| 1. |
- Jansen, Marcel A. K., et al.
(författare)
-
Environmental plastics in the context of UV radiation, climate change, and the Montreal Protocol
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1354-1013 .- 1365-2486. ; 30:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- There are close links between solar UV radiation, climate change, and plastic pollution. UV-driven weathering is a key process leading to the degradation of plastics in the environment but also the formation of potentially harmful plastic fragments such as micro- and nanoplastic particles. Estimates of the environmental persistence of plastic pollution, and the formation of fragments, will need to take in account plastic dispersal around the globe, as well as projected UV radiation levels and climate change factors.image
|
|
| 2. |
- Jansen, Marcel A. K., et al.
(författare)
-
Plastics in the environment in the context of UV radiation, climate change and the Montreal Protocol : UNEP Environmental Effects Assessment Panel, Update 2023
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Photochemical and Photobiological Sciences. - : Springer Nature. - 1474-905X .- 1474-9092.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This Assessment Update by the Environmental Effects Assessment Panel (EEAP) of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) considers the interactive effects of solar UV radiation, global warming, and other weathering factors on plastics. The Assessment illustrates the significance of solar UV radiation in decreasing the durability of plastic materials, degradation of plastic debris, formation of micro- and nanoplastic particles and accompanying leaching of potential toxic compounds. Micro- and nanoplastics have been found in all ecosystems, the atmosphere, and in humans. While the potential biological risks are not yet well-established, the widespread and increasing occurrence of plastic pollution is reason for continuing research and monitoring. Plastic debris persists after its intended life in soils, water bodies and the atmosphere as well as in living organisms. To counteract accumulation of plastics in the environment, the lifetime of novel plastics or plastic alternatives should better match the functional life of products, with eventual breakdown releasing harmless substances to the environment.
|
|
| 3. |
- Grahn, Maria, 1963, et al.
(författare)
-
Description of the global energy systems model GET-RC 6.1
- 2013
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- To provide a tool for decision makers to understand meeting global energy demand with global energy supply at a minimum cost and in a sustainable way, we have developed a global energy model (GET-RC 6.1) that includes a detailed description of passenger vehicle technology options. The model can be used to better understand the fuel and vehicle technology choices available for passenger vehicles and how these fit into the larger global energy system, where different energy sectors compete for the same limited primary energy sources. The original linear programming Global Energy Transition (GET) model is designed to meet exogenously given energy demand levels, subject to a CO2 constraint, at the lowest global energy system cost (all costs are in US$). The GET model is being developed and extended to address research questions related to the sustainable development of the global energy system. Several different versions of the GET model are available. The aim of this report is to describe the version used in collaboration between staff at Ford Motor Company and Chalmers University of Technology during the period 2008-2013. The model version used, GET-RC 6.1, was developed to address research questions related to light duty passenger vehicles, where R stands for regionalized and C for cars. The report contains a description of the settings that are defined in the model (i.e., the sets, parameters and variables), the equations used in the model, suggestion for how to implement the model step by step, and the mathematical description of the model.
|
|
| 4. |
- Masnadi, Mohammad S., et al.
(författare)
-
Global carbon intensity of crude oil production
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 361:6405, s. 851-853
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Producing, transporting, and refining crude oil into fuels such as gasoline and diesel accounts for ∼15 to 40% of the “well-to-wheels” life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of transport fuels (1). Reducing emissions from petroleum production is of particular importance, as current transport fleets are almost entirely dependent on liquid petroleum products, and many uses of petroleum have limited prospects for near-term substitution (e.g., air travel). Better understanding of crude oil GHG emissions can help to quantify the benefits of alternative fuels and identify the most cost-effective opportunities for oil-sector emissions reductions (2). Yet, while regulations are beginning to address petroleum sector GHG emissions (3–5), and private investors are beginning to consider climate-related risk in oil investments (6), such efforts have generally struggled with methodological and data challenges. First, no single method exists for measuring the carbon intensity (CI) of oils. Second, there is a lack of comprehensive geographically rich datasets that would allow evaluation and monitoring of life-cycle emissions from oils. We have previously worked to address the first challenge by developing open-source oil-sector CI modeling tools [OPGEE (7, 8), supplementary materials (SM) 1.1]. Here, we address the second challenge by using these tools to model well-to-refinery CI of all major active oil fields globally—and to identify major drivers of these emissions.
|
|
| 5. |
- Brynolf, Selma, 1984, et al.
(författare)
-
Review of electrofuel feasibility—prospects for road, ocean, and air transport
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Progress in Energy. - : IOP Publishing. - 2516-1083. ; 4:4, s. 042007-042007
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- To meet climate targets the emissions of greenhouse gases from transport need to be reduced considerably.Electrofuels (e-fuels) produced from low-CO2 electricity, water, and carbon (or nitrogen) are potential low-climate-impact transportation fuels. The purpose of this review is to provide a technoeconomic assessment of the feasibility and potential of e-fuels for road, ocean, and air transport.The assessment is based on a review of publications discussing e-fuels for one or more transport modes. For each transport mode, (a) e-fuel options are mapped, (b) cost per transport unit (e.g. vehicle km) and carbon abatement costs are estimated and compared to conventional options, (c) prospects and challenges are highlighted, and (d) policy context is described.Carbon abatement costs for e-fuels (considering vehicle cost, fuel production and distribution cost) are estimated to be in the range 110–1250 € tonne−1 CO2 with e-gasoline and e-diesel at the high end of the range.The investigated combined biofuel and e-fuels production pathways (based on forest residues and waste) are more cost-competitive than the stand-alone e-fuel production pathways, but the global availability of sustainable biomass is limited making these pathways more constrained.While the potential for e-fuels to decarbonize the transport sector has been discussed extensively in the literature, many uncertainties in terms of production costs, vehicle costs and environmental performance remain. It is too early to rule out or strongly promote particular e-fuels for different transport modes. For e-fuels to play a significant role in transportation, their attractiveness relative to other transport options needs to be improved. Incentives will be needed for e-fuels to be cost-effective and increased clarity on how e-fuels are linked to existing policies is needed.
|
|
| 6. |
- Grahn, Maria, 1963, et al.
(författare)
-
Cost-effective vehicle and fuel technology choices in a carbon constrained world: insights from global energy systems modelling
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Electric and Hybrid Vehicles: Power Sources, Models, Sustainability, Infrastructure and the Market. Editor: Gianfranco Pistoia, Elsevier. ISBN: 798-0-444-53565-8. ; , s. 91-110
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- There is no abstract to this Elsevier book chapter. Here is instead our Discussion/Conclusion chapter: The goal of this work was to investigate the factors influencing the cost-effective vehicle and fuel technology choices in a carbon constrained world. We approached this goal by further developing an existing global energy systems model with the most important addition being a more detailed description of light-duty vehicle technologies (GET RC 6.1). The model is not intended to provide a forecast of the future, but it does provide insight into the system behavior. We have shown how CCS and CSP, technological options that have the potential to significantly reduce CO2 emissions associated with electricity and heat generation, may affect cost-effective fuel and vehicle technologies for transport. We find that the availability of CCS and CSP have substantial impacts on the fuel and technology options for passenger vehicles in meeting global CO2 emission target of 450 ppm at lowest system cost. Four key findings emerge.First, the introduction of CCS increases, in general, the use of coal (in the energy system) and ICEV (for transport). By providing relatively low-cost approaches to reducing CO2 emissions associated with electricity and heat generation, CCS reduces the “CO2 task” for the transportation sector, extends the time span of conventional petroleum-fueled ICEVs, and enables the use of liquid biofuels as well as GTL/CTL for transportation. Second, the introduction of CSP reduces the relative cost of electricity in relation to hydrogen and tends to increase the use of electricity for transport (at the expense of hydrogen).Third, the combined introduction of both CCS and CSP reduces the cost-effectiveness of shifting away from petroleum and ICEVs for a prolonged period of time (e.g., compare the results in Figure X.2D with those in Figure X.2A). Advanced energy technologies (CCS and CSP) reduce the cost of carbon mitigation (in the model) and therefore the incentives to shift to more advanced vehicle technologies. Fourth, the cost estimates for future vehicle technologies are very uncertain (for the time span considered) and therefore it is too early to express firm opinions about the future cost-effectiveness or optimality of different fuel and powertrain combinations. Sensitivity analyses in which these parameters were varied over reasonable ranges result in large differences in the cost-effective fuel and vehicle technology solutions. For instance, for low battery costs ($150/kWh) electrified powertrains dominate and for higher battery costs ($450/kWh) hydrogen-fueled vehicles dominate, regardless of CCS and CSP availability. Thus, our results summarized above should not be interpreted to mean that the electricity production options alone will have a decisive impact on the cost-effective fuel and vehicle options chosen.General results on cost-effective primary energy choices include observations that the use of coal increases substantially when CCS is available and that the use of solar energy (mainly solar-based hydrogen) increases when neither CCS nor CSP are available.Our findings have several policy and research implications. From a policy perspective, the findings highlight the need to recognize, and account for, the interaction between sectors (e.g., that illustrated by the impact of CCS availability in the present work) in policy development. From a research perspective, the findings illustrate the importance of pursuing the research and development of multiple fuel and vehicle technology pathways to achieve the desired result of affordable and sustainable personal mobility.
|
|
| 7. |
- Grahn, Maria, 1963, et al.
(författare)
-
Fuel and Vehicle Technology Choices for Passenger Vehicles in Achieving Stringent CO2 Targets: Connections between Transportation and Other Energy Sectors
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Environmental Science and Technology. - 1382-3124. ; 43:9, s. 3365-3371
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The regionalized Global Energy Transition (GET-R 6.0) modelhas been modified to include a detailed description of light-duty vehicle options and used to investigate the potential impact of carbon capture and storage (CCS) and concentrating solar power (CSP) on cost-effective fuel/vehicle technologies in a carbon-constrained world. Total CO2 emissions were constrained to achieve stabilization at 400-550 ppm, by 2100, at lowest total system cost. The dominant fuel/vehicle technologies varied significantly depending on CO2 constraint, future cost of vehicle technologies, and availability of CCS and CSP. For many cases, no one technology dominated on a global scale. CCS provides relatively inexpensive low-CO2 electricity and heat which prolongs the use of traditional ICEVs. CSP displaces fossil fuel derived electricity, prolongs the use of traditional ICEVs, and promotes electrification of passenger vehicles. In all cases considered, CCS and CSP availability had a major impact on the lowest cost fuel/vehicle technologies, and alternative fuels are needed in response to expected dwindling oil and natural gas supply potential by the end of the century.
|
|
| 8. |
- Grahn, Maria, 1963, et al.
(författare)
-
Sustainable mobility: using a global energy model to inform vehicle technology choices in a decarbonized economy
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Sustainability. - : MDPI AG. - 2071-1050. ; 5:5, s. 1845-1862
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The reduction of CO2 emissions associated with vehicle use is an important element of a global transition to sustainable mobility and is a major long-term challenge for society. Vehicle and fuel technologies are part of a global energy system, and assessing the impact of the availability of clean energy technologies and advanced vehicle technologies on sustainable mobility is a complex task. The global energy transition (GET) model accounts for interactions between the different energy sectors, and we illustrate its use to inform vehicle technology choices in a decarbonizing economy. The aim of this study is to assess how uncertainties in future vehicle technology cost, as well as how developments in other energy sectors, affect cost-effective fuel and vehicle technology choices. Given the uncertainties in future costs and efficiencies for light-duty vehicle and fuel technologies, there is no clear fuel/vehicle technology winner that can be discerned at the present time. We conclude that a portfolio approach with research and development of multiple fuel and vehicle technology pathways is the best way forward to achieve the desired result of affordable and sustainable personal mobility. The practical ramifications of this analysis are illustrated in the portfolio approach to providing sustainable mobility adopted by the Ford Motor Company.
|
|
| 9. |
- Grahn, Maria, 1963, et al.
(författare)
-
The role of ICEVs, HEVs, PHEVs, BEVs and FCVs in achieving stringent CO2 targets: results from global energy systems modeling
- 2009
-
Ingår i: World Electric Vehicle Journal. - : MDPI AG. - 2032-6653. ; 3:1, s. 519-530, s. 1645-1655
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A modified GET model version was used to investigate long-term, cost-effective fuel and vehicle technologies for global passenger transport. The aim was to quantify the potential impact of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology and low CO2 intensity electricity from renewable sources, such as concentrating solar power (CSP), on cost-effective passenger vehicle fuel and technology options necessary to achieve stabilization of atmospheric CO2 at 450 ppm. In addition, the model was used to assess the sensitivity of future vehicle cost assumptions. For all cases investigated, there is no single technology and fuel that dominates throughout the century; instead a variety of fuels and vehicle technologies are important. The availability of CCS and CSP have a substantial impact on cost-effective fuel and technology choices, in general: (i) the introduction of CCS increases the use of coal in the energy system and conventional vehicle technology, (ii) the introduction of CSP reduces the relative cost of electricity in relation to hydrogen and tends to increase the use of electricity for transport, and (iii) the introduction of both CCS and CSP reduces the economic incentives to shift to more advanced vehicle technologies. Varying cost estimates for future vehicle technologies results in large differences in the cost-effective fuel and vehicle technology solutions. For instance, for low battery costs ($150/kWh), electrified powertrains dominate and for higher battery costs ($450/kWh), hydrogen-fueled vehicles dominate, regardless of CCS and CSP availability. The results highlight the importance of a multi-sector approach and the importance of pursuing research and development of multiple fuel and vehicle technologies.
|
|
| 10. |
- Hansson, Julia, et al.
(författare)
-
Review of electrofuel feasibility - cost and environmental impact
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Progress in Energy. - Stockholm : IOP Publishing. - 2516-1083. ; A:2595
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Electrofuels, fuels produced from electricity, water, and carbon or nitrogen, are of interest assubstitutes for fossil fuels in all energy and chemical sectors. This paper focuses on electrofuels for transportation, where some can be used in existing vehicle/vessel/aircraft fleets and fueling infrastructure.The aim of this study is to review publications on electrofuels and summarize costs and environmental performance. A special case, denoted as bio-electrofuels, involves hydrogen supplementing existing biomethane production (e.g. anaerobic digestion) to generate additional or different fuels. We use costs, identified in the literature, to calculate harmonized production costs for a range of electrofuels and bio-electrofuels.Results from the harmonized calculations show that bio-electrofuels generally have lower costs than electrofuels produced using captured carbon. Lowest costs are found for liquefied bio-electro-methane, bio-electro-methanol, and bio-electro-dimethyl ether. The highest cost is for electro-jet fuel. All analyzed fuels have the potential for long-term production costs in the range 90–160 € per MWh. Dominant factors impacting production costs are electrolyzer and electricity costs, the latter connected to capacity factors (CFs) and cost for hydrogen storage. Electrofuel production costs also depend on regional conditions for renewable electricity generation, which are analyzed in sensitivity analyses usingcorresponding CFs in four European regions.Results show a production cost range forelectro-methanol of 76–118 € per MWh depending on scenario and region assuming an electrolyzer CAPEX of 300–450 € per kWelec and CFs of 45%–65%. Lowest production costs are found in regions with good conditions for renewable electricity, such as Ireland and western Spain. The choice of system boundary has a large impact on the environmental assessments. The literature is not consistent regarding the environmental impact from different CO2 sources. The literature, however, points to the fact that renewable energy sources are required to achieve low global warming impact over the electrofuel life cycle.
|
|
