Batteries versus fuel cells for decarbonizing medium- and heavy-duty vehicles across applications

IF 70.1 1区材料科学 Q1 ENERGY & FUELS

Nature Energy Pub Date : 2026-06-25 DOI:10.1038/s41560-026-02095-6

Maxwell Woody, Spencer Checkoway, Gregory A. Keoleian, Robert De Kleine, Hyung Chul Kim, James E. Anderson

{"title":"Batteries versus fuel cells for decarbonizing medium- and heavy-duty vehicles across applications","authors":"Maxwell Woody, Spencer Checkoway, Gregory A. Keoleian, Robert De Kleine, Hyung Chul Kim, James E. Anderson","doi":"10.1038/s41560-026-02095-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles are a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the United States and globally. Batteries and fuel cells can play a critical role in decarbonizing this sector. Here we conduct a life-cycle GHG assessment of class 3–8 internal combustion engine vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) and battery electric vehicles (BEVs) in the United States. Compared with conventional diesel-fuelled options, alternative powertrains reduce emissions across vehicle types: HEVs by 1–26%, FCEVs using hydrogen produced from steam methane reforming by 12–51%, BEVs powered by the grid by 44–68%, FCEVs using hydrogen produced from electrolysis powered by renewable electricity by 72–82% and BEVs powered by renewable electricity by 87–92%. The ordering of these powertrains holds across cargo weights, drive cycles, regional electricity grids and grid projections. We also assess renewable electricity consumption and hydrogen leakage, two factors that must be considered when evaluating the suitability of different powertrains for decarbonization. Decarbonizing medium- and heavy-duty vehicles is challenging, and the relative benefits of batteries versus fuel cells remain uncertain across applications. This modelling work shows that both reduce emissions versus diesel, but battery electric vehicles powered by renewable electricity deliver the lowest life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions in most cases.","PeriodicalId":19073,"journal":{"name":"Nature Energy","volume":"11 9","pages":"1350-1363"},"PeriodicalIF":70.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Energy","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-026-02095-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Medium- and heavy-duty vehicles are a major source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the United States and globally. Batteries and fuel cells can play a critical role in decarbonizing this sector. Here we conduct a life-cycle GHG assessment of class 3–8 internal combustion engine vehicles, hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs) and battery electric vehicles (BEVs) in the United States. Compared with conventional diesel-fuelled options, alternative powertrains reduce emissions across vehicle types: HEVs by 1–26%, FCEVs using hydrogen produced from steam methane reforming by 12–51%, BEVs powered by the grid by 44–68%, FCEVs using hydrogen produced from electrolysis powered by renewable electricity by 72–82% and BEVs powered by renewable electricity by 87–92%. The ordering of these powertrains holds across cargo weights, drive cycles, regional electricity grids and grid projections. We also assess renewable electricity consumption and hydrogen leakage, two factors that must be considered when evaluating the suitability of different powertrains for decarbonization. Decarbonizing medium- and heavy-duty vehicles is challenging, and the relative benefits of batteries versus fuel cells remain uncertain across applications. This modelling work shows that both reduce emissions versus diesel, but battery electric vehicles powered by renewable electricity deliver the lowest life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions in most cases.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

电池与燃料电池在中重型车辆脱碳中的应用

在美国和全球范围内，中型和重型车辆是温室气体排放的主要来源。电池和燃料电池可以在该行业的脱碳中发挥关键作用。在此，我们对美国的3-8级内燃机汽车、混合动力汽车（hev）、燃料电池汽车（fcev）和纯电动汽车（bev）进行了生命周期温室气体评估。与传统的柴油燃料相比，替代动力系统可以减少各类车辆的排放：混合动力汽车减少1-26%，使用蒸汽甲烷重整制氢的fcev减少12-51%，电网驱动的bev减少44-68%，使用可再生电力的电解制氢的fcev减少72-82%，使用可再生电力的bev减少87-92%。这些动力系统的顺序适用于货物重量、驱动周期、区域电网和电网投影。我们还评估了可再生能源电力消耗和氢泄漏，这是评估不同动力系统脱碳适用性时必须考虑的两个因素。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Nature Energy Energy-Energy Engineering and Power Technology

CiteScore

75.10

自引率

1.10%

发文量

193

期刊介绍： Nature Energy is a monthly, online-only journal committed to showcasing the most impactful research on energy, covering everything from its generation and distribution to the societal implications of energy technologies and policies. With a focus on exploring all facets of the ongoing energy discourse, Nature Energy delves into topics such as energy generation, storage, distribution, management, and the societal impacts of energy technologies and policies. Emphasizing studies that push the boundaries of knowledge and contribute to the development of next-generation solutions, the journal serves as a platform for the exchange of ideas among stakeholders at the forefront of the energy sector. Maintaining the hallmark standards of the Nature brand, Nature Energy boasts a dedicated team of professional editors, a rigorous peer-review process, meticulous copy-editing and production, rapid publication times, and editorial independence. In addition to original research articles, Nature Energy also publishes a range of content types, including Comments, Perspectives, Reviews, News & Views, Features, and Correspondence, covering a diverse array of disciplines relevant to the field of energy.