skip to main content


Title: Public Health and Climate Benefits and Trade‐Offs of U.S. Vehicle Electrification
Abstract

Vehicle electrification is a common climate change mitigation strategy, with policymakers invoking co‐beneficial reductions in carbon dioxide (CO2) and air pollutant emissions. However, while previous studies of U.S. electric vehicle (EV) adoption consistently predict CO2mitigation benefits, air quality outcomes are equivocal and depend on policies assessed and experimental parameters. We analyze climate and health co‐benefits and trade‐offs of six U.S. EV adoption scenarios: 25% or 75% replacement of conventional internal combustion engine vehicles, each under three different EV‐charging energy generation scenarios. We transfer emissions from tailpipe to power generation plant, simulate interactions of atmospheric chemistry and meteorology using the GFDL‐AM4 chemistry climate model, and assess health consequences and uncertainties using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Benefits Mapping Analysis Program Community Edition (BenMAP‐CE). We find that 25% U.S. EV adoption, with added energy demand sourced from the present‐day electric grid, annually results in a ~242 M ton reduction in CO2emissions, 437 deaths avoided due to PM2.5reductions (95% CI: 295, 578), and 98 deaths avoided due to lesser ozone formation (95% CI: 33, 162). Despite some regions experiencing adverse health outcomes, ~$16.8B in damages avoided are predicted. Peak CO2reductions and health benefits occur with 75% EV adoption and increased emission‐free energy sources (~$70B in damages avoided). When charging‐electricity from aggressive EV adoption is combustion‐only, adverse health outcomes increase substantially, highlighting the importance of low‐to‐zero emission power generation for greater realization of health co‐benefits. Our results provide a more nuanced understanding of the transportation sector's climate change mitigation‐health impact relationship.

 
more » « less
Award ID(s):
1848683
NSF-PAR ID:
10455275
Author(s) / Creator(s):
 ;  ;  ;  ;  
Publisher / Repository:
DOI PREFIX: 10.1029
Date Published:
Journal Name:
GeoHealth
Volume:
4
Issue:
10
ISSN:
2471-1403
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract

    Electric vehicle (EV) adoption promises potential air pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction co‐benefits. As such, China has aggressively incentivized EV adoption, however much remains unknown with regard to EVs’ mitigation potential, including optimal vehicle type prioritization, power generation contingencies, effects of Clean Air regulations, and the ability of EVs to reduce acute impacts of extreme air quality events. Here, we present a suite of scenarios with a chemistry transport model that assess the potential co‐benefits of EVs during an extreme winter air quality event. We find that regardless of power generation source, heavy‐duty vehicle (HDV) electrification consistently improves air quality in terms of NO2and fine particulate matter (PM2.5), potentially avoiding 562 deaths due to acute pollutant exposure during the infamous January 2013 pollution episode (∼1% of total premature mortality). However, HDV electrification does not reduce GHG emissions without enhanced emission‐free electricity generation. In contrast, due to differing emission profiles, light‐duty vehicle (LDV) electrification in China consistently reduces GHG emissions (∼2 Mt CO2), but results in fewer air quality and human health improvements (145 avoided deaths). The calculated economic impacts for human health endpoints and CO2reductions for LDV electrification are nearly double those of HDV electrification in present‐day (155M vs. 87M US$), but are within ∼25% when enhanced emission‐free generation is used to power them. Overall, we find only a modest benefit for EVs to ameliorate severe wintertime pollution events, and that continued emission reductions in the power generation sector will have the greatest human health and economic benefits.

     
    more » « less
  2. Abstract

    Electric vehicles (EVs) constitute just a fraction of the current U.S. transportation fleet; however, EV market share is surging. EV adoption reduces on-road transportation greenhouse gas emissions by decoupling transportation services from petroleum, but impacts on air quality and public health depend on the nature and location of vehicle usage and electricity generation. Here, we use a regulatory-grade chemical transport model and a vehicle-to-electricity generation unit electricity assignment algorithm to characterize neighborhood-scale (∼1 km) air quality and public health benefits and tradeoffs associated with a multi-modal EV transition. We focus on a Chicago-centric regional domain wherein 30% of the on-road transportation fleet is instantaneously electrified and changes in on-road, refueling, and power plant emissions are considered. We find decreases in annual population-weighted domain mean NO2(−11.83%) and PM2.5(−2.46%) with concentration reductions of up to −5.1 ppb and −0.98µg m−3in urban cores. Conversely, annual population-weighted domain mean maximum daily 8 h average ozone (MDA8O3) concentrations increase +0.64%, with notable intra-urban changes of up to +2.3 ppb. Despite mixed pollutant concentration outcomes, we find overall positive public health outcomes, largely driven by NO2concentration reductions that result in outsized mortality rate reductions for people of color, particularly for the Black populations within our domain.

     
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    Electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure buildout is a major greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation strategy among governments and municipalities. In the United States, where petroleum-based transportation is the largest single source of GHG emissions, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 will support building a national network of 500 000 EV charging units. While the climate benefits of driving electric are well established, the potential embodied climate impacts of building out the charging infrastructure are relatively unexplored. Furthermore, ‘charging infrastructure’ tends to be conceptualized in terms of plugs and stations, leaving out the electrical and communications systems that will be required to support decarbonized and efficient charging. In this study, we present an EV charging system (EVCS) model that describes the material and operational components required for charging and forecasts the scale-up of these components based on EV market share scenarios out to 2050. We develop a methodology for measuring GHG emissions embodied in the buildout of EVCS and incurred during operation of the EVCS, including vehicle recharging, and we demonstrate this model using a case study of Georgia (USA). We find that cumulative GHG emissions from EVCS buildout and use are negligible, at less than 1% of cumulative emissions from personal light duty vehicle travel (including EV recharging and conventional combustion vehicle driving). If an accelerated EVCS buildout were to stimulate a faster transition of the vehicle fleet, the emissions reduction of electrification will far outweigh emissions embodied in EVCS components, even assuming relatively high carbon inputs prior to decarbonization.

     
    more » « less
  4. Abstract

    The transportation sector is the largest contributor to CO2emissions and a major source of criteria air pollutants in the United States. The impact of climate change and that of air pollution differ in space and time, but spatially-explicit, systematic evaluations of the effectiveness of alternative fuels and advanced vehicle technologies in mitigating both climate change and air pollution are lacking. In this work, we estimate the life cycle monetized damages due to greenhouse gas emissions and criteria air pollutant emissions for different types of passenger-moving vehicles in the United States. We find substantial spatial variability in the monetized damages for all fuel-vehicle technologies studied. None of the fuel-vehicle technologies leads simultaneously to the lowest climate change damages and the lowest air pollution damages across all U.S. counties. Instead, the fuel-vehicle technology that best mitigates climate change in one region is different from that for the best air quality (i.e. the trade-off between decarbonization and air pollution mitigation). For example, for the state of Pennsylvania, battery-electric cars lead to the lowest population-weighted-average climate change damages (a climate change damage of 0.87 cent/mile and an air pollution damage of 1.71 cent/mile). In contrast, gasoline hybrid-electric cars lead to the lowest population-weighted-average air pollution damages (a climate change damage of 0.92 cent/mile and an air pollution damage of 0.77 cent/mile). Vehicle electrification has great potential to reduce climate change damages but may increase air pollution damages substantially in regions with high shares of coal-fired power plants compared to conventional vehicles. However, clean electricity grid could help battery electric vehicles to achieve low damages in both climate change and air pollution.

     
    more » « less
  5. By displacing gasoline and diesel fuels, electric cars and fleets offer significant public health benefits by reducing emissions from the transportation sector. However, public confidence in the reliability of charging infrastructure remains a fundamental barrier to adoption. Using large-scale social data and machine learning based on 12,720 U.S. electric vehicle charging stations, we provide national evidence on how well the existing charging infrastructure is serving the needs of the expanding population of EV drivers in 651 core-based statistical areas in the United States. Contrary to predictions, we find that stations at private charging locations do not outperform public charging locations provided by government. We also find evidence of higher negative sentiment in the dense urban centers, where issues of charge rage and congestion may be the most prominent. Overall, 40% of drivers using mobility apps have faced negative experiences at EV charging stations, a problem that needs to be fixed as the market expands. 
    more » « less