Freight Day V Life Cycle Emissions and Life Time Costs of a Medium-duty Diesel and a Battery Electric Truck. A Case Study for Toronto

Taylor Zhou February 26, 2016

Overview

§  Introduction §  Objective §  Method §  Results §  Conclusions

2

Introduction

3

Gross Vehicle Weight Rating : 6,351 – 11,793 kg

•  Powered by diesel fuel

•  28 L/100km à 23 L/100km

•  19% increase in energy use in Canada

•  49% increase in sales in Canada

Medium-duty Truck (MDT)

Introduction

4

Advantages

•  Zero emissions

•  low maintenance costs

•  low fuel cost

•  Quiet

Battery-Electric Vehicle

Disadvantages

•  Higher manufacturing

emissions

•  High purchase cost

•  Limited range

5

•  Determine fuel consumption for medium-duty diesel

truck and Battery-electric truck

•  Life cycle GHG emissions

•  Total cost of ownership (purchase cost, operating cost,

and maintenance cost over the vehicle lifetime)

Objective

Method – Energy consumption modeling

6

Simulation Tool: Autonomie 1. Truck fuel type and cargo weight

Diesel Truck: Curb weight:

3774 kg Maximum Payload:

7875 kg

Battery-electric Truck Curb weight:

4432 kg Maximum Payload:

7558 kg

Energy Consumption Modeling – cont’

7

2. Drive cycle: Toronto MDT University (city condition) and Freeway (freeway condition)

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

Spe

ed (K

m/h

)

Time (s)

University

Freeway

3. Operating temperatures (-20°C ,-10°C, -5°C, 0°C, 10°C , 20°C, 30°C,40°C)

Method – Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

8

§  Well-To-Wheel Greenhouse Gas emissions (g CO2e/km metric-tonne) from:

1. Fuel cycle: •  Fuel (diesel/electricity) production

2. Vehicle operation cycle: •  Emissions from using the vehicle

3. Vehicle cycle •  Emission from vehicle manufacturing

Results – Energy Consumption Simulations : Diesel Truck

9

0 5

10 15 20

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

10% payload 50% payload 100% payload

MJ/

Km

-mdt

ric to

nne

University

Freeway

Maximum energy increase: Diesel

Truck

Cold weather Warm weather

University 21% 17% Freeway 12% 8%

Results – Energy Consumption Simulations : Battery-electric Truck

10

0 1 2 3 4 5

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

10% payload 50% payload 100% payload

MJ/

Km

-mdt

ric to

nne

University

Freeway

Maximum energy increase: Battery-

electric Truck

Cold weather Warm weather

University 91% 8% Freeway 63% 0%

Results – Energy Consumption: comparison

•  More energy is reduced by the BET in the University drive cycle, especially in warm weather

11

40%

60%

80%

100% -2

0°C

-1

0°C

-5

°C

0°C

10

°C

20°C

30

°C

40°C

-2

0°C

-1

0°C

-5

°C

0°C

10

°C

20°C

30

°C

40°C

-2

0°C

-1

0°C

-5

°C

0°C

10

°C

20°C

30

°C

40°C

10% payload 50% payload 100% payload

Ene

rgy

Red

uced

by

the

BE

T

University Freeway

Results - Life cycle GHG emissions

12

•  The majority of life cycle GHG emissions for the DT comes from the vehicle operation cycle; while that for the BET is from the vehicle cycle

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

10% payload 50% payload

100%payload 10% payload 50% payload

100%payload 10% payload 50% payload

100%payload 10% payload 50% payload

100%payload D

iese

l Tr

uck

Bat

tery

E

lect

ric

Truc

k D

iese

l Tr

uck

Bat

tery

E

lect

ric

Truc

k

Uni

vers

ity D

rive

Cyc

le

Free

way

Driv

e C

ycle

GHG Emissions (gCO2e/tonne-km)

Vehicle operation

Vehicle cycle

Fuel cycle

Natural gas 10%

Nuclear 61%

Wind 4%

Hydro 24%

Biomass

1%

Ontario Electricity Generation mix – 2014

Average

13

Results – Life cycle GHG emissions

•  The BET produces 31 – 82% less lifecycle GHG emissions than the DT on University Drive cycle

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0 200 400 600 800

1000 1200 1400 1600

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

-20°

C

-10°

C

-5°C

0°

C

10°C

20

°C

30°C

40

°C

10% payload 50% payload 100% payload

University Drive Cycle

GH

G re

duct

ion

by th

e B

ET

life

cycl

e G

HG

em

issi

ons

(g C

O2e

/km

met

ric-to

nne)

DT

BET

GHG reduction by the BET

14

•  The BET produces -23 – 68% less lifecycle GHG emissions than the DT on the Freeway Drive cycle

•  The GHG emission advantages of the BET decreases as cargo weight increases.

Results – Life cycle GHG emissions

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

200

400

600

800

1000 -2

0°C

-1

0°C

-5

°C

0°C

10

°C

20°C

30

°C

40°C

-2

0°C

-1

0°C

-5

°C

0°C

10

°C

20°C

30

°C

40°C

-2

0°C

-1

0°C

-5

°C

0°C

10

°C

20°C

30

°C

40°C

10% Payload 50% payload 100% payload

Freeway Drive Cycle

GH

G re

duct

ion

by th

e B

ET

life

cycl

e G

HG

em

issi

ons

(g

CO

2e/k

m m

etric

-tonn

e) DT

BET

GHG reduction by the BET

Results - Lifetime Total Cost of Ownership

15

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

DT BET

Ann

ualiz

ed li

fetim

e TC

O (2

014$

)

Annualized lifetime TCO for the DT and BET -Best Estimate

Purchase Cost

Fuel Cost

Maintenance Cost

Battery Replacement Cost

EVSE and replacement

•  The BET has 10% lower lifetime total cost of ownership than the DT

16

Results - Lifetime Total Cost of Ownership

-50000

0

50000

100000

150000

DT BET

5-ye

ar T

CO

(201

4$)

5-year TCO for the DT and BET Purchase Cost

Fuel Cost

Maintenance Cost

EVSE installation cost

Resale

•  The BET has 18% higher 5-year total cost of ownership than the DT

Sensitivity Analysis – Lifetime cost of ownership

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

Lower bound Best estimate Higher bound

Ann

ualiz

ed li

fe ti

me

TCO

diff

eren

ce

betw

een

the

BE

T an

d D

T Annual VKT

Lifetime VKT

Battery cost

Battery replacement cost

Diesel fuel price

Fuel consumption

BEV maintenance cost

EVSE costs

Discount Rate

Electricity price

•  The cost difference between the BET and the DT is most sensitive to lifetime vehicle kilometers travelled, fuel consumption rate, and discount rate.

Sensitivity Analysis – 5-year cost of ownership

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Lower Bound best estimate Higher Bound

5-ye

ar T

CO

diff

eren

ce b

etw

een

the

BE

VTa

nd D

T

Annual VKT

Battery Costs

Diesel fuel price

Energy Consumption

BEV maintenance cost

Discount Rate

EVSE installation

Electricity rate

•  The 5-year cost difference between the BET and the DT is most sensitive to annual vehicle kilometers travelled, battery costs and diesel fuel price.

Conclusions

•  The BET has GHG emissions advantages over the DT, especially in the

University drive cycle and in warm weather

•  The BET has lower life time costs of ownership in most scenarios, even

without any government incentives; but it has higher 5-year costs of

ownership

•  The government could promote the BET by coordinating with local fleet

owners and give incentives to purchase to reduce the short-term

ownership costs

Thank You

Questions?