Articles
In Europe, the introduction of limits through the emissions standards has made combustion engine vehicles cleaner. The limits set have made a huge difference. And they have pushed engineers to make huge changes through better combustion, improved aftertreatment systems and the introduction of electrification.
Tailpipe emissions are only part of the story and, as automotive shifts away from combustion technology, it’s coincided with more emphasis being placed on the total lifecycle of vehicles, and how their environmental impact stacks up.
Combined effort
The European Union is funding a study to define a single harmonised European lifecycle assessment standard for zero-emission vehicles and batteries. The initiative is supported under the Horizon Europe Framework Programme and has also received funding from UK Research and Innovation, and it builds on the vehicle lifecycle assessment research project conducted in 2020.
The project brings together a consortium of experts, including the Fraunhofer Institute for Structural Durability and System Reliability, the Fraunhofer Institute of Surface Engineering and engineering consultancy Ricardo. They are looking to develop a baseline for a Europe-wide commonly accepted and applied single lifecycle assessment (LCA) approach for zero-emission vehicles.
Nikolas Hill, head of vehicle technologies and fuels in Ricardo’s sustainable transport team, said: “The major report on lifecycle impacts of road vehicles that Ricardo undertook for the European Commission in 2020 highlighted the importance of lifecycle assessment in sustainable product and business development, but also the challenges for its application.
“Efforts fully to use and realise the benefits from lifecycle assessment approaches by the transport sector are being hampered because there is not an official European standard for vehicle LCA. This is largely because of a lack of a consistent, fair framework or harmonised methodology, plus limitations in accessing and managing real-world data and applying consistent modelling.
“Through our work with our industry and research partners on this project, Ricardo policy, strategy and technology experts will help to deliver a standard, trustworthy and consistent assessment of full vehicular environmental footprints, to support organisations across the transport value chain progress their objective of achieving climate neutrality.”
Need for transparency
The project could be incredibly important to directing the future of the industry. Currently, there isn’t an agreed European or international standard on vehicle lifecycle assessment, although there are a number of standards in draft or being developed for electric vehicle batteries. Defining a single, harmonised lifecycle assessment approach for vehicles and batteries is key to providing transparency.
Harmonised standards will facilitate industry, mobility providers and planners to develop sustainable road transport products that are optimised to combat climate change. It should also make it easier for OEMs and mobility providers to see exactly what they need to do to achieve the most sustainable vehicles possible. And it should also make it more transparent as we possibly shift away from the arbitrary emissions targets used for current vehicles on the road.
Ricardo is on the core team of the collaborative TranSensus LCA consortium which comprises 44 stakeholders from industry and research along the full value chain of zero-emission vehicles and batteries.
Passenger vehicles and light commercial vehicles produce 15% of the EU’s CO2 emissions, while heavy-duty vehicles make up 25%. But that only accounts for tailpipe levels. As we shift to an electrified future, we need a better grasp of vehicles’ total impact on the environment, which makes the latest study incredibly important to the future of the industry.
Want the best engineering stories delivered straight to your inbox? The Professional Engineering newsletter gives you vital updates on the most cutting-edge engineering and exciting new job opportunities. To sign up, click here.
Content published by Professional Engineering does not necessarily represent the views of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.