基于改进生命周期评估的美国重型卡车替代燃料评估

IF 9.6 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Chengjiang Li , Jiajia Zhang , Xiu Gu , Jing Yang , Quande Qin , Wei Zhang , Abbas Ali Chandio
{"title":"基于改进生命周期评估的美国重型卡车替代燃料评估","authors":"Chengjiang Li ,&nbsp;Jiajia Zhang ,&nbsp;Xiu Gu ,&nbsp;Jing Yang ,&nbsp;Quande Qin ,&nbsp;Wei Zhang ,&nbsp;Abbas Ali Chandio","doi":"10.1016/j.spc.2025.06.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The United States is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the global transportation field. In response to the growing challenges of climate change and the rising emissions from the freight sector, the U.S. is actively exploring alternative fuel pathways. This study develops an improved life cycle assessment integrating the Aspen Plus process simulation, life cycle assessment, and system dynamics model. Seven different fuel types for heavy-duty trucks are assessed from resource, environmental, and economic perspectives. Considering technological advances and other influencing factors, the study predicts the deployment trends of alternative fuels in the United States. The results show that liquefied natural gas and biomass-based methanol consume the most energy and water. Hydrogen fuel cell and electricity-based methanol achieve the lowest life cycle carbon emissions and global warming potential. From an economic perspective, liquefied natural gas currently offers the lowest total cost of ownership, whereas electricity-based methanol has the lowest environmental costs. Moreover, as e-fuel technology advances, hydrogen fuel cell and electricity-based methanol costs are expected to fall. Therefore, the U.S. is suggested to accelerate infrastructure improvements and strengthen the promotion of low-carbon alternative fuel heavy-duty trucks to achieve carbon reduction targets in the transportation sector.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48619,"journal":{"name":"Sustainable Production and Consumption","volume":"58 ","pages":"Pages 1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":9.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing alternative fuels for heavy-duty trucks in the U.S. based on improved life cycle assessment\",\"authors\":\"Chengjiang Li ,&nbsp;Jiajia Zhang ,&nbsp;Xiu Gu ,&nbsp;Jing Yang ,&nbsp;Quande Qin ,&nbsp;Wei Zhang ,&nbsp;Abbas Ali Chandio\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.spc.2025.06.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The United States is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the global transportation field. In response to the growing challenges of climate change and the rising emissions from the freight sector, the U.S. is actively exploring alternative fuel pathways. This study develops an improved life cycle assessment integrating the Aspen Plus process simulation, life cycle assessment, and system dynamics model. Seven different fuel types for heavy-duty trucks are assessed from resource, environmental, and economic perspectives. Considering technological advances and other influencing factors, the study predicts the deployment trends of alternative fuels in the United States. The results show that liquefied natural gas and biomass-based methanol consume the most energy and water. Hydrogen fuel cell and electricity-based methanol achieve the lowest life cycle carbon emissions and global warming potential. From an economic perspective, liquefied natural gas currently offers the lowest total cost of ownership, whereas electricity-based methanol has the lowest environmental costs. Moreover, as e-fuel technology advances, hydrogen fuel cell and electricity-based methanol costs are expected to fall. Therefore, the U.S. is suggested to accelerate infrastructure improvements and strengthen the promotion of low-carbon alternative fuel heavy-duty trucks to achieve carbon reduction targets in the transportation sector.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sustainable Production and Consumption\",\"volume\":\"58 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sustainable Production and Consumption\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352550925001265\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sustainable Production and Consumption","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352550925001265","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国是全球交通领域最大的温室气体排放国。为了应对气候变化带来的日益严峻的挑战,以及货运行业排放的不断增加,美国正在积极探索替代燃料的途径。本研究将Aspen Plus过程模拟、生命周期评估和系统动力学模型整合在一起,开发了一种改进的生命周期评估方法。从资源、环境和经济的角度对重型卡车的七种不同燃料类型进行了评估。考虑到技术进步和其他影响因素,该研究预测了替代燃料在美国的部署趋势。结果表明,液化天然气和生物质甲醇消耗的能量和水最多。氢燃料电池和基于电力的甲醇实现了最低的生命周期碳排放和全球变暖潜力。从经济角度来看,液化天然气目前的总拥有成本最低,而基于电力的甲醇的环境成本最低。此外,随着电子燃料技术的进步,氢燃料电池和电力甲醇的成本有望下降。因此,建议美国加快基础设施改善,加强低碳替代燃料重型卡车的推广,以实现交通运输领域的碳减排目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing alternative fuels for heavy-duty trucks in the U.S. based on improved life cycle assessment
The United States is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the global transportation field. In response to the growing challenges of climate change and the rising emissions from the freight sector, the U.S. is actively exploring alternative fuel pathways. This study develops an improved life cycle assessment integrating the Aspen Plus process simulation, life cycle assessment, and system dynamics model. Seven different fuel types for heavy-duty trucks are assessed from resource, environmental, and economic perspectives. Considering technological advances and other influencing factors, the study predicts the deployment trends of alternative fuels in the United States. The results show that liquefied natural gas and biomass-based methanol consume the most energy and water. Hydrogen fuel cell and electricity-based methanol achieve the lowest life cycle carbon emissions and global warming potential. From an economic perspective, liquefied natural gas currently offers the lowest total cost of ownership, whereas electricity-based methanol has the lowest environmental costs. Moreover, as e-fuel technology advances, hydrogen fuel cell and electricity-based methanol costs are expected to fall. Therefore, the U.S. is suggested to accelerate infrastructure improvements and strengthen the promotion of low-carbon alternative fuel heavy-duty trucks to achieve carbon reduction targets in the transportation sector.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sustainable Production and Consumption
Sustainable Production and Consumption Environmental Science-Environmental Engineering
CiteScore
17.40
自引率
7.40%
发文量
389
审稿时长
13 days
期刊介绍: Sustainable production and consumption refers to the production and utilization of goods and services in a way that benefits society, is economically viable, and has minimal environmental impact throughout its entire lifespan. Our journal is dedicated to publishing top-notch interdisciplinary research and practical studies in this emerging field. We take a distinctive approach by examining the interplay between technology, consumption patterns, and policy to identify sustainable solutions for both production and consumption systems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信