Lifecycle of the electric car in comparison with the conventional car.

Electric vehicles (EV’s) coupled with low-carbon electricity sources offer the potential for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and exposure to tailpipe emissions from personal transportation. In considering these benefits, it is important to address the phenomenon  of problem- shifting. In addition, while many studies have focused on the use phase in comparing transportation options, vehicle production is also significant when comparing conventional and EV’s. We have developed and provided a transparent life cycle inventory of conventional and electric vehicles and apply our inventory to assess conventional and EV’s over a range of impact categories. We find that EV’s powered by the present European electricity mix offer a 10% to 24% decrease in global warming potential (GWP) relative to conventional diesel or gasoline vehicles assuming lifetimes of 150,000 km. However, EV’s exhibit the potential for significant increases in human toxicity, freshwater eco-toxicity, freshwater eutrophication, and metal depletion impacts, largely emanating from the vehicle supply chain. Results are sensitive to assumptions regarding electricity source, use phase energy consumption, vehicle lifetime, and battery replacement schedules. Because production impacts are more significant for EV’s than for conventional vehicles, assuming a vehicle lifetime of 200,000 km exaggerates the GWP benefits of EV’s from 27% to 29% relative to gasoline vehicles from 17% to 20% relative to diesel vehicles. An assumption of 100,000 km decreases the benefit of EV’s from 9% to 14% with respect to gasoline vehicles and results in impacts indistinguishable from those of a diesel vehicle. Improving the environmental profile of EV’s requires engagement around reducing vehicle production supply chain impacts and promoting clean electricity sources in decision making regarding electricity infrastructure.

Propelgol® reduces the emissions for a petrol car up to 40% which will give an emission footprint of max. 20% cleaner than an electric car. For diesel we will achieve the same 20% cleaner than an electric car. Also less copper, nickel and aluminium is needed to produce cars. The recycling of an electric car leaves a lot of chemical waist that has to be dealt with.

Hawkins et al. -2013 Journal of Industrial Ecology

Figures from the Norwegian University for science and technology in Trondhiem, Study “Comparative Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Conventional and Electric Vehicles”.

Propelgol® reduces CO2 emissions up to 40%

  • 1 Litre Diesel weighs 835 grams. Diesel has 86,2% Carbon, That is 720 grams Carbon per Litre Diesel. To burn this Carbon into CO2 you need 1920 grams of Oxygen. The sum of 720 + 1920 = 2640 grams of CO2 per Litre Diesel.
  • A fuel consumption of 5 Litre per 100 km will give a CO2 of, 5L x 2640 g/l ÷ 100 (per km) = 132 g CO2/km.
  • Soot reduction against the TÜV-standard from 2016 (2.50) with Propelgol® is reduced with 95%.

Propelgol® reduces the CO2 emissions by reducing the amount of fuel that is burned in the engine. Fuel that is not burned, has no reaction with oxygen and will not create CO2. Propelgol® reduces fuel consumption up to 40%. This means up to 40% less CO2.