Supplementary material for:
Greenhouse gas emissions of conventional and alternative
vehicles: Predictions based on energy policy analysis in South
Korea
Wonjae Choi1,2,3, Eunji Yoo1, Eunsu Seol1, Myoungsoo Kim1, Han
Ho Song1,*
1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Seoul National
University, Seoul 08826, South Korea2 BK21 Plus Transformative
Training Program for Creative Mechanical and Aerospace Engineers,
Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, South Korea3 Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology,Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.* Correspondence to H.H. Song
([email protected])
19 pages, including 13 tables and 3 figures
Table S1. Major parameters of the life cycle analyses of base
fuels in South Korea
Fuel
Parameter
Value
Min
Max
Unit
Petroleum
Efficiency–recovery [1]1
98.86
98.66
99.01
%
Efficiency–refining (gasoline) [2]
93.59
94.19
92.99
%
Efficiency–refining (diesel) [2]
94.64
94.13
95.15
%
Efficiency–refining (naphtha and LPG) [2]
95.08
95.55
94.62
%
Efficiency–refining (heavy oil) [2]
96.52
96.18
96.85
%
CH4 from flaring and venting–recovery [2]2
59.48
57.05
61.61
g-CH4/GJ
CO2 from flaring and venting–recovery [2]2
1059
1016
1102
g-CO2/GJ
LHV–gasoline [3]
30.3
30.3
30.3
MJ/l
LHV–diesel [3]
35.3
35.3
35.3
MJ/l
LHV–naphtha [4]
44.1
44.1
44.1
MJ/kg
LHV–heavy oil [3]
39.2
39.2
39.2
MJ/l
C ratio of naphtha [4]
84.2
84.2
84.2
%
Natural gas
Efficiency–recovery [1]3
98.40
97.50
99.01
%
Efficiency–processing [1]3
98.09
97.35
99.01
%
Efficiency–liquefaction [1]4
92.68
91.00
94.30
%
Efficiency–regasification & distribution [1]5
99.31
99.25
99.38
%
CH4 leakage–recovery [1]6
77.4
11.9
192.0
g-CH4/GJ
CH4 leakage–processing [1]6
33.2
30.5
43.8
g-CH4/GJ
CH4 leakage–LNG tanks in NG producing countries [1]
10.2
5.1
15.3
g-CH4/GJ
CH4 leakage–LNG tanks during import [1]
25.7
10.2
46.3
g-CH4/GJ
CH4 leakage–in South Korea [5]
8.2
6.6
9.8
g-CH4/GJ
CO2 from flaring and venting–recovery [1]7
542.4
472.1
612.7
g-CO2/GJ
CO2 from venting–processing [6]
1525
1135
1916
g-CO2/GJ
LHV [3]
37.6
37.6
37.6
MJ/Nm3
Density [7]
0.78
0.78
0.78
kg/Nm3
LPG
Efficiency–refining (petroleum-based) [2]
95.08
95.55
94.62
%
Efficiency–LPG production (NG-based) [8]8
96.23
97.44
94.97
%
CO2 from flaring and venting–recovery (NG-based) [8]9
200.7
192.0
209.4
g-CO2/GJ
CO2 from venting–processing (NG-based) [6]
1525
1135
1916
g-CO2/GJ
VOC leakage–transportation & distribution (NG-based) [9]
36.3
36.3
36.3
g-VOC/GJ
VOC leakage–transportation & distribution (petroleum-based)
[9]
17.3
17.3
17.3
g-VOC/GJ
VOC leakage–storage (petroleum-based) [9]
122.2
122.2
122.2
g-VOC/GJ
LHV [3]
22.1
22.1
22.1
MJ/kg
Coal
Efficiency–mining [1]10
99.32
99.30
99.35
%
CH4 leakage–mining (anthracite) [1]11
324.1
291.7
356.5
g-CH4/GJ
CH4 leakage–mining (bituminous) [1]11
119.9
107.9
131.9
g-CH4/GJ
LHV–anthracite [10]
23.47
23.47
23.47
MJ/kg
LHV–bituminous [10]
22.47
22.47
22.47
MJ/kg
Uranium
Energy use–mining [11]
679.21
611.29
747.13
GJ/ton
Energy use–enrichment [11]
392194
375426
406233
kJ/g U-235
Energy use–conversion and fabrication [12, 13]
6372
5802
7066
kJ/g U-235
% of U-235 after enrichment [12]
4.5
4.0
5.0
%
1 In [1], this parameter was calculated from references [2,
14-16].
2 In [2], these parameter were calculated from references [17,
18].3 In [1], this parameter was calculated from references [11,
14, 19].4 In [1], this parameter was calculated from references
[11, 14, 19-22].5 In [1], this parameter was calculated from
references [5, 7].6 In [1], these parameter were calculated from
references [6, 11, 14, 19].7 In [1], this parameter was calculated
from references [17, 18, 23].8 In [8], this parameter was
calculated from references [11, 24, 25].9 In [8], this parameter
was calculated from references [17, 18, 23, 26].10 In [1], this
parameter was calculated from references [11, 27].11 In [1], this
parameter was calculated from references [28, 29].
Table S2. GHG emissions during the life cycles of base fuels in
South Korea
Fuels
Process
CO2 (g-CO2/GJ)
CH4 (g-CH4/GJ)
N2O (g-N2O/GJ)
GHG (g-CO2-eq./GJ)
Min.
Max.
Gasoline
Recovery
1904
69.0
0.008
3632
3395
3922
Import
1311
1.1
0.005
1341
1337
1347
Refining
6773
8.1
0.002
6975
6838
7147
Distribution
278
0.3
0.006
288
286
289
Total
10266
78.5
0.022
12236
11856
12707
Diesel
Recovery
1902
69.0
0.008
3630
3393
3921
Import
1311
1.1
0.005
1341
1337
1347
Refining
5704
6.7
0.002
5871
5758
6013
Distribution
363
0.4
0.008
375
373
377
Total
9281
77.2
0.023
11217
10861
11658
LPG(Crude-based)
Recovery
1914
69.4
0.008
3653
3414
3945
Import
1320
1.1
0.005
1350
1345
1356
Refining
5083
6.1
0.002
5237
5133
5367
Distribution
340
0.3
0.008
350
349
352
Total
8657
77.0
0.023
10589
10241
11020
Heavy oil
Recovery
1902
69.0
0.008
3629
3393
3920
Import
1311
1.1
0.005
1341
1337
1347
Refining
3597
4.2
0.001
3703
3631
3794
Distribution
106
0.1
0.002
109
109
110
Total
6916
74.5
0.017
8783
8469
9171
Naphtha
Recovery
1904
69.1
0.008
3633
3395
3924
Import
1312
1.1
0.005
1342
1338
1348
Refining
5051
6.1
0.001
5203
5100
5333
Total
8267
76.3
0.015
10178
9834
10605
Natural gas
Recovery
1355
80.0
0.012
3359
1403
6670
Processing
2724
42.2
0.010
3783
2650
5084
Liquefaction
4694
20.3
0.084
5228
3802
6989
Import
767
27.8
0.004
1463
1198
1793
Regasification & distribution
445
9.8
0.001
690
613
785
Total
9986
180.2
0.111
14523
9666
21321
LPG(natural gas-based)
Recovery
1017
79.5
0.012
3008
1132
6196
Processing
2701
42.0
0.010
3753
2643
5011
LPG production
2501
4.9
0.021
2630
1686
3791
Import
1815
1.6
0.009
1857
1850
1865
Distribution
281
0.3
0.006
290
289
291
Total
8315
128.2
0.058
11537
7600
17154
LPG(Average)
Total
8418
112.8
0.047
11251
8395
15306
Coal
Mining
1442
125.6
0.005
4585
4236
4937
Import
875
0.8
0.004
895
892
899
Total
2318
126.4
0.009
5480
5128
5836
Table S3. Life cycle GHG emissions of electricity and hydrogen
according to production technology
g-CO2-eq./GJ
Upstream process
Power generation
Hydrogen production
Total
Min.
Max.
Electricity
South Korea Avg.
16095
161005
0
177100
173309
181960
Coal - ST
16349
280104
0
296452
295412
297505
Coal - IGCC
14385
246340
0
260725
259810
261652
Natural Gas - ST
43869
169186
0
213055
198407
233556
Natural Gas - CC
32695
126090
0
158785
147868
174064
Natural Gas - FC
32113
123848
0
155961
145238
170968
Heavy oil - ST
26674
230449
0
257124
256170
258302
Diesel - ICE
34487
227832
0
262318
261222
263675
Uranium - ST
2822
0
0
2822
2781
2866
WWS
0
0
0
0
0
0
By-Product Gas
0
396085
0
396085
359213
432668
Hydrogen
South Korea Avg.
10376
0
33662
44037
35877
49789
Naphtha - NCC
10178
0
31078
41256
33675
46753
Natural Gas - SMR (on)
17673
0
129326
147000
117384
162178
Natural gas - SMR (off)
17152
0
108656
125809
110838
144514
Electro. w/ grid (on)
321504
0
19452
340956
259315
352544
Electro. w/ grid (off)
245083
0
22851
268934
237656
306705
Electro. w/ WWS (off)
0
0
0
0
0
0
Table S4. Well-to-wheel GHG emissions of each vehicle type sold
in South Korea in 2017
g-CO2-eq./km
Feedstockproduction
Fuel production
Vehicle operation
Total
Min.
Max.
City-driving
Highway-driving
Best in Compact
ICEV-gasoline
13
19
194
225
224
226
251
193
187
ICEV-diesel
14
17
202
233
232
234
255
205
158
ICEV-LPG
16
13
172
201
194
211
227
168
149
HEV-gasoline
9
13
137
159
159
160
155
164
119
PHEV-gasoline
11
103
18
133
130
136
128
139
103
BEV
10
99
0
109
107
112
99
119
101
FCEV
13
42
0
55
45
62
53
57
48
Table S5. Prediction of the net power generation by technologies
based on the 7th Basic Plan for Long-term Electricity Supply and
Demand
Fuel
Power Generation Technology
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Coal
ST (Anthracite)
5,781
3,728
3,728
3,748
3,515
3,466
3,461
3,484
3,479
3,448
3,417
3,390
3,390
ST (Bituminous)
223,422
223,909
230,319
238,407
257,939
257,787
257,414
259,067
258,741
256,381
254,130
252,122
252,122
IGCC
2,102
2,102
2,102
2,102
2,102
2,102
2,102
2,102
6,307
6,307
6,307
6,307
6,307
Total
231,305
229,739
236,149
244,257
263,556
263,355
262,977
264,653
268,527
266,135
263,854
261,819
261,819
Natural Gas
ST
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
CC
142,616
147,492
151,838
153,838
144,269
136,105
135,908
136,781
136,609
135,363
134,174
133,114
133,114
FC
2,736
3,199
3,691
4,182
4,673
5,103
5,594
6,147
6,638
7,129
7,621
8,081
8,081
Total
145,352
150,691
155,529
158,020
148,942
141,208
141,502
142,928
143,247
142,492
141,795
141,195
141,195
Petroleum Based Fuel
ST
6,582
6,624
6,642
4,082
3,828
3,775
935
941
940
931
923
916
916
ICE
436
436
436
439
411
406
405
408
407
404
400
397
397
Total
7,018
7,060
7,079
4,520
4,239
4,181
1,340
1,349
1,347
1,335
1,323
1,313
1,313
Uranium
ST
158,737
167,653
167,627
168,524
166,319
180,364
188,255
189,464
189,226
196,199
203,100
210,051
210,051
Renewable
Water
5,374
5,416
5,946
5,951
5,956
5,961
5,966
5,971
6,066
6,071
6,076
6,181
6,181
Wind
4,464
5,097
6,399
8,265
9,280
10,196
11,140
12,124
13,160
14,256
15,419
16,663
16,663
Solar PV
6,152
7,333
8,589
9,921
11,323
12,782
14,271
15,759
17,210
18,593
19,886
21,210
21,210
By-product gas
15,554
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
20,873
Total
31,544
38,719
41,807
45,010
47,432
49,812
52,250
54,727
57,309
59,793
62,254
64,927
64,927
ST: steam turbine, IGCC: integrated gasification combined cycle,
CC: combined cycle, FC: fuel cell, ICE: internal combustion
engine
Here, we note how the future net power generation amounts for
various power-generation pathways are estimated from the Basic Plan
for Long-term Electricity Supply and Demand. These basic plans show
the detailed plans for every power plant construction and closure.
They also show the target electricity demand for every year in
detail. These target electricity demands were calculated based on
predictions regarding many parameters, including GDP growth,
according to the government.
From these data describing the basic plans, we estimated the
future net power generation of each technology. To this end, we
utilized data from the past ten years concerning utilization
factors, as shown in Table S7. The government plans to decrease the
average utilization factors in the future to prevent black outs. In
the present paper, it is assumed that the utilization factors
decrease over time, while the ratios between the utilization
factors shown in Table S7 are maintained over time. The basic plans
directly showed the predicted net power generation from new and
renewable energy; thus, the amounts of net power generation of new
and renewable energy are directly referenced to the plans. In the
government’s classification, IGCC and FC are classified as new and
renewable energy, in addition to wind, water, solar, and by-product
gas. Lastly, we note that we assumed that the values of 2030 are
simply the same as the values of 2029 in the case of the 7th Basic
Plan because the 7th Basic Plan only has values up to 2029.
Table S6. Prediction of the net power generation by technologies
based on the 8th basic plan for long-term electricity supply and
demand
Fuel
Power Generation Technology
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Coal
ST (Anthracite)
3,045
2,024
1,988
1,946
1,888
1,892
1,895
1,934
1,950
1,940
1,913
1,893
1,854
ST (Bituminous)
209,867
202,928
206,291
216,329
221,216
221,665
216,038
215,030
216,836
215,684
212,671
210,453
206,163
IGCC
2,351
2,351
2,351
2,351
2,351
2,351
5,067
5,067
5,067
5,067
5,067
5,067
5,067
Total
215,263
207,304
210,631
220,627
225,456
225,908
223,000
222,031
223,854
222,691
219,651
217,413
213,084
Natural Gas
ST
-
-
-
-
-
-
1,480
2,860
2,884
2,868
2,828
2,799
2,742
CC
121,940
129,285
133,601
130,776
126,890
121,704
127,769
130,390
131,486
136,367
138,588
137,143
134,347
FC
2,382
3,027
3,671
3,994
4,316
4,638
4,800
4,961
5,122
5,202
5,283
5,364
5,404
Total
124,322
132,312
137,272
134,770
131,206
126,342
134,049
138,211
139,491
144,438
146,700
145,306
142,493
Petroleum Based Fuel
ST
6,332
6,315
6,202
6,071
3,709
3,716
1,168
1,192
1,202
1,196
1,179
1,167
1,143
ICE
1,261
1,037
1,018
997
967
969
971
991
999
994
980
969
950
Total
7,593
7,352
7,220
7,068
4,676
4,686
2,139
2,183
2,201
2,189
2,159
2,136
2,093
Uranium
ST
139,432
146,958
144,330
141,278
144,447
148,695
143,909
136,622
128,802
119,198
112,469
107,604
105,410
Renewable
Water
7,181
7,254
7,328
7,401
7,475
7,548
7,640
7,732
7,824
7,935
8,045
8,794
9,382
Wind
2,397
3,921
5,576
7,333
9,615
12,422
15,756
19,614
23,473
27,433
32,443
37,454
42,566
Solar PV
7,534
9,453
11,371
13,673
15,975
18,277
21,347
24,416
27,486
31,067
34,648
38,229
42,322
By-product gas
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
7,757
Total
24,869
28,385
32,032
36,164
40,822
46,004
52,500
59,519
66,540
74,192
82,893
92,234
102,027
ST: steam turbine, IGCC: integrated gasification combined cycle,
CC: combined cycle, FC: fuel cell, ICE: internal combustion
engine
Table S7. The average past utilization factors of each
power-generation technology
Fuel
Power-Generation Technology
7th plan(Avg of 2006–2015)
8th plan(Avg of 2008–2017)
Coal
ST (Anthracite)
91%
88%
ST (Bituminous)
77%
82%
Natural Gas
ST
22%
22%
CC
52%
49%
Petroleum Based Fuel
ST
32%
31%
ICE
23%
22%
Uranium
ST
90%
87%
The utilization factor is calculated from the net power
generation amount and the nominal power-generating capacity in each
year.
Table S8. Prediction of the power-generation mix by technologies
based on the 7th basic plan for long-term electricity supply and
demand
Fuel
Power Generation Technology
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Coal
ST (Anthracite)
1.0%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
ST (Bituminous)
38.9%
37.7%
37.9%
38.4%
40.9%
40.3%
39.8%
39.7%
39.2%
38.5%
37.8%
37.1%
37.1%
IGCC
0.4%
0.4%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
1.0%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
Total
40.3%
38.7%
38.8%
39.4%
41.8%
41.2%
40.7%
40.5%
40.7%
40.0%
39.2%
38.5%
38.5%
Natural Gas
ST
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
CC
24.8%
24.8%
25.0%
24.8%
22.9%
21.3%
21.0%
20.9%
20.7%
20.3%
20.0%
19.6%
19.6%
FC
0.5%
0.5%
0.6%
0.7%
0.7%
0.8%
0.9%
0.9%
1.0%
1.1%
1.1%
1.2%
1.2%
Total
25.3%
25.4%
25.6%
25.5%
23.6%
22.1%
21.9%
21.9%
21.7%
21.4%
21.1%
20.8%
20.8%
Petroleum Based Fuel
ST
1.1%
1.1%
1.1%
0.7%
0.6%
0.6%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
ICE
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
0.1%
Total
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
0.7%
0.7%
0.7%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
Uranium
ST
27.7%
28.2%
27.6%
27.2%
26.4%
28.2%
29.1%
29.0%
28.7%
29.5%
30.2%
30.9%
30.9%
Renewable
Water
0.9%
0.9%
1.0%
1.0%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
Wind
0.8%
0.9%
1.1%
1.3%
1.5%
1.6%
1.7%
1.9%
2.0%
2.1%
2.3%
2.5%
2.5%
Solar PV
1.1%
1.2%
1.4%
1.6%
1.8%
2.0%
2.2%
2.4%
2.6%
2.8%
3.0%
3.1%
3.1%
By-product gas
2.7%
3.5%
3.4%
3.4%
3.3%
3.3%
3.2%
3.2%
3.2%
3.1%
3.1%
3.1%
3.1%
Total
5.5%
6.5%
6.9%
7.3%
7.5%
7.8%
8.1%
8.4%
8.7%
9.0%
9.3%
9.6%
9.6%
ST: steam turbine, IGCC: integrated gasification combined cycle,
CC: combined cycle, FC: fuel cell, ICE: internal combustion
engine
Table S9. Prediction of the power-generation mix by technologies
based on the 8th basic plan for long-term electricity supply and
demand
Fuel
Power Generation Technology
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
Coal
ST (Anthracite)
0.6%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
0.3%
ST (Bituminous)
41.0%
38.9%
38.8%
40.1%
40.5%
40.2%
38.9%
38.5%
38.7%
38.3%
37.7%
37.3%
36.5%
IGCC
0.5%
0.5%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
Total
42.0%
39.6%
39.6%
40.8%
41.2%
40.9%
40.1%
39.7%
39.8%
39.5%
38.9%
38.4%
37.6%
Natural Gas
ST
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.3%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
0.5%
CC
24.0%
24.9%
25.3%
24.4%
23.4%
22.2%
23.1%
23.5%
23.6%
24.4%
24.7%
24.4%
23.9%
FC
0.5%
0.6%
0.7%
0.7%
0.8%
0.8%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
0.9%
1.0%
Total
24.5%
25.5%
26.0%
25.1%
24.2%
23.1%
24.3%
24.9%
25.0%
25.8%
26.2%
25.9%
25.4%
Petroleum Based Fuel
ST
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.1%
0.7%
0.7%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
ICE
0.3%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
0.2%
Total
1.5%
1.4%
1.4%
1.3%
0.9%
0.9%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
Uranium
ST
27.2%
28.0%
27.1%
26.1%
26.3%
26.9%
25.8%
24.4%
22.9%
21.1%
19.9%
19.0%
18.6%
Renewable
Water
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.6%
1.7%
Wind
0.5%
0.8%
1.0%
1.4%
1.8%
2.3%
2.8%
3.5%
4.2%
4.9%
5.8%
6.6%
7.5%
Solar PV
1.5%
1.8%
2.1%
2.5%
2.9%
3.3%
3.8%
4.4%
4.9%
5.5%
6.1%
6.8%
7.5%
By-product gas
1.5%
1.5%
1.5%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
1.4%
Total
4.9%
5.4%
6.0%
6.7%
7.5%
8.3%
9.4%
10.7%
11.9%
13.2%
14.7%
16.3%
18.1%
ST: steam turbine, IGCC: integrated gasification combined cycle,
CC: combined cycle, FC: fuel cell, ICE: internal combustion
engine
Table S10. Efficiencies of power-generation technologies over
the past ten years (reproduced from the Statistics of electric
power in Korea 2017)
Fuel
Power-Generation Technology
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Average
Determined
Coal
ST (Anthracite)
32.19%
34.07%
31.75%
32.54%
35.26%
31.97%
33.05%
31.91%
32.11%
32.06%
32.69%
32.69%
ST (Bituminous)
37.54%
37.56%
37.41%
37.04%
36.83%
36.72%
36.97%
36.54%
36.11%
36.72%
36.94%
36.94%
IGCC
39.9%
39.9%
39.9%
Natural Gas
ST
33.97%
33.99%
33.71%
33.55%
34.80%
34.83%
32.70%
33.70%
28.89%
33.91%
33.41%
33.41%
CC
45.24%
45.63%
45.55%
46.40%
46.81%
44.30%
47.13%
49.07%
46.38%
45.13%
46.16%
46.16%
FC
47.0%
47.0%
47.0%
Petroleum Based Fuel
ST
34.50%
35.77%
34.34%
33.59%
34.09%
34.06%
36.31%
36.86%
36.03%
34.20%
34.98%
34.98%
ICE
38.09%
38.78%
30.35%
39.01%
39.01%
38.95%
41.19%
41.18%
36.70%
33.73%
37.70%
37.70%
Transmission & Substation & Distribution loss
4.01%
4.07%
3.99%
3.69%
3.57%
3.73%
3.69%
3.60%
3.59%
3.57%
3.75%
3.57%
ST: steam turbine, IGCC: integrated gasification combined cycle,
CC: combined cycle, FC: fuel cell, ICE: internal combustion
engine
Table S11. Life cycle GHG emissions of electricity and hydrogen
in 2030 according to established cases
g-CO2-eq./GJ
Upstream process
Power generation
Hydrogen production
Total
Electricity
2017 Avg.
16095
161005
0
177100
"Reference" case
13648
144144
0
157792
"De-Nuc. & Ren." case
14741
141354
0
156095
Hydrogen
2017 Avg.
10376
0
33662
44037
“Reference “case
53412
0
64806
118218
“H2 w/ WWS” case
10572
0
60770
71342
“By-product H2” case
32026
0
51180
83206
Naphtha - NCC
10149
0
30238
40386
Natural Gas - SMR (on)
13556
0
101801
115358
Natural gas - SMR (off)
16555
0
104994
121549
Electro. w/ grid (on)
225082
0
17332
242414
Electro. w/ grid (off)
203317
0
23027
226344
Electro. w/ WWS (off)
0
0
0
0
Table S12. Predicted fuel economies of compact cars from various
studies
Fuel economies in 2030 [MPGe]
Autonomie(Reference)
Autonomie(High-tech)
Autonomie(Low-tech)
NREL1
MIT2
ICEV-gasoline
39.0
43.6
34.3
39.1
37.9
ICEV-diesel
36.1
41.7
31.4
46.0
39.6
HEV-gasoline
57.2
66.8
48.7
56.0
54.4
HEV-diesel
49.5
60.0
43.7
-
-
FCEV
93.0
109.0
81.0
76.1
104.5
BEV-100 mile
134.8
147.6
123.8
131.0
145.1
BEV-200 mile
130.7
143.8
119.4
BEV-300 mile
120.7
133.2
109.7
PHEV-gasoline3
117.2/58.3
129.3/68.4
107.3/49.2
-
-
1 The fuel economies from the report entitled “Light-Duty
Vehicle Attribute Projections (Years 2015-2030)” written by the
U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) were referenced.
The fuel economies of compact cars were referenced, except that of
FCEVs, because the report does not provide the fuel economy data of
FCEV compact cars. Instead, the fuel economies of midsize FCEVs
were referenced.2 The report entitled “On the Road toward 2050”
written by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was
referenced. The ratios between the fuel economies of ICEVs-gasoline
in the year 2015 and those of other vehicle types in the year 2030
were predicted in this report. These ratios were multiplied by the
fuel economy of ICEVs-gasoline in the year 2015 provided in the
Autonomie program.
3 The fuel economies of PHEV are shown in the form of
‘Charge-depleting fuel economy’/‘Charge-sustaining fuel
economy’.
Table S13. Well-to-wheel GHG emissions of compact cars in South
Korea in 2030 according to the scenarios
g CO2 eq/km
Feedstockproduction
Fuel production
Vehicle operation
Total
Low-tech
High-tech
De-nuc. & ren.
H2 w/ WWS
By-product H2
ICEV-gasoline
9
13
139
161
183
144
161
161
161
ICEV-diesel
10
12
147
169
194
146
169
169
169
ICEV-LPG
11
9
124
144
164
129
144
144
144
HEV-gasoline
6
9
95
110
129
94
110
110
110
HEV-diesel
7
9
108
124
140
102
124
124
124
PHEV-gasoline
8
77
13
97
108
88
97
97
97
BEV-100 mile
7
76
0
83
91
76
82
83
83
BEV-200 mile
7
78
0
86
94
78
85
86
86
BEV-300 mile
8
85
0
93
101
85
92
93
93
FCEV
41
50
0
91
104
77
90
55
64
Fig. S1. WTW GHG emissions of all passenger vehicle models sold
in 2017: a) city driving; b) highway driving; c) combined
driving
Fig. S1 shows the WTW GHG emissions of all passenger vehicle
models, with 1259 models in total, sold in South Korea in 2017. The
GHG emissions of each model are shown as a function of the curb
weight to enable comparisons of various vehicle types with the same
curb weight. It is assumed that models released from 2013 to 2017
were sold in 2017. Because only two FCEV models were available in
South Korea, two additional representative models, i.e., the Toyota
Mirai and the Honda Clarity Fuel Cell, were added to the analysis
shown in Fig. S1.
Figs. S1 a) and b) show the cases of city and highway driving.
In both cases, the vehicle types are ranked as follows in
decreasing order of GHG emissions: ICEVs-gasoline, ICEVs-diesel
& ICEVs-LPG, HEVs, PHEVs & BEVs, and FCEVs. For reference,
all HEV and PHEV models were fuelled by gasoline in 2017. However,
the gaps between the vehicle types significantly decrease in the
case of highway driving. This mainly occurs because ICEVs are
generally more efficient under high-load conditions, e.g., highway
driving, than under low-load conditions, e.g., city driving,
whereas batteries are generally more efficient under low-load
conditions. In the cases of HEVs and FCEVs, the gaps between city
and highway driving are not large.
Fig. S2. The WTW GHG emissions of passenger vehicle pathways in
2030 in the reference case according to vehicle classes
Fig. S3. Price predictions of new midsize passenger vehicles in
the U.S. (reproduced from the Annual Energy Outlook 2019 of the
U.S. Energy Information Administration)
