Environmental assessments in the transportation sector are often lacking in transparency and completeness. In this article, the environmental trade-offs in road passenger transportation between conventional vehicles and electrified vehicles are compared, using life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. Hence, the relevance of a massive electrification approach can be questioned. Assessing a set of current midsize passenger cars and buses allows for investigation of potential environmental issues. This is the first detailed LCA concerning several hybridization levels for cars and buses, and it is based on real consumption data for two traffic conditions. We focused on the ISO standards (ISO 2006a, b) and analyzed the energy carriers’ life cycle and the vehicle’s life cycle. The functional unit is clearly defined as the transportation of one passenger over 1 km in specific driving conditions from a point A to a point B, without prejudice toward the path taken. Vehicle specifications were derived based on the available manufacturers’ data, literature, and French Institute of Petroleum (IFPEN) experts. For the use stage, two driving cycles were assessed: the “worldwide harmonized light vehicles test procedure” (WLTP) cycle and an urban cycle. France was selected as the study area, and a sensitivity analysis was performed based on a European electricity charging mix for electrified vehicles. Battery electric vehicles (EVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) exhibit the highest climate change (CC) mitigation potential, provided that the electricity mix has low carbon and that the PHEV is used with a fully-charged battery. With these conditions, PHEVs can perform even better than EVs. In that regard, PHEVs using only a thermic engine perform the worst in regard to CC indicator. It is also worth mentioning that electric buses are the best solution in urban traffic conditions for decreasing greenhouse gas emissions. Among powertrains, the electrified powertrains are even more important when performing in urban cycles. For other environmental indicators, such as particulate matter emissions, EVs perform worse than conventional thermic vehicles. The results underline the importance of considering vehicles’ life cycles for LCA in the transportation sector and the need for multicriteria environmental analysis. Therefore, electrification of the transportation sector should not be driven by a single CC indicator, as this may generate potential environmental drawbacks. It is also crucial to adapt public policies to the local context because the results are highly sensitive to the electricity charging mix.

中文翻译：

---

法国几种汽车和公共汽车动力总成类型在两个驾驶循环中的环境生命周期比较评估：“全球统一轻型车辆测试程序”循环和城市循环

交通部门的环境评估往往缺乏透明度和完整性。在本文中，使用生命周期评估 (LCA) 方法比较了传统车辆和电动车辆在道路客运中的环境权衡。因此，可以质疑大规模电气化方法的相关性。评估一组当前的中型乘用车和公共汽车可以调查潜在的环境问题。这是第一个关于汽车和公共汽车的几个混合级别的详细 LCA，它基于两种交通条件的实际消耗数据。我们重点关注 ISO 标准 (ISO 2006a, b) 并分析了能源载体的生命周期和车辆的生命周期。功能单元明确定义为在特定驾驶条件下将一名乘客从 A 点运送到 B 点超过 1 公里，不影响所选择的路径。车辆规格是根据可用制造商的数据、文献和法国石油学会 (IFPEN) 专家得出的。对于使用阶段，评估了两个驾驶循环：“全球统一轻型车辆测试程序”（WLTP）循环和城市循环。选择法国作为研究区域，并基于欧洲电动汽车的充电组合进行了敏感性分析。纯电动汽车 (EV) 和插电式混合动力汽车 (PHEV) 表现出最高的气候变化 (CC) 减缓潜力，前提是电力组合低碳且PHEV与充满电的电池一起使用。在这些条件下，PHEV 的性能甚至比 EV 还要好。在这方面，仅使用热力发动机的 PHEV 在 CC 指标方面表现最差。还值得一提的是，电动公交车是城市交通条件下减少温室气体排放的最佳解决方案。在动力系统中，电动动力系统在城市自行车中的表现更为重要。对于其他环境指标，例如颗粒物排放，电动汽车的表现不如传统的热力汽车。结果强调了考虑运输部门 LCA 车辆生命周期的重要性以及多标准环境分析的必要性。所以，交通部门的电气化不应由单一的 CC 指标驱动，因为这可能会产生潜在的环境缺陷。使公共政策适应当地情况也很重要，因为结果对充电组合高度敏感。