skip to main content
10.1145/3414274.3414501acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdsitConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Impacts on Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Replacement of Conventional Buses by Electric Buses

Authors Info & Claims
Published:26 August 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Public transport buses traversing in urban areas emit extensive carbon dioxide (CO2). It is critical to understand and estimate the characteristics of carbon emissions for transit buses to achieve a low-carbon transportation system. This paper compares the CO2 emissions between electric buses and conventional buses. We use the mobile sensor data of electric buses collected from Shenzhen to calculate CO2 emissions. To evaluate the CO2 emissions impacts of electric buses, we design four scenarios of different replacement rates of a conventional buses fleet by electric buses as a case study. The results demonstrate that the CO2 emissions of electric buses fleet can be reduced 34896.512 tons in comparison with conventional fuel buses by 2023. And the reduction rate of CO2 emissions will be 20.601%. Moreover, the reduction rate of CO2 emissions will be 0 if the CO2 emissions intensity is 742 gCO2 /kwh.

References

  1. Reckien D, Ewald M, Edenhofer O, et al. What parameters influence the spatial variations in CO2 emissions from road traffic in Berlin? Implications for urban planning to reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions[J]. Urban Studies, 2007, 44(2): 339--355.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Accessed Mar. 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gasemissionsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Boriboonsomsin K, Barth M. Impacts of road grade on fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions evidenced by use of advanced navigation systems[J]. Transportation Research Record, 2009, 2139(1): 21--30.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Axsen J, Orlebar C, Skippon S. Social influence and consumer preference formation for pro-environmental technology: The case of a UK workplace electric-vehicle study[J]. Ecological Economics, 2013, 95: 96--107.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Bradley T H, Frank A A. Design, demonstrations and sustainability impact assessments for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles[J]. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2009, 13(1): 115--128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Shan X, Hao P, Chen X, et al. Vehicle energy/emissions estimation based on vehicle trajectory reconstruction using sparse mobile sensor data[J]. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2018, 20(2): 716--726.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. He Z, Zhang W, Jia N. Estimating Carbon Dioxide Emissions of Freeway Traffic: A Spatiotemporal Cell-Based Model[J]. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Wang S, Li Z, Tan J, et al. A method for estimating carbon dioxide emissions based on low frequency GPS trajectories[C]//2017 Chinese Automation Congress (CAC). IEEE, 2017: 1960--1964.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Sun Z, Hao P, Ban X J, et al. Trajectory-based vehicle energy/emissions estimation for signalized arterials using mobile sensing data[J]. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2015, 34: 27--40.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Kan Z, Tang L, Kwan M P, et al. Estimating vehicle fuel consumption and emissions using GPS big data[J]. International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018, 15(4): 566.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Rakha H, Ahn K, Trani A. Comparison of MOBILE5a, MOBILE6, VT-MICRO, and CMEM models for estimating hot-stabilized light-duty gasoline vehicle emissions[J]. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 2003, 30(6): 1010--1021.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Ntziachristos L, Gkatzoflias D, Kouridis C, et al. COPERT: a European road transport emission inventory model[M]//Information technologies in environmental engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009: 491--504.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Scora G, Barth M. Comprehensive modal emissions model (cmem), version 3.01[J]. User guide. Centre for environmental research and technology. University of California, Riverside, 2006, 1070.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Papson A, Hartley S, Kuo K L. Analysis of emissions at congested and uncongested intersections with motor vehicle emission simulation 2010[J]. Transportation research record, 2012, 2270(1): 124--131.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Zhao Y, Sadek A W. Computationally-efficient approaches to integrating the MOVES emissions model with traffic simulators[J]. Procedia Computer Science, 2013, 19: 882--887.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Lejri D, Can A, Schiper N, et al. Accounting for traffic speed dynamics when calculating COPERT and PHEM pollutant emissions at the urban scale[J]. Transportation research part D: Transport and Environment, 2018, 63: 588--603.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Sturm P J, Rodler J, Lechner B, et al. Validation of emission factors for road vehicles based on street tunnel measurements[J]. International journal of vehicle design, 2001, 27(1-4): 65--75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Hausberger S, Rodler J, Sturm P, et al. Emission factors for heavy-duty vehicles and validation by tunnel measurements[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 2003, 37(37): 5237--5245.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Wang X, Peng L, Chi T, et al. A hidden Markov model for urban-scale traffic estimation using floating car data[J]. PloS one, 2015, 10(12).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Zhou X, Tanvir S, Lei H, et al. Integrating a simplified emission estimation model and mesoscopic dynamic traffic simulator to efficiently evaluate emission impacts of traffic management strategies[J]. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2015, 37: 123--136.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Hao P, Boriboonsomsin K, Wu G, et al. Modal activity-based stochastic model for estimating vehicle trajectories from sparse mobile sensor data[J]. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2016, 18(3): 701--711. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Teixeira A C R, Sodré J R. Impacts of replacement of engine powered vehicles by electric vehicles on energy consumption and CO2 emissions[J]. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2018, 59: 375--384.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Teixeira A C R, Sodré J R. Simulation of the impacts on carbon dioxide emissions from replacement of a conventional Brazilian taxi fleet by electric vehicles[J]. Energy, 2016, 115: 1617--1622.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Yuan X, Li L, Gou H, et al. Energy and environmental impact of battery electric vehicle range in China[J]. Applied Energy, 2015, 157: 75--84.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Ahn K, Rakha H, Trani A, et al. Estimating Vehicle Fuel Consumption and Emissions based on Instantaneous Speed and Acceleration Levels[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 2002, 128(2):182--190.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Wang H, Shi H. Analysis of vehicle carbon emission in Chinese Context. Blue book of new energy vehicle: Annual report on new energy vehicle industry in China (2018) [M]. 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. China National Bureau of statistics. Steady growth of power production, adjustment and optimization of power supply structure [EB/OL]. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/201803/t20180319_1588744.html, 2018--03-19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Li X, Cui J, An S, et al. Stop-and-go traffic analysis: Theoretical properties, environmental impacts and oscillation mitigation[J]. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 2014, 70: 319--339.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Impacts on Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Replacement of Conventional Buses by Electric Buses

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      DSIT 2020: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Data Science and Information Technology
      July 2020
      261 pages
      ISBN:9781450376044
      DOI:10.1145/3414274

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 26 August 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      DSIT 2020 Paper Acceptance Rate40of97submissions,41%Overall Acceptance Rate114of277submissions,41%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader