | 22,800.0 | 50,400.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.9 | 8.6 | 60.9 | 59.3 | 78.0 | 173.0 | |
All | 5340 | 6440 | 6740 | 21,900 | 39,130.0 | 36,980.0 | 47,400.0 | 118,000 | 19.1 | 21.3 | 20.9 | 60.5 | 1725.0 | 1597.7 | 2045.7 | 4038.38 | |
2025 | Cathode | 2830 | 3728 | 3730 | 6587 | 11,200 | 10,464 | 13,800 | 14,600 | 10.8 | 13.01 | 11.6 | 22.1 | 768.00 | 727.00 | 943.00 | 992.00 |
Anode | 218 | 209 | 263 | 1920 | 3380 | 3450 | 4180 | 1320 | 2.54 | 2.32 | 3 | 0.1 | 277.00 | 249.00 | 325.00 | 1.86 | |
Electrolyte | 73.5 | 56.7 | 77.5 | 129 | 2430 | 1870 | 2560 | 4270 | 0.257 | 0.198 | 0.271 | 0.451 | 9.31 | 7.19 | 9.83 | 16.40 | |
Diaphragm | 16.2 | 13.3 | 18.1 | 52.3 | 537 | 437 | 598 | 1790 | 0.025 | 0.0206 | 0.0282 | 0.08 | 0.81 | 0.66 | 0.91 | 2.52 | |
Shell | 24 | 21.4 | 30.3 | 2436 | 469 | 419 | 593 | 22,500 | 0.108 | 0.096 | 0.135 | 11.8 | 360.00 | 327.70 | 464.00 | 1561.60 | |
Cooling liquid | 2.43 | 2.4 | 3.24 | 20 | 102 | 99 | 136 | 837 | 0.005 | 0.0048 | 0.0066 | 0.04 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 0.20 | 1.23 | |
BMS | 0.67 | 0.65 | 0.89 | 4.6 | 7 | 7 | 9 | 48.3 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.01 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.20 | |
Manufacturing | 750 | 731 | 999 | 1660 | 9640 | 9400 | 12,900 | 21,400 | 1.62 | 1.58 | 2.16 | 3.6 | 35.20 | 34.30 | 46.90 | 78.20 | |
All | 3914 | 4760 | 5120 | 12,800 | 27,700 | 26,150 | 34,700 | 66,700 | 15.4 | 17.2 | 17.2 | 38.2 | 1450.50 | 1346.03 | 1789.88 | 2654.01 | |
2030 | Cathode | 2350 | 3070 | 2990 | 5430 | 9930 | 9340 | 11,830 | 13,100 | 9.6 | 11.6 | 9.98 | 19.9 | 682 | 648 | 809 | 893 |
Anode | 190 | 182 | 221 | 1540 | 3000 | 3080 | 3580 | 1190 | 2.26 | 2.07 | 2.57 | 0.088 | 246 | 222 | 279 | 1.68 | |
Electrolyte | 65.2 | 50.6 | 66.5 | 116 | 2150 | 1670 | 2200 | 3840 | 0.228 | 0.177 | 0.232 | 0.406 | 8.27 | 6.42 | 8.43 | 14.7 | |
Diaphragm | 14.4 | 11.8 | 15.6 | 47.1 | 476 | 390 | 513 | 1610 | 0.0224 | 0.0184 | 0.0242 | 0.074 | 0.717 | 0.591 | 0.776 | 2.26 | |
Shell | 21.3 | 19.1 | 26 | 2190 | 416 | 374 | 508 | 20,200 | 0.0959 | 0.0853 | 0.116 | 10.6 | 320 | 292 | 398 | 1406 | |
Cooling liquid | 2.16 | 2.12 | 2.78 | 18 | 90.4 | 88.6 | 116 | 754 | 0.00439 | 0.00431 | 0.0056 | 0.366 | 0.133 | 0.13 | 0.171 | 1.1 | |
BMS | 0.47 | 0.46 | 0.6 | 3.27 | 4.91 | 4.82 | 6.32 | 34.4 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.007 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.17 | |
Manufacturing | 353 | 346 | 455 | 795 | 5020 | 4920 | 6470 | 11,300 | 0.761 | 0.746 | 0.98 | 1.71 | 18.5 | 18.2 | 23.9 | 41.8 | |
All | 3000 | 3680 | 3780 | 10,100 | 21,100 | 19,900 | 25,200 | 52,100 | 13 | 14.7 | 13.9 | 32.8 | 1275.64 | 1187.361 | 1519.307 | 2360.71 |
Assessment Indictor | GWP/kg CO2-eq | ADP(f)/MJ | AP/kg SO2-eq | HTP/kg DCB-eq | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year | Phase | LFP | NMC | LMO | LTO | LFP | NMC | LMO | LTO | LFP | NMC | LMO | LTO | LFP | NMC | LMO | LTO |
2020 | CTG Power battery | 5340 | 6440 | 6740 | 21,900 | 39,130 | 36,980 | 47,400 | 118,000 | 19.1 | 21.3 | 20.9 | 60.5 | 1725 | 1597.7 | 2045.7 | 4038.4 |
CTG Glider | 4880 | 4880 | 4880 | 4880 | 55,100 | 55,100 | 55,100 | 55,100 | 15.5 | 15.5 | 15.5 | 15.5 | 1170 | 1170 | 1170 | 1170 | |
Vehicle assembly | 2680 | 2670 | 2840 | 3690 | 28,200 | 28,000 | 29,800 | 38,700 | 5.8 | 5.77 | 6.13 | 7.96 | 113 | 113 | 120 | 156 | |
WTW phase | 15,300 | 15,200 | 15,900 | 19,200 | 160,000 | 160,000 | 166,000 | 201,000 | 33.1 | 33 | 34.4 | 41.5 | 656 | 654 | 682 | 823 | |
GTC phase | −3900 | −3820 | −4090 | −7510 | −38,400 | −37,700 | −40,200 | −71,200 | −18.9 | −18.3 | −20 | −34.8 | −2260 | −2190 | −2410 | −4400 | |
Life cycle | 24,300 | 25,370 | 26,270 | 42,160 | 244,030 | 242,380 | 258,100 | 341,600 | 54.6 | 57.27 | 56.93 | 90.66 | 1404 | 1344.7 | 1607.7 | 1787.4 | |
2025 | CTG Power battery | 3914 | 4760 | 5120 | 12,800 | 27,700 | 26,150 | 34,700 | 66,700 | 15.4 | 17.2 | 17.2 | 38.2 | 1450.50 | 1346.03 | 1789.88 | 2654.01 |
CTG Glider | 3980 | 3980 | 3980 | 3980 | 45,100 | 45,100 | 45,100 | 45,100 | 12.8 | 12.8 | 12.8 | 12.8 | 988 | 988 | 988 | 988 | |
Vehicle assembly | 1960 | 1950 | 2090 | 2440 | 20,600 | 20,500 | 45,100 | 25,700 | 4.22 | 4.19 | 4.5 | 5.26 | 88.1 | 87.7 | 94.1 | 110 | |
WTW phase | 10,900 | 10,800 | 11,300 | 12,600 | 114,000 | 114,000 | 119,000 | 132,000 | 23.5 | 23.4 | 24.5 | 27.2 | 504 | 503 | 527 | 585 | |
GTC phase | −3420 | −3360 | −3640 | −5590 | −33,700 | −33,200 | −35,800 | −53,400 | −16.3 | −15.8 | −17.6 | −25.5 | −1920 | −1870 | −2090 | −3160 | |
Life cycle | 17,334 | 18,130 | 18,850 | 26,230 | 173,700 | 172,550 | 208,100 | 216,100 | 39.62 | 41.79 | 41.4 | 57.96 | 1110.60 | 1054.73 | 1308.98 | 1177.01 | |
2030 | CTG Power battery | 3000 | 3680 | 3780 | 10,100 | 21,100 | 19,900 | 25,200 | 52,100 | 13 | 14.7 | 13.9 | 32.8 | 1275.64 | 1187.361 | 1519.307 | 2360.71 |
CTG Glider | 3340 | 3340 | 3340 | 3340 | 38,000 | 38,000 | 38,000 | 38,000 | 10.9 | 10.9 | 10.9 | 10.9 | 867 | 867 | 867 | 867 | |
Vehicle assembly | 1420 | 1410 | 1500 | 1780 | 14,900 | 14,900 | 15,800 | 18,700 | 3.05 | 3.03 | 3.23 | 3.82 | 69.7 | 69.4 | 73.8 | 87.5 | |
WTW phase | 7600 | 7580 | 7880 | 8810 | 80,000 | 79,800 | 82,900 | 92,600 | 16.4 | 16.3 | 17 | 19 | 394 | 393 | 409 | 457 | |
GTC phase | −3130 | −3070 | −3280 | −5090 | −30,900 | −30,400 | −32,300 | −48,700 | −14.6 | −14.3 | −15.6 | −23 | −1700 | −1660 | −1820 | −2830 | |
Life cycle | 12,230 | 12,940 | 13,220 | 18,940 | 123,100 | 122,200 | 129,600 | 152,700 | 28.75 | 30.63 | 29.43 | 43.52 | 906.34 | 856.761 | 1049.107 | 942.21 |
Scenarios | LFP | NCM | LMO | LTO |
---|---|---|---|---|
Baseline | 170 | 175 | 133 | 60 |
Battery energy density + 10% | 187 | 192.5 | 146.3 | 66 |
Battery energy density + 20% | 204 | 210 | 159.6 | 72 |
Battery energy density + 30% | 221 | 227.5 | 172.9 | 78 |
Electricity Structure | Baseline | Scenario 1 | Scenario 2 |
---|---|---|---|
Coal electricity | 71% | 60% | 48% |
Wind electricity | 4% | 10% | 14% |
Nuclear electricity | 3% | 4% | 8% |
Hydroelectric electricity | 15% | 17% | 18% |
Photovoltaic electricity | 2% | 6% | 11% |
Other electricity | 5% | 3% | 1% |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yang, Y.; Lan, L.; Hao, Z.; Zhao, J.; Luo, G.; Fu, P.; Chen, Y. Life Cycle Prediction Assessment of Battery Electrical Vehicles with Special Focus on Different Lithium-Ion Power Batteries in China. Energies 2022, 15, 5321. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155321
Yang Y, Lan L, Hao Z, Zhao J, Luo G, Fu P, Chen Y. Life Cycle Prediction Assessment of Battery Electrical Vehicles with Special Focus on Different Lithium-Ion Power Batteries in China. Energies. 2022; 15(15):5321. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155321
Chicago/Turabian StyleYang, Yang, Libo Lan, Zhuo Hao, Jianyou Zhao, Geng Luo, Pei Fu, and Yisong Chen. 2022. "Life Cycle Prediction Assessment of Battery Electrical Vehicles with Special Focus on Different Lithium-Ion Power Batteries in China" Energies 15, no. 15: 5321. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15155321