Elsevier

Energy Policy

Volume 35, Issue 1, January 2007, Pages 39-49
Energy Policy

Life cycle cost analysis of a car, a city bus and an intercity bus powertrain for year 2005 and 2020

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2005.10.004Get rights and content

Abstract

The international economy, in the beginning of the 20th century, is characterized by uncertainty about the supply and the price of oil. Together with the fast decrease of electrical propulsion component prices, it becomes more and more cost effective to develop vehicles with alternative powertrains. This paper focuses on two questions: Are alternative powertrains especially cost effective for specific applications?; How does an increased fossil fuel price influences the choose of powertrain? To assess these questions, a computer tool named THEPS, developed in a Ph.D. project, is used. Three applications and three scenarios are analysed. The applications, a car, a city bus and an intercity bus, are vehicles all assumed to operate in Sweden. One scenario represents year 2005, the other two year 2020. The two future scenarios are characterized by different fossil fuel prices. The study, presented in the paper, indicates that alternative powertrains can be competitive from a cost perspective, in some applications, already in year 2005. It is for example cost effective to equip a city bus, running in countries with a high fuel price, with a hybrid powertrain. The study also indicates that pure electric, hybrid and/or fuel cell cars will probably be a more cost effective choice than conventional cars in year 2020. Another indication is that it will not be clear which powertrain concept to choose. The reason is that many cost effective powertrain concepts will be offered. The best choice will depend on the application.

Introduction

Increased energy demands, combined with limited fossil fuel sources and the environmental concern, are huge challenges for the humankind. The greatest increase in transportation energy consumption will occur in the developing world.

Vehicles with an internal combustion engine (ICE), as single power source, have for a long time dominated the market. However, more energy efficient alternative powertrains,1 like hybrid powertrains, become more and more attractive. The major reasons are the reduced cost of electrical components and the risk of higher fossil fuel prices.

Many design options are present when it comes to powertrain design. The powertrain components can be configured, chosen and sized in numerous ways. The most cost effective choice depends on factors like fuel price, application and interest rate. Especially, in future when many powertrain concepts will be offered, it will not be clear for a customer which powertrain to choose.

Several papers deal with the economical impact of different fuels, in transportation, from a societal perspective, some examples are Specht et al. (1998), Azar et al. (2002), Hekker et al. (2003) and Ogden et al. (2004). These studies focus on comparing different fuel chains2 or technical aspects in the vehicle. Typically a cost model, that includes the capital cost of the vehicle and the fuel cost, is included. The powertrain models are normally very simple, in Specht et al. (1998) the energy conversion in the powertrain is modelled by a constant efficiency. The characteristics of the different powertrain types are derived from real vehicles or from computer simulation, in Hekker et al. (2003) it is assumed that hybrid powertrains have 50% lower fuel consumption compared to the conventional powertrains. There are also numerous papers that deal with detailed computer simulation of a given powertrain, some examples are Lyshevski (2000), Butler et al. (1999) and Wipke et al. (1999). By detailed computer simulation, virtual tests of powertrains can be performed to study technical aspects in a vehicle. Examples of earlier studies that focus on costs, connected with the use of a vehicle, are Cuenca et al. (2001), Lipman and Delucchi (2003), Cuenca et al. (1999), Burke (2003), Vyas et al. (1999), Mizsey and Newson (2001), Ekdunge and Råberg (1998) and Forsberg (2003). In this paper, a smaller set (2–5) of powertrains, are prescribed. Their performance, fuel consumption and other characteristics are typically determined from computer simulation. Comparisons for different parameter setups are then often made, fuel price can be the parameter varied.

The purpose of this paper is to assess powertrain choices for different applications and scenarios. Two key questions are highlighted:

  • (Q1)

    Are alternative powertrains especially cost effective for specific applications?

  • (Q2)

    How does an increased fossil fuel price influence the choose of powertrain?

The difference from similar studies, previously cited, is that the powertrain design is not prescribed. In this study, a computer tool automatically finds the lowest cost powertrain design, given constraints and prerequests. The author has not found any work that considers, in a systematic way, that the powertrain design highly depends on constraints and prerequests.

In Section 2, different powertrain technologies are presented. A computer tool THEPS, developed in a Ph.D. project to optimize powertrains, is described in Section 3. Assumptions and limitations are presented in Section 4. The main contribution of the paper, a life cycle cost analysis of a car, a city bus and an intercity bus, is presented in Sections 5–7. In the end of the paper conclusions are drawn.

Section snippets

Powertrain technologies

The powertrain is a part of the vehicle that in this paper is defined as follows:

Definition 2.1

The powertrain is the system in a vehicle that generates and transforms the power necessary for propulsion.

The powertrain can be configured in numerous ways. In a conventional vehicle, all propulsion power is always generated in the engine. Hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) are one promising candidate to conventional vehicles. HEVs are in this paper defined as

Definition 2.2

A HEV is a hybrid vehicle including electrical

THEPS

When designing products, computer simulation can be seen as a tool or a guideline for choosing between solutions. One reason to use computer simulation is to avoid building expensive prototypes. Another reason is that computers are objective, i.e. the influence of human prejudice is minimized.

The study presented in Sections 5–7 is performed using a computer tool named THEPS.6 THEPS is developed in a Ph.D. project (

Assumptions and limitations

Unfortunately, it is difficult to achieve a general cost function (1). Several aspects, for example noise and driveability, are difficult to quantify. Another aspect is that the calculation time becomes unreasonable if the evaluation is too detailed. Some assumptions and limitations, of the study presented in this paper, are:

  • A specific set of powertrain configurations and powertrain component types are presented in the database of THEPS.11

Studied applications

The purpose of the study presented in Sections 5–7 is to assess powertrain choices for different applications and scenarios. The studied applications are a car, a city bus and an intercity bus. The reason to study several applications is that the powertrain design depends on the application. Intuitively, it is for example difficult to motivate a hybrid powertrain in an intercity bus. Due to long distances between the stops in such a vehicle, the braking energy is only a small fraction of the

Studied scenarios

In this paper a scenario corresponds to specific conditions. Examples of conditions are component prices, fuel prices and interest rate. Three scenarios are evaluated, one of year 2005 and two of year 2020. Swedish prices of fuel and grid electricity are assumed. One reason to include a present time scenario (year 2005) is that the proposed powertrains can be compared to existing vehicles. The intention with the future scenarios is to indicate trends in future powertrain technology. Due to the

Results

The results presented in this section are based on the computer tool THEPS, see Section 3, and the assumptions made in Sections 4–6. In Fig. 7, Fig. 8, Fig. 9, life cycle cost and energy consumption are presented for different powertrain configurations. In the figures, abbreviations are used to express different configurations and components. For example, P(g,s) represents a parallel HEV with a gasoline ICE as PPU and a super capacitor as buffer. The abbreviations are defined in the upper right

Conclusions

The design of a cost effective powertrain is a compromise between several aspects. One extreme case is a vehicle that is cheap to buy but has a high operating cost. The operating cost is highly influenced by the fuel consumption. An other extreme is a vehicle with a low operating cost and high purchase price. The powertrain in a cost effective vehicle is a trade off between these extremes.

In contrast to similar studies, presented in Section 1, the method used in this paper automatically adapts

References (35)

  • C. Azar et al.

    Global energy scenarios meeting stringent CO2 constraints—cost-effective fuel choices in the transportation sector

    Energy Policy

    (2002)
  • Bosch, R., 2000. Automotive Handbook. Society of Automotive Engineers,...
  • British Petroleum, 2004. Statistical Review of World Energy 2004....
  • Burke, A., 2003. Saving petroleum with cost-effective hybrids....
  • K. Butler et al.

    A matlab-based modeling and simulation package for electric and hybrid vehicle design

    IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology

    (1999)
  • Carlsson, B., 2001. Survey of powertrain characteristics and load spectra in city bus operation. Master's Thesis,...
  • Cuenca, R., Vyas, A., Gaines, L., 1999. An assessment of electric vehicle life cycle costs to consumers....
  • R. Cuenca et al.

    An assessment of electric vehicle life cycle costs to consumers

    Transportation Research D

    (2001)
  • P. Ekdunge et al.

    The fuel cell vehicle analysis of energy use, emissions and cost

    Hydrogen Energy

    (1998)
  • Forsberg, P., 2003. Modeling and Calculation Techniques for Environmental Systems, Licentiate Thesis. Department of...
  • FreedomCAR program, F., 2004. Homepage:...
  • M. Hekker

    Natural gas as an alternative to crude oil in automotive fuel chains well-to-wheel analysis and transition strategy development

    Energy Policy

    (2003)
  • Hellgren, J., 2004. A methodology for the design of cost effective hybrid and fuel cell powertrains. Ph.D. Thesis,...
  • Hellgren, J., Laine, L., Sjöberg, J., 2002. Specification of a hybrid electric taxi car. Internal Report, Department of...
  • Holt, D., 2001. Fuel cell powered vehicles. SAE, ISBN...
  • Kanehira, M., 2004. Personal Contact, ETCAB, Göteborg,...
  • Kim, P., 2000. Future cost estimation of hybrid electric vehicle using the learning curve. Seoul 2000 FISITA World...
  • Cited by (37)

    • External costs of the Dieselgate – Peccadillo or substantial consequences?

      2020, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
    • Well-to-Wheel analysis of fossil energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for conventional, hybrid-electric and plug-in hybrid-electric city buses in the BRT system in Curitiba, Brazil

      2018, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
      Citation Excerpt :

      Due to the high importance of the operation phase, many studies use a Tank-to-Wheel (TTW) analysis to trace energy use and/or GHG emissions of city buses. Most studies have analysed two-axle city buses with different types of powertrains (e.g., Hellgren, 2007; Graham et al., 2008; Xiong et al., 2009; Lajunen, 2012, 2014a; McKenzie and Durango-Cohen, 2012; Nylund and Koponen, 2012; Suh et al., 2012; Wu et al., 2012; Hu et al., 2013; Bottiglione et al., 2014; Cooper et al., 2014; Ribau et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2014a; Guo et al., 2015; Xu et al., 2015; Yu et al., 2016). Especially the comparison of conventional and hybrid-electric two-axle city buses has received particular attention and has been the focus of several studies.

    • A consumer-oriented total cost of ownership model for different vehicle types in Germany

      2017, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment
      Citation Excerpt :

      For example, the Toyota Auris is economical from approximately 21,800 km p.a. (60 km p.d.) than its comparable gasoline vehicle. These results are consistent with the findings of Bubeck et al. (2016), Lin et al. (2013) and Hellgren (2007). Thus, HEVs are already economically competitive for higher annual mileages and since range anxiety is not relevant even for longer trips.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text