Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (13)
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (13)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- nein (13)
Schlagworte
- CO2-Bilanz (6)
- Elektrofahrzeug (6)
- Elektromobilität (4)
- Umweltbilanz (4)
- LCA (3)
- carbon footprint (3)
- greenhouse gas emissions (3)
- BEV (2)
- Batteriefahrzeug (2)
- Deutschland (2)
- GHG (2)
- Personenkraftwagen (2)
- Universität (2)
- carbon footprinting (2)
- climate policy (2)
- efficiency trade-offs (2)
- electric cars (2)
- global warming potential (2)
- life cycle assessment (2)
- university carbon footprint (2)
- university sustainability (2)
- zero emission university (2)
- BEV (battery electric vehicle) (1)
- Batterie (1)
- Bewertung (1)
- Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung (1)
- Brennstoffzellenfahrzeug (1)
- CO2 (1)
- CO2 emissions (1)
- Carbon footprint (1)
- China (1)
- Dieselkraftstoff (1)
- E-Scooter (1)
- ESD (1)
- Electric kick scooter (1)
- Emissionsverringerung (1)
- Environmental Campus Birkenfeld (1)
- Environmental impact (1)
- Erwärmung <Meteorologie> (1)
- European diesel car boom (1)
- FCEV (1)
- GHG accounting and reporting (1)
- GWP (1)
- Global warming potential (GWP) (1)
- Güterverkehr (1)
- HDV (1)
- Höheres Bildungswesen (1)
- ICEV (1)
- Klimaschutz (1)
- Klimaänderung (1)
- Kohlendioxidemission (1)
- Kraftfahrzeugindustrie (1)
- Kraftwagen (1)
- Lastkraftwagen (1)
- Lebensdauer (1)
- Life cycle assessment (1)
- Micro-mobility (1)
- Mobility mode (1)
- Nachhaltigkeit (1)
- Nanyang Technological University (1)
- Nullemission (1)
- Plug-in-Hybrid (1)
- Ruß (1)
- Shared feet application greenhouse gases (1)
- Singapur (1)
- Studiengang (1)
- Treibhausgas (1)
- Umwelt-Campus Birkenfeld (1)
- Verkehrswende (1)
- Wasserstoffmotor (1)
- bachelor degree programs in business administration and mechanical engineering (1)
- battery (1)
- battery electric (1)
- battery electric vehicle (1)
- battery electric vehicles (1)
- battery production (1)
- battery second use (1)
- battery size (1)
- black carbon (1)
- break-even mileages (1)
- break-even production (1)
- building emissions (1)
- carbon offsetting (1)
- climate change impact (1)
- climate change mitigation (1)
- diesel (1)
- diesel emissions (1)
- e-bikes (1)
- e-boards (1)
- electric bus (1)
- electric conversion (1)
- electric kick scooters (1)
- electric light commercial vehicles (1)
- electric motorcycles (1)
- electric three- and four-wheelers (1)
- electric trucks (1)
- electric vehicles (1)
- embodied emissions (1)
- embodied impacts (1)
- emissions mitigation costs (1)
- energy impacts (1)
- energy use (1)
- environmental impact (1)
- freight (1)
- fuel cell (1)
- fuel cell vehicles (1)
- health impact (1)
- higher education for a sustainable development (1)
- higher education institutions (1)
- hydrogen (1)
- impact categories (1)
- indicator system (1)
- internal combustion engine vehicle (1)
- learning rates (1)
- life cycle (1)
- mobility impacts (1)
- passenger cars (1)
- passenger kilometers travelled (1)
- per capita carbon footprint (1)
- plug-in hybrid cars (1)
- plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (1)
- probabilistic (1)
- radiative forcing (1)
- real-world driving (1)
- real-world emissions (1)
- real-world life-cycle inventory (1)
- renewable energy (1)
- sustainability education (1)
- sustainable mobility (1)
- sustainable road transport (1)
- time trend (1)
- toxic emissions (1)
- traffic emissions (1)
- traffic modes (1)
- truck (1)
- urban mobility (1)
- vehicle mass (1)
- vehicle power (1)
- vehicle size effect (1)
- well-to-wheels (1)
Institut
- FB Umweltplanung/-technik (UCB) (13) (entfernen)
Universities, as innovation drivers in science and technology worldwide, should attempt to become carbon-neutral institutions and should lead this transformation. Many universities have picked up the challenge and quantified their carbon footprints; however, up-to-date quantification is limited to use-phase emissions. So far, data on embodied impacts of university campus infrastructure are missing, which prevents us from evaluating their life cycle costs. In this paper, we quantify the embodied impacts of two university campuses of very different sizes and climate zones: the Umwelt-Campus Birkenfeld (UCB), Germany, and the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. We also quantify the effects of switching to full renewable energy supply on the carbon footprint of a university campus based on the example of UCB. The embodied impacts amount to 13.7 (UCB) and 26.2 (NTU) kg CO2e/m2•y, respectively, equivalent to 59.2% (UCB), and 29.8% (NTU), respectively, of the building lifecycle impacts. As a consequence, embodied impacts can be dominating; thus, they should be quantified and reported. When adding additional use-phase impacts caused by the universities on top of the building lifecycle impacts (e.g., mobility impacts), both institutions happen to exhibit very similar emissions with 124.5–126.3 kg CO2e/m2•y despite their different sizes, structures, and locations. Embodied impacts comprise 11.0–20.8% of the total impacts at the two universities. In conclusion, efficient reduction in university carbon footprints requires a holistic approach, considering all impacts caused on and by a campus including upstream effects.
Background: The environmental impact of electric scooters has been the subject of critical debate in the scientific community for the past 5 years. The data published so far are very inhomogeneous and partly methodologically incomplete. Most of the data available in the literature suffer from an average bias of 34%, because end-of-life (EOL) impacts have not been modelled, reported or specified. In addition, the average lifetime mileage of shared fleets of e-scooters, as they are operated in cities around the world, has recently turned out to be much lower than expected. This casts the scooters in an unfavourable light for the necessary mobility transition. Data on impact categories other than the global warming potential (GWP) are scarce. This paper aims to quantify the strengths and weaknesses of e-scooters in terms of their contribution to sustainable transport by more specifically defining and extending the life cycle assessment (LCA) modelling conditions: the modelling is based on two genuine material inventories obtained by dismantling two different e-scooters, one based on a traditional aluminium frame and another, for the first time, based on plastic material.
Results: This study provides complete inventory data to facilitate further LCA modelling of electric kick scooters. The plastic scooter had a 26% lower lifetime GWP than the aluminium vehicle. A favourable choice of electric motor promises a further reduction in GWP. In addition to GWP, the scooter's life cycles were assessed across seven other impact categories and showed no critical environmental or health impacts compared to a passenger car. On the other hand, only the resource extraction impact revealed clear advantages for electric scooters compared to passenger cars.
Conclusions: Under certain conditions, scooters can still be an important element of the desired mobility transition. To assure a lifetime long enough is the crucial factor to make the electric scooter a favourable or even competitive vehicle in a future sustainable mobility system. A scooter mileage of more than 5400 km is required to achieve lower CO2eq/pkm emissions compared to passenger cars, which seems unlikely in today's standard use case of shared scooter fleets. In contrast, a widespread use of e-scooters as a commuting tool is modelled to be able to save 4% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across the German mobility sector.
This research conducted a probabilistic life-cycle assessment (pLCA) into the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions performance of nine combinations of truck size and powertrain technology for a recent past and a future (largely decarbonised) situation in Australia. This study finds that the relative and absolute life-cycle GHG emissions performance strongly depends on the vehicle class, powertrain and year of assessment. Life-cycle emission factor distributions vary substantially in their magnitude, range and shape. Diesel trucks had lower life-cycle GHG emissions in 2019 than electric trucks (battery, hydrogen fuel cell), mainly due to the high carbon-emission intensity of the Australian electricity grid (mainly coal) and hydrogen production (mainly through steam–methane reforming). The picture is, however, very different for a more decarbonised situation, where battery electric trucks, in particular, provide deep reductions (about 75–85%) in life-cycle GHG emissions. Fuel-cell electric (hydrogen) trucks also provide substantial reductions (about 50–70%), but not as deep as those for battery electric trucks. Moreover, hydrogen trucks exhibit the largest uncertainty in emissions performance, which reflects the uncertainty and general lack of information for this technology. They therefore carry an elevated risk of not achieving the expected emission reductions. Battery electric trucks show the smallest (absolute) uncertainty, which suggests that these trucks are expected to deliver the deepest and most robust emission reductions. Operational emissions (on-road driving and vehicle maintenance combined) dominate life-cycle emissions for all vehicle classes. Vehicle manufacturing and upstream emissions make a relatively small contribution to life-cycle emissions from diesel trucks (<5% each), but these are important aspects for electric trucks (5% to 30%).