Environmental Life- cycle Assessment of Passenger
Transportation: A Detailed Methodology for Energy,
Greenhouse Gas, and Criteria Pollutant Inventories of
Automobiles, Buses, Light Rail, Heavy Rail and Air
Mikhail Chester and Arpad Horvath
WORKING PAPER
UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
March 2008
Primary Researcher: Mikhail Chester, Doctoral Candidate
University of California, Berkeley
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Civil Systems Program
mchester@ cal. berkeley. edu
Project Director: Arpad Horvath, Associate Professor
University of California, Berkeley
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Engineering and Project Management Program
215 McLaughlin Hall
horvath@ ce. berkeley. edu
Environmental Life- Cycle Assessment of Passenger Transportation
A Detailed Methodology for Energy, Greenhouse Gas, and Criteria Pollutant Inventories
of Automobiles, Buses, Light Rail, Heavy Rail and Air
Working Paper
University of California, Berkeley
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Institute of Transportation Studies
UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
March 2008
This document is based on models 20080306/ onroad, 20080218/ rail, 20080218/ air, 20080306/ compiled.
Document filename: its_ report_ 08. doc
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
Table of Contents
Version History........................................................................................................................ ..................... 4
List of Tables......................................................................................................................... ....................... 5
List of Figures........................................................................................................................ ....................... 7
List of Equations...................................................................................................................... ..................... 8
List of Acronyms and Symbols...................................................................................................................... 9
1 Abstract ............................................................................................................................... .............. 11
2 Problem Statement...................................................................................................................... ...... 11
3 Methodology.................................................................................................................... .................. 11
3.1 Life- cycle Assessment ( LCA)..................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Environmental Effects Studied .................................................................................................. 14
3.3 Availability of Lead Data ............................................................................................................ 15
4 Data Sources........................................................................................................................ ............. 16
5 Life- cycle Inventory of Automobiles and Urban Buses....................................................................... 19
5.1 Vehicles ............................................................................................................................... ..... 19
5.1.1 Manufacturing.................................................................................................................. ..... 20
5.1.2 Operation...................................................................................................................... ........ 21
5.1.3 Maintenance.................................................................................................................... ..... 22
5.1.4 Automotive Repair................................................................................................................. 22
5.1.5 Insurance...................................................................................................................... ........ 23
5.1.6 Vehicle Results...................................................................................................................... 24
5.2 Infrastructure................................................................................................................. ............ 27
5.2.1 Roadway Construction .......................................................................................................... 27
5.2.2 Roadway Maintenance.......................................................................................................... 29
5.2.3 Parking ............................................................................................................................... .. 30
5.2.4 Roadway and Parking Lighting.............................................................................................. 31
5.2.5 Herbicides and Salting .......................................................................................................... 32
5.2.6 Infrastructure Results ............................................................................................................ 34
5.3 Fuel Production ( Gasoline and Diesel)...................................................................................... 36
5.3.1 Onroad fuels production ........................................................................................................ 36
5.3.2 Onroad fuel production results .............................................................................................. 37
5.4 Fundamental Environmental Factors for Onroad ...................................................................... 39
5.5 Onroad Summary ...................................................................................................................... 40
5.5.1 Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................................................. 40
5.5.2 Criteria Air Pollutants............................................................................................................. 42
6 Life- cycle Inventory of Rail ................................................................................................................. 46
6.1 Vehicles ( Trains)........................................................................................................................ 46
6.1.1 Manufacturing.................................................................................................................. ..... 47
6.1.2 Operation...................................................................................................................... ........ 48
6.1.3 Maintenance.................................................................................................................... ..... 50
6.1.4 Insurance...................................................................................................................... ........ 52
6.1.5 Rail Vehicle Results .............................................................................................................. 53
6.2 Infrastructure ( Stations, Tracks, and Insurance) ....................................................................... 57
6.2.1 Station Construction .............................................................................................................. 57
6.2.2 Station Operation .................................................................................................................. 59
6.2.3 Station Maintenance and Cleaning ....................................................................................... 63
6.2.4 Station Parking ...................................................................................................................... 63
6.2.5 Track Construction ................................................................................................................ 64
6.2.6 Track Maintenance................................................................................................................ 67
6.2.7 Insurance...................................................................................................................... ........ 68
6.2.8 Rail Infrastructure Results ..................................................................................................... 69
6.3 Fuels ............................................................................................................................... .......... 72
6.3.1 Electricity in California and Massachusetts........................................................................... 72
6.3.2 Diesel......................................................................................................................... ........... 73
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 2 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
6.3.3 Rail Fuels Results ................................................................................................................. 73
6.4 Fundamental Environmental Factors for Rail ............................................................................ 76
6.5 Rail Summary ............................................................................................................................ 77
6.5.1 Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions .............................................................................. 77
6.5.2 Criteria Air Pollutants............................................................................................................. 80
7 Life- cycle Inventory of Air ................................................................................................................... 83
7.1 Vehicles ( Aircraft) ...................................................................................................................... 83
7.1.1 Manufacturing.................................................................................................................. ..... 84
7.1.2 Operation...................................................................................................................... ........ 85
7.1.3 Maintenance.................................................................................................................... ..... 88
7.1.4 Insurance...................................................................................................................... ........ 89
7.1.5 Usage Attribution – Passengers, Freight, and Mail............................................................... 89
7.1.6 Air Vehicle Results ................................................................................................................ 90
7.2 Infrastructure ( Airports and Other Components) ....................................................................... 91
7.2.1 Airport Construction............................................................................................................... 91
7.2.2 Runway, Taxiway and Tarmac Construction and Maintenance............................................ 92
7.2.3 Operation...................................................................................................................... ........ 93
7.2.4 Maintenance.................................................................................................................... ..... 95
7.2.5 Parking ............................................................................................................................... .. 95
7.2.6 Insurance...................................................................................................................... ........ 96
7.2.7 Usage Attribution – Passengers, Freight, and Mail............................................................... 96
7.2.8 Air Infrastructure Results....................................................................................................... 98
7.3 Fuel Production..................................................................................................................... .. 100
7.3.1 Fuel Production Inventory ................................................................................................... 100
7.3.2 Fuel Production Results ...................................................................................................... 100
7.4 Fundamental Environmental Factors for Air ............................................................................ 101
7.5 Air Summary ............................................................................................................................ 102
7.5.1 Energy and GHG Emissions ............................................................................................... 102
7.5.2 Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions........................................................................................... 104
8 Geographic and Temporal Considerations ...................................................................................... 106
9 Data Uncertainty, Quality, and Sensitivity ........................................................................................ 109
9.1 Model and Choice Uncertainty ................................................................................................ 109
9.2 Parameter Uncertainty and Data Quality................................................................................. 110
9.3 Sensitivity Analysis .................................................................................................................. 114
10 Future Work........................................................................................................................... .......... 114
11 References ............................................................................................................................... ....... 115
Appendix A.............................................................................................................................. ................. 123
Appendix B.............................................................................................................................. ................. 124
Appendix C.............................................................................................................................. ................. 125
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 3 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
Version History
This working paper is intended to provide the background purpose, methodology, and
preliminary results of this assessment. The results in this paper provide draft final results
meaning they are subject to further analysis. Changes in the analysis which have been
published in re- released working papers are documented in this section.
Working Paper v1 ( UCB- ITS- VWP- 2007- 7) December 2007
􀂃 Release of draft final inventory.
􀂃 Models used: 20071027/ onroad, 20071015/ rail, 20071206/ air.
Working Paper v2 ( UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2) March 2008
􀂃 Update of all inventory numerical results.
􀂃 Disaggregation of “ average” bus into “ off- peak” and “ peak” buses ( § 5).
􀂃 Updated “ Methodology” Scope of Work, Table 1 ( § 3)
􀂃 Selected reporting of lead emissions from Criteria Air Pollutant results ( § 3.3).
􀂃 Addition of “ Geographic and Temporal Considerations” section ( § 8).
􀂃 Addition of “ Fundamental Environmental Factors” sections ( § 5.4, 6.4, and 7.4).
􀂃 Addition of “ Data Uncertainty, Quality, and Sensitivity” section ( § 9).
􀂃 Models used: 20080306/ onroad, 20080218/ rail, 20080218/ air, 20080306/ compiled.
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 4 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
List of Tables
Table 1 - Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................. 12
Table 2 - Onroad data sources ................................................................................................................... 16
Table 3 - Rail data sources ......................................................................................................................... 17
Table 4 - Air data sources........................................................................................................................ .. 18
Table 5 - 2005 automobile sales by vehicle type........................................................................................ 19
Table 6 - Onroad vehicle parameters ......................................................................................................... 20
Table 7 – Emissions ( g/ VMT) from Mobile.................................................................................................. 22
Table 8 – Sedan vehicle inventory.............................................................................................................. 24
Table 9 - SUV vehicle inventory.................................................................................................................. 24
Table 10 - Pickup vehicle inventory ............................................................................................................ 25
Table 11 – Average bus vehicle inventory .................................................................................................. 25
Table 12 – Off- Peak bus vehicle inventory ................................................................................................. 26
Table 13 – Peak bus vehicle inventory ....................................................................................................... 26
Table 14 - AASHTO roadway geometry by functional class....................................................................... 28
Table 15 - Roadway mileage by functional class at 10- year horizon ......................................................... 28
Table 16 - Roadway damage fraction calculations by vehicle and functional class ................................... 30
Table 17 - Onroad infrastructure results for sedans ................................................................................... 34
Table 18 - Onroad infrastructure results for SUVs...................................................................................... 34
Table 19 - Onroad infrastructure results for pickups................................................................................... 34
Table 20 - Onroad infrastructure results for average urban buses............................................................. 34
Table 21 - Onroad infrastructure results for off- peak urban buses............................................................. 35
Table 22 - Onroad infrastructure results for peak urban buses .................................................................. 35
Table 23 - Fuel production parameters by vehicle...................................................................................... 36
Table 24 - Onroad fuel production for sedans ............................................................................................ 37
Table 25 - Onroad fuel production for SUVs............................................................................................... 37
Table 26 - Onroad fuel production for pickups............................................................................................ 37
Table 27 - Onroad fuel production for urban buses .................................................................................... 38
Table 28 - Onroad fuel production for off- peak urban buses...................................................................... 38
Table 29 - Onroad fuel production for peak urban buses ........................................................................... 38
Table 30 - Fundamental Environmental Factors for Onroad Modes........................................................... 39
Table 31 - Onroad energy inventory ........................................................................................................... 40
Table 32 - Onroad GHG inventory .............................................................................................................. 41
Table 33 - Onroad Energy and GHG Total and Operational Inventory ...................................................... 42
Table 34 - Onroad criteria air pollutants inventory...................................................................................... 43
Table 35 - Onroad CAP Total and Operational Inventory........................................................................... 45
Table 36 – Life- cycle inventory of rail vehicle manufacturing in SimaPro ( impacts per train) .................... 47
Table 37 - Caltrain operational factors for a train ....................................................................................... 49
Table 38 - Electricity generation emission factors by state ( per kWh)........................................................ 49
Table 39 – Life- cycle inventory of rail vehicle maintenance in SimaPro ( per train per lifetime) ................. 50
Table 40 – Rail vehicle insurance costs ($ 2005/ yr- train)............................................................................... 52
Table 41 - Rail vehicle performance data ................................................................................................... 53
Table 42 – BART vehicle inventory............................................................................................................. 54
Table 43 – Caltrain vehicle inventory.......................................................................................................... 54
Table 44 – Muni vehicle inventory .............................................................................................................. 55
Table 45 – Green Line vehicle inventory .................................................................................................... 55
Table 46 – CAHSR vehicle inventory.......................................................................................................... 56
Table 47 - Rail infrastructure station material requirements ....................................................................... 59
Table 48 - Rail station parking .................................................................................................................... 64
Table 49 - Rail infrastructure track construction material requirements ..................................................... 66
Table 50 - Rail infrastructure track maintenance SimaPro factors ( per meter per year) ............................ 67
Table 51 – Rail non- vehicle insurance costs ($ 2005/ yr- train) ....................................................................... 68
Table 52 – BART infrastructure inventory................................................................................................... 69
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 5 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
Table 53 – Caltrain infrastructure inventory ................................................................................................ 69
Table 54 – Muni infrastructure inventory..................................................................................................... 70
Table 55 – Green Line infrastructure inventory........................................................................................... 70
Table 56 – CAHSR infrastructure inventory................................................................................................ 71
Table 57 - Electricity generation factors for CA and MA............................................................................. 72
Table 58 - Rail vehicle and infrastructure electricity consumption.............................................................. 72
Table 59 – BART fuel inventory .................................................................................................................. 74
Table 60 – Caltrain fuel inventory ............................................................................................................... 74
Table 61 – Muni fuel inventory.................................................................................................................... 74
Table 62 – Green Line fuel inventory.......................................................................................................... 74
Table 63 – CAHSR fuel inventory ............................................................................................................... 75
Table 64 - Fundamental Environmental Factors for Rail Modes ................................................................ 76
Table 65 - Rail energy inventory ................................................................................................................. 77
Table 66 - Rail GHG emission inventory..................................................................................................... 78
Table 67 – Rail Energy and GHG Emissions Total and Operational Inventory .......................................... 80
Table 68 - Rail CAP inventory..................................................................................................................... 82
Table 69 - Rail inventory of Criteria Air Pollutants ...................................................................................... 82
Table 70 - EDMS emission factors by stage ( emissions per kg of fuel burned) ......................................... 86
Table 71 - Aircraft cruise emission factors per VMT................................................................................... 87
Table 72 - Aircraft maintenance components and corresponding EIOLCA sectors ................................... 88
Table 73 - Aircraft maintenance component costs ($/ hr of flight) ............................................................... 88
Table 74 - Aircraft insurance costs in $ M/ aircraft- life.................................................................................. 89
Table 75 - Weight of Passengers, freight, and mail on aircraft ( per flight) ................................................. 89
Table 76 - Air vehicle inventory for Embraer 145........................................................................................ 90
Table 77 - Air vehicle inventory for Boeing 737 .......................................................................................... 90
Table 78 - Air vehicle inventory for Boeing 747 .......................................................................................... 90
Table 79 - Airport insurance costs ($ M/ aircraft- life).................................................................................... 96
Table 80 - Aircraft infrastructure inventory for Embraer 145....................................................................... 98
Table 81 - Aircraft infrastructure inventory for Boeing 737 ......................................................................... 98
Table 82 - Aircraft infrastructure inventory for Boeing 747 ......................................................................... 99
Table 83 - Aircraft fuel production inventory for Embraer 145.................................................................. 100
Table 84 - Fuel production inventory for Boeing 737................................................................................ 100
Table 85 - Fuel production inventory for Boeing 747................................................................................ 100
Table 86 - Fundamental Environmental Factors for Air Modes ................................................................ 101
Table 87 - Air energy inventory................................................................................................................. 102
Table 88 - Air GHG inventory.................................................................................................................... 103
Table 89 - Air Energy and GHG inventory life- cycle impact contributions per PMT................................. 104
Table 90 - Air CAP inventory..................................................................................................................... 104
Table 91 - Air CAP inventory life- cycle impact contributions per PMT ..................................................... 105
Table 92 - Data Quality Assessment Pedigree Matrix .............................................................................. 111
Table 93 - Data Quality Assessment Scoring Matrices ............................................................................ 113
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 6 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
List of Figures
Figure 1 - A conceptual model of the life- cycle components of each mode ............................................... 14
Figure 2 – Automobile manufacturing ......................................................................................................... 20
Figure 3 – Roadway construction ............................................................................................................... 27
Figure 4 – Surface lot............................................................................................................................ ..... 31
Figure 5 – Roadways in potential snow regions ......................................................................................... 32
Figure 6 – Refinery electricity consumption................................................................................................ 44
Figure 7 - BART train ............................................................................................................................... .. 46
Figure 8 - Caltrain train ............................................................................................................................... 46
Figure 9 - Typical BART aerial structure..................................................................................................... 57
Figure 10 - Typical Caltrain station ............................................................................................................. 58
Figure 11 - Typical Muni at- grade station ................................................................................................... 58
Figure 12 - At- grade Green Line station ..................................................................................................... 58
Figure 13 – BART Lake Merritt station........................................................................................................ 60
Figure 14 – BART aerial support ................................................................................................................ 65
Figure 15 – New York City aerial support similar to Green Line................................................................. 66
Figure 16 – Roadway paving emissions ..................................................................................................... 81
Figure 17 – Boeing 747............................................................................................................................ .. 83
Figure 18 - Aircraft Parameters................................................................................................................... 83
Figure 19 – Embraer 145 ............................................................................................................................ 84
Figure 20 – Boeing 737............................................................................................................................ .. 84
Figure 21 – Airplane manufacturing facility................................................................................................. 84
Figure 22 – Landing- Takeoff cycle.............................................................................................................. 85
Figure 23 – Dulles aerial view..................................................................................................................... 91
Figure 24 – Dulles construction, circa 1961................................................................................................ 91
Figure 25 – Dulles terminals ....................................................................................................................... 92
Figure 26 – Ground support equipment at San Francisco International Airport ......................................... 94
Figure 27 – Dulles parking ( purple lot)........................................................................................................ 95
Figure 28 – Onroad life- cycle component temporal and geographic differentiation ................................. 106
Figure 29 – Rail life- cycle component temporal and geographic differentiation ....................................... 107
Figure 30 – Air life- cycle component temporal and geographic differentiation......................................... 107
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 7 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
List of Equations
Equation Set 1 – Onroad vehicle manufacturing ........................................................................................ 21
Equation Set 2 – Catalytic converter chemistry .......................................................................................... 21
Equation Set 3 – Onroad vehicle maintenance .......................................................................................... 22
Equation Set 4 – Onroad vehicles repair facilities ...................................................................................... 23
Equation Set 5 – Onroad vehicle insurance................................................................................................ 24
Equation Set 6 – Onroad infrastructure roadway construction ................................................................... 29
Equation Set 7 – Onroad infrastructure roadway maintenance damage factors ........................................ 29
Equation Set 8 – Onroad infrastructure roadway maintenance.................................................................. 30
Equation Set 9 – Onroad infrastructure parking construction and maintenance ........................................ 31
Equation Set 10 – Onroad infrastructure roadway and parking lighting ..................................................... 32
Equation Set 11 – Onroad infrastructure herbicides and salting ................................................................ 33
Equation Set 12 – Onroad fuel production.................................................................................................. 36
Equation Set 13 - Rail vehicle manufacturing............................................................................................. 48
Equation Set 14 - Rail vehicle operation..................................................................................................... 50
Equation Set 15 - Rail vehicle maintenance ( routine maintenance)........................................................... 51
Equation Set 16 - Rail vehicle maintenance ( cleaning) .............................................................................. 51
Equation Set 17 - Rail vehicle maintenance ( flooring replacement)........................................................... 52
Equation Set 18 - Rail vehicle insurance .................................................................................................... 53
Equation Set 19 - Rail infrastructure station construction........................................................................... 59
Equation Set 20 - Rail infrastructure station operation – station lighting .................................................... 60
Equation Set 21 - Rail infrastructure station operation – escalators........................................................... 61
Equation Set 22 - Rail infrastructure station operation – train control ........................................................ 61
Equation Set 23 - Rail infrastructure station operation – parking lot lighting .............................................. 62
Equation Set 24 - Rail infrastructure station operation – miscellaneous .................................................... 62
Equation Set 25 - Rail infrastructure station operation – inventory............................................................. 62
Equation Set 26 - Rail infrastructure station maintenance.......................................................................... 63
Equation Set 27 - Rail infrastructure station cleaning................................................................................. 63
Equation Set 28 - Rail infrastructure parking .............................................................................................. 64
Equation Set 29 - Rail infrastructure track construction.............................................................................. 67
Equation Set 30 - Rail infrastructure maintenance for BART, Caltrain, and CAHSR................................. 68
Equation Set 31 - Rail infrastructure maintenance for Muni and the Green Line ....................................... 68
Equation Set 32 - Rail electricity precombustion and transmission and distribution losses ....................... 73
Equation Set 33 – Aircraft manufacturing ................................................................................................... 85
Equation Set 34 – Aircraft at or near- airport operations ............................................................................. 87
Equation Set 35 – Aircraft cruise operations............................................................................................... 88
Equation Set 36 – Aircraft maintenance ..................................................................................................... 89
Equation Set 37 – Airport buildings inventory............................................................................................. 92
Equation Set 38 – Airport infrastructure runway, taxiway, and tarmac construction and maintenance ..... 93
Equation Set 39 – Airport infrastructure operations.................................................................................... 95
Equation Set 40 – Airport infrastructure parking construction and maintenance........................................ 95
Equation Set 41 – Airport insurance ........................................................................................................... 96
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 8 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
List of Acronyms and Symbols
α β
γ
,
IO− I Impact for mode ( α), system component ( β), and functional unit ( γ)
Modes ( α) are onroad ( autos and buses), rail, and air
Functional units are impacts per vehicle lifetime, VMT, and PMT
Impacts ( IO = Input or Output) include:
􀂬 Energy inputs
􀂬 Greenhouse Gases ( GHG in Carbon Dioxide Equivalence) outputs
􀂬 Criteria Pollutants ( SO2, CO, NOX, VOC, Pb, PM) outputs
$ U. S. dollars in 2005 unless otherwise stated
§ Section
B Billion
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit
CAHSR California High Speed Rail
CAP Criteria air pollutants
CO Carbon Monoxide
EF Emission Factor
EIOLCA Economic Input- Output Life- cycle Assessment
GGE Grams of Greenhouse Gas Equivalence
GHG Greenhouse Gases
Green Line Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Green Line Light Rail
J Joule
LCA Life- cycle Assessment
LTO Landing- Takeoff Cycle
M Million
Muni San Francisco Municipal Railway Light Rail
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
PaLATE Pavement Life- cycle Assessment Tool for Environmental and Economic Effects
Pb Lead
PKT Passenger Kilometers Traveled
PMT Passenger Miles Traveled
PMX Particulate Matter ( subscript denotes particle diameter in microns, 10- 6 meters)
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
VKT Vehicle Kilometers Traveled
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
Wh Watt- hour ( watt = joule · second- 1)
g Gram
mt Metric tonne
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 9 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
Powers of Ten
k Kilo ( 103)
M Million or Mega ( 106)
B Billion ( 109)
G Giga ( 109)
T Tera ( 1012)
P Peta ( 1015)
E Exa ( 1018)
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 10 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
1 Abstract
The passenger transportation modes of auto, bus, heavy rail, light rail and air are critical
systems relied upon for business and leisure. When considering their environmental effects,
most studies and policy focus on the fuel use of the vehicles, and ignore the energy and other
resource inputs and environmental outputs from the life cycles of necessary infrastructures,
fuels, and vehicles.
The goal of this project is to develop comprehensive life- cycle assessment ( LCA) models to
quantify the energy inputs and emissions from autos, buses, heavy rail, light rail and air
transportation in the U. S. associated with the entire life cycle ( design, raw materials extraction,
manufacturing, construction, operation, maintenance, end- of- life) of the vehicles, infrastructures,
and fuels involved in these systems. Energy inputs are quantified as well as greenhouse gas
and criteria air pollutant outputs. Inventory results are normalized to effects per vehicle- lifetime,
VMT, and PMT.
Current results show that total energy and greenhouse gas emissions increase by as much as
1.6X for automobiles, 1.4X for buses, 2.6X for light rail, 2.1X for heavy rail, and 1.3X for air over
operation. Criteria air pollutant emissions increase up to 30X for automobiles, 7X for buses, 10X
for light rail, 29X for heavy rail, and 9X for air.
2 Problem Statement
Passenger transportation modes encompass a variety of options for moving people from
sources to destinations. Although the automobile is the most widely used transportation vehicle
in the United States, passengers often have the alternatives of using buses, rail, air or other
modes at economically reasonable prices for their trips. Within urban areas, infrastructure is
typically in place for cars, buses, metro, and light rail [ Levinson 1998a, Maddison 1996, Small
1995, Verhoef 1994]. For traveling longer distances, between regions or states, cars, buses,
heavy rail, and air infrastructure provide passengers with affordable modes of transport
[ Mayeres 1996].
A few studies have already been published analyzing the life- cycle environmental effects of
automobiles [ MacLean 1998, Sullivan 1998, Delucchi 1997]. However, a comprehensive,
systematic study of the life- cycle environmental effects of these modes in the United States has
not yet been published. The environmental impacts of passenger transportation modes are
typically understood at the operational level. In quantification of energy impacts and emissions,
these modes have been analyzed at the vehicle level. To fully understand the system- wide,
comprehensive environmental implications, analysis should be performed on the other life- cycle
phases of these modes as well: design, raw materials extraction, manufacturing, construction,
operation, maintenance, and end- of- life of the infrastructure and vehicles.
3 Methodology
The passenger transportation sectors play a key role in the economy of moving people between
sources and destinations, but are some of the largest energy consumers and polluters in our
society [ Greene 1997, Mayeres 1996]. Some statistics have been compiled comparing the
environmental impacts of these modes of transportation, but few consider anything beyond the
operational impact of the vehicle [ GREET 2004]. Environmental regulations, primarily at the
government level, are made using these statistics to target energy and emission reductions for
transportation modes. The aircraft emission standard is just one example of this practice. The
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 11 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
EPA Office of Transportation and Air Quality ( OTAQ) is responsible for regulating aircraft
emissions, but considers only operation of the vehicle while ignoring the environmental impacts
that result from the design, construction, and end- of- life of the infrastructure and vehicles. The
United Nations International Civil Aviation Organization ( ICAO) performs a similar role of
suggesting standards for aircraft emissions for the global community.
A comprehensive environmental assessment comparing passenger transportation modes has
not yet been published. To appropriately address the environmental impacts of these modes, it
is necessary to accurately quantify the entire life- cycle of the infrastructure and vehicles.
Informed decisions should not be made on partial data acting as indicators for whole system
performance. Some studies have been completed for rail transportation vehicles at specific
stages in the lifecycle ( Table 1). These studies tend to quantify social costs at each stage
without considering the full environmental costs.
Table 1 - Scope of Work
Design
Production,
Construction,
or Manufacturing
Operation End- of- Life
Roadways & Other
Infrastructure N M, N, AO M, N, AO N, AO
Cars & Trucks K, L, N, AJ, AK, AN J, K, L, M, N, AH, AJ,
AK, AM, AN
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K,
L, M, N, AJ, AM, AN K, L, M, N, AJ, AL
Fuel ( Gasoline) A, S, AD, AO
Roadways & Other
Infrastructure N M, N, AO M, N, AO N, AO
Vehicles Q, R, AP
Fuel ( Diesel) AO
Airports & Runways AO O AO
Aircraft AO G, H, I, O, U, V, W,
AI, AO AO
Fuel ( Kerosene) AO
Tracks & Stations N N, AB, AE, AF, AG,
AO N, X, AO N, AO
Trains N J, N, AE, AO F, H, J, N, P, X, Y, Z, AA,
AB, AC, AE, AO N, AO
Fuel ( Diesel, Electric) T, AO
Sources: A. Delucchi 1997 ( Economic); B. Madison 1996 ( Economic); C. Mayeres 1996 ( Economic); D. Verhoef 1994 ( Economic); E. Small 1995
( Economic); F. Levinson 1996 ( Economic); G. Levinson 1998b ( Economic); H. INFRAS 1994 ( Economic); I. Schipper 2003 ( Economic); J. Stodolsky
1998 ( Freight); K. Sullivan 1998; L. MacLean 1998; M. Marheineke 1998 ( Freight); N. Nocker 2000 ( Freight); O. FAA 2007; P. Fritz 1994; Q. Clark
2003; R. Cohen 2003; S. MacLean 2003; T. Deru 2007; U. Greene 1992; V. EEA 2006; W. EPA 1999b; X. Fels 1978; Y. EPA 1997; Z. Andersson
2006; AA. Jorgenson 1997; AB. Pikarsky 1981; AC. Healy 1973; AD. Farrell 2006; AE. Lave 1977; AF. Bei 1978; AG. Carrington 1984; AH. Cobas-
Flores 1998; AI. Lee 2001; AJ. Sullivan 1995; AK. Gediga 1998; AL. Cobas- Flores 1998b; AM. Di Carlo 1998; AN. Kaniut 1997; AO. Facanha 2007
( Freight); AP. McCormick 2000.
Rail
Bus
Automobile
Air
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 12 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
With increasing environmental regulation and pressures from consumers and the public, it is
important that complete data be presented to target areas of opportunity for improvement.
These data will be valuable to private and governmental organizations. Private entities ( such as
transportation companies) will have the information to proactively address the environmentally
“ weak points” of their transportation systems and improve the sustainability, and ultimately the
competitiveness, of their networks. The manufacturing sector ( e. g., aircraft companies) will have
the information to improve their processes and technologies, avoiding the future impact of
government regulations and policies. Government agencies will have the data to improve on
their policies to reduce environmental impacts.
The environmental effects of transportation should not be measured by a single stage in the life
cycle of the infrastructure or vehicle. A methodology for understanding the impacts of these
modes should be created to accurately quantify the environmental impacts. Accurate
quantification will provide an improved understanding of the resource inputs and emissions
associated with each mode at each stage.
3.1 Life- cycle Assessment ( LCA)
The vehicles, infrastructure, fuels that serve these modes are complex with many resource
inputs and environmental outputs. Their analysis involves many processes. The most
comprehensive tool for dealing with these complexities and for quantifying environmental effects
is life- cycle assessment ( LCA).
LCA has become the necessary systematic method in pollution prevention and life- cycle
engineering to analyze the environmental implications associated with products, processes, and
services through the different stages of the life cycle: design, materials and energy acquisition,
transportation, manufacturing, construction, use and operation, maintenance,
repair/ renovation/ retrofit, and end- of- life treatment ( reuse, recycling, incineration, landfilling)
[ Curran 1996]. The Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, as well as the International Organization for Standardization
( ISO) have helped develop and promote LCA over the last 15 years [ Fava 1991, Bare 2003,
ISO 2000]. The LCA methodology consists of four stages ( Figure 1): definition of the goal and
scope of the study and determining the boundaries; inventory analysis involving data collection
and calculation of the environmental burdens associated with the functional unit and each of the
life- cycle stages; impact assessment of regional, global, and human health effects of emissions;
and interpretation of the results in the face of uncertainty, subjected to sensitivity analysis, and
prepared for communication to stakeholders.
In this research, we will use a combination of two LCA models:
• the process model approach that identifies and quantifies resource inputs and
environmental outputs at each life- cycle stage based on unit process modeling and
mass- balance calculations [ Curran 1996, Keoleian 1993], and
• the Economic Input- Output Analysis- based LCA as a general equilibrium model of the
U. S. economy that integrates economic input- output analysis and publicly available
environmental databases for inventory analysis of the entire supply chain associated
with a product or service [ Hendrickson 1998].
The process- based LCA maps every process associated with a product within the system
boundaries, and associates energy and material inputs and environmental outputs and wastes
with each process. Although this model enables specific analyses, it is usually time- and cost-intensive
due to heavy data requirements, especially when the first, second, third, etc. tiers of
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 13 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
suppliers is attempted to be included. An alternative LCA model has been created to overcome
some of the challenges posed by process- based LCA [ Hendrickson 1998]. The economic input-output
analysis- based LCA adds environmental data to economic input- output modeling. This
well- established econometric model quantifies the interdependencies among the different
sectors, effectively mapping the economic interactions along a supply chain of any product or
service in an economy. A specific final demand ( purchase) induces demand not just for that
commodity, but also for a series of products and services in the entire supply chain that is
accounted for in input- output analysis. EIOLCA associates economic output from a sector ( given
in producer prices, e. g., $ 100,000 worth of steel manufactured) with environmental metrics ( e. g.,
energy, air pollutants, hazardous waste generation, etc. associated with steel production)
[ EIOLCA 2007]. Even though this model results in a comprehensive and industry- wide
environmental assessment, it may not offer the level of detail included in a well- executed
process- based LCA. This is especially critical when the studied commodity falls into a sector
that is broadly defined ( e. g., plastics manufacturing), or when the product’s use phase is
analyzed ( e. g., burning diesel in a locomotive). A hybrid LCA model that combines the
advantages of both process model- based LCA and economic input- output- based LCA is the
appropriate approach for the most comprehensive studies, and it will be employed in this
research [ Suh 2004]. Figure 1 shows the stages of the LCA that will be analyzed.
Figure 1 - A conceptual model of the life- cycle components of each mode
Energy, Material, Process, & Service Inputs
Design Production Use End- of- Life
Greenhouse Gas & Criteria Air Pollutant Outputs
3.2 Environmental Effects Studied
We will quantify the energy inputs, greenhouse gas emissions ( carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide,
methane) and criteria air pollutant emissions ( particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides, lead, volatile organic compounds) associated with the life cycles of
vehicles, infrastructure, fuels associated with each mode.
The emissions are of concern because:
• Greenhouse Gases – global climate change and its effects
• Sulfur Dioxide ( SO2) – respiratory irritant, precursor for acid deposition
• Carbon Monoxide ( CO) – asphyxiate
• Nitrogen Oxides ( NOX) – respiratory irritant, contributes to ground level ozone formation
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 14 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
• Volatile Organic Compounds ( VOC) – potentially carcinogenic, contributes to ground
level ozone formation
• Particulate Matter ( PM) – affects respiratory system, cardiovascular system, and
damages lung tissue
• Lead ( Pb) – neurotoxin
3.3 Availability of Lead Data
For many life- cycle components, lead airborne emission data is not reported but other CAP
emissions are. This leads to a dilemma in reporting of total emissions. While lead data exists for
some components in a mode, it had not been determined for all components. Further effort
would be needed to find, if available, additional lead emission data for several products and
processes. To not give the impression that total lead inventories have been computed in the LCI
of a mode, reporting of final results excludes this pollutant. This is not to say, however, that lead
has been excluded entirely in this analysis. Where lead data exists, it has been compiled and
reported, particularly in the LCI sections for each mode. Discussion is also presented on where
and why that lead is produced. For any mode, the lead emissions reported represent only a
fraction of total emissions.
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 15 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
4 Data Sources
Across the five modes and twelve vehicles, many data sources were used to analyze the
environmental inventory and normalize values to the functional units. These data sources are
described in further sections in each mode’s inventory. The following tables summarize these
data sources for the purpose of availability and reproducibility. The tables are arranged by life-cycle
component where for each stage, both the data source and LCA type ( process, EIOLCA,
hybrid) is reported.
Table 2 - Onroad data sources
Data Sources LCA Type
Vehicle
Manufacturing
Manufacturing AN 2005 EIOLCA
Operation
Running EPA 2006, Mobile 2003 Process
Startup Mobile 2003 Process
Braking Mobile 2003 Process
Tire Wear Mobile 2003 Process
Evaporative Losses Mobile 2003 Process
Idling CARB 2002, Clarke 2005, McCormick 2000 Process
Maintenance
Vehicle AAA 2006, FTA 2005b EIOLCA
Tire Production AAA 2006, FTA 2005b EIOLCA
Automotive Repair CARB 1997 Process
Insurance
Fixed Costs / Insurance AAA 2006, FTA 2005b, APTA 2006 EIOLCA
Infrastructure
Construction & Maintenance
Roadway Construction FHWA 2000, AASHTO 2001, PaLATE, EPA 2001 Hybrid
Roadway Maintenance FTA 2006, PaLATE, EPA 2001 Hybrid
Roadway & Parking Lighting EERE 2002, Deru 2007 Process
Parking IPI 2007, EPA 2005, TRB 1991, Census 2002, MR 2007,
Guggemos 2005, PaLATE, EPA 2001 Hybrid
Operation
Herbicides & Salt Production EPA 2001b, TRB 1991 EIOLCA
Fuel
Gasoline & Diesel Production EIA 2007, EIA 2007b EIOLCA
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 16 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
Table 3 - Rail data sources
Data Sources LCA Type
Vehicles
Manufacturing
Vehicle Manufacturing SimaPro, Breda 2007, Breda 2007b Process
Operation
Propulsion, Idling, Auxiliaries Fels 1977, FTA 2005, Caltrain 2007c, Fritz 1994,
Anderrson 2006, Deru 2007 Process
Maintenance
Vehicle SimaPro Process
Cleaning SFG 2006, EERE, BuiLCA Process
Flooring Replacement SFG 2006 EIOLCA
Insurance
Operator Health and Benefits BART 2006c, Muni 2007, FTA 2005 EIOLCA
Vehicle Incidentals BART 2006c, FTA 2005, Muni 2007, CAHSR 2005, FRA
1997, Levinson 1996
EIOLCA
Infrastructure
Construction & Maintenance
Station Construction BART 2006, BART 2007e, Bombardier 2007, Guggemos
2005
Hybrid
Track Construction BART 2007, SVRTC 2006, Carrington 1984, Muni 2006,
PB 1999, Bei 1978, WBZ 2007, Griest 1915, WSDOT
2007, WSDOT 2007b, USGS 1999
Hybrid
Track Maintenance SimaPro, MBTA 2007, FAA 2007 Process
Station Maintenance BART 2006, BART 2007e, Bombardier 2007, Guggemos
2005
Hybrid
Station Parking SFC 2007b, Caltrain 2004, MBTA 2007, PaLATE, EPA
2001
Hybrid
Operation
Station Lighting Fels 1977, Deru 2007 Process
Station Escalators EERE 2007, FTA 2005, Fels 1977, Deru 2007 Process
Train Control Fels 1977, Deru 2007 Process
Station Parking Lighting Deru 2007 Process
Station Miscellaneous Fels 1977, MEOT 2005, EIA 2005 Process
Station Cleaning Paulsen, Deru 2007 Process
Insurance
Non- Operator Health and Benefits BART 2006c, Muni 2007, FTA 2005 EIOLCA
Infrastructure Incidentals BART 2006c, FTA 2005, Muni 2007, CAHSR 2005, FRA
1997, Levinson 1996
EIOLCA
Fuels
Indirect Energy Production Deru 2007 Process
Transmission and Distribution Losses Deru 2007 Process
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 17 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2
Table 4 - Air data sources
Data Sources LCA Type
Vehicle
Manufacturing
Airframe Janes 2004, AIA 2007, Boeing 2007 EIOLCA
Engine Jenkins 1999 EIOLCA
Operation
Auxiliary Power Unit FAA 2007 Process
Startup FAA 2007 Process
Taxi Out FAA 2007 Process
Take Off FAA 2007 Process
Climb Out FAA 2007 Process
Cruise EEA 2006, Romano 1999 Process
Approach FAA 2007 Process
Taxi In FAA 2007 Process
Maintenance
Lubrication and Fuel Changes EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Battery Repair and Replacement EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Chemical Application EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Parts Cleaning EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Metal Finishing EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Coating Application EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Painting EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Depainting EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Engine EPA 1998, BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Insurance
Vehicle Incidents BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Flight Crew Health & Benefits BTS 2007b EIOLCA
Infrastructure
Construction & Maintenance
Airport Construction MWAA 2005, GE 2007, MWAA 2007, RSM 2002 EIOLCA
Runway, Taxiways, and Tarmacs Sandel 2006, FAA 1996, GE 2007, PaLATE, EPA 2001 Hybrid
Airport Maintenance
Airport Parking MWA 2007, PaLATE, EPA 2001 Hybrid
Operation
Runway Lighting EERE 2002, Deru 2007 Process
Deicing Fluid Production EPA 2000 EIOLCA
Ground Support Equipment FAA 2007, EPA 1999 Process
Insurance
Airport Insurance MWAA 2005 EIOLCA
Non- Flight Crew Health & Benefits MWAA 2005 EIOLCA
Fuel
Production SimaPro Process
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 18 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
5 Life- cycle Inventory of Automobiles and Urban Buses
Cars, light trucks, and transit buses consumed 18M TJ of energy in 2005, approximately 60% of
the 31M TJ consumed in the U. S. by the entire transportation sector [ Davis 2007]. The impact of
these vehicles is felt not just directly through fuel consumption and tail- pipe emissions but also
in the infrastructure and life- cycle components required to support them.
Automobiles come in many different configurations but can be generalized into the three major
categories: sedan, SUV, and pickup truck. Additionally, a typical diesel- powered urban transit
bus is evaluated.
5.1 Vehicles
To select the most typical vehicles representing the three automobile categories, vehicle sales
data is evaluated for 2005 [ Wards 2006]. Table 5 shows the ranking of vehicle sales in 2005 for
the three categories. Representative vehicles are assumed to be the top selling models for the
year. The vehicle categories represent extremes in environmental impacts of conventional
gasoline vehicles. The sedan is the most fuel efficient and lightest vehicle ( representing the best
vehicle on the road), the sport utility has poor fuel efficiency and is the heaviest, and the pickup
also has poor fuel efficiency and high weight ( and is the highest selling vehicle). The sedan
averages 1.58 people per car, the SUV 1.74, and the pickup 1.46 [ Davis 2006].
Table 5 - 2005 automobile sales by vehicle type
Rank Model Number Model Number Model Number
1 Toyota Camry 431,703 Chevrolet TrailBlazer 244,150 Ford F- Series 854,878
2 Honda Accord 369,293 Ford Explorer 239,788 Chevrolet Silverado 705,980
3 Toyota Corolla/ Matrix 341,290 Jeep Grand Cherokee 213,584 Dodge Ram Pickup 400,543
4 Honda Civic 308,415 Jeep Liberty 166,883 GMC Sierra 229,488
5 Nissan Altima 255,371 Chevrolet Tahoe 152,305 Toyota Tacoma 168,831
6 Chevrolet Impala 246,481 Dodge Durango 115,439 Chevrolet Colorado 128,359
7 Chevrolet Malibu 245,861 Ford Expedition 114,137 Toyota Tundra 126,529
8 Chevrolet Cobalt 212,667 GMC Envoy 107,862 Ford Ranger 120,958
9 Ford Taurus 196,919 Toyota 4Runner 103,830 Dodge Dakota 104,051
10 Ford Focus 184,825 Chevrolet Suburban 87,011 Nissan Titan 86,945
11 Ford Mustang 160,975 Jeep Wrangler 79,017 Nissan Frontier 72,838
12 Chrysler 300 Series 144,048 Nissan Pathfinder 76,156 Chevrolet Avalanche 63,186
13 Hyundai Sonata 130,365 GMC Yukon 73,458 Honda Ridgeline 42,593
14 Pontiac Pontiac G6 124,844 Nissan Xterra 72,447 GMC Canyon 34,845
15 Pontiac Grand Prix 122,398 GMC Yukon XL 53,652 Lincoln LT 10,274
16 Nissan Sentra 119,489 Kia Sorento 47,610 Chevrolet SSR 8,107
17 Hyundai Elandra 116,336 Toyota Sequoia 45,904 Cadillac Escalade EXT 7,766
18 Dodge Neon 113,332 Nissan Armada 39,508 Subaru Baja 6,239
19 Ford Five Hundred 107,932 Mercedes M- Class 34,959 Mazda Pickup 5,872
20 Toyota Prius 107,897 Lexus GX470 34,339 Mitsubishi Raider 1,145
Sedan Sport Utility Pickup
The Toyota Camry, Chevrolet Trailblazer, and Ford F- Series are used to determine total life-cycle
environmental impacts of automobiles. A 40- foot bus is chosen as the representative U. S.
urban transit bus based on sales data [ FTA 2006]. These buses represent about 75% of transit
buses purchased each year. The average occupancy of the bus is 10.5 passengers [ FHA 2004].
It is assumed that an off- peak bus has 5 passengers and a peak bus 40 passengers.
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 19 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Several vehicle parameters are identified for normalization of inventory results to the functional
units: effect per vehicle lifetime, vehicle- mile- traveled, and passenger- mile- traveled. Sedans are
assigned a 16.9 year lifetime, SUVs 15.5 years, and pickups 15.5 years, the median lifetime of
each vehicle [ Davis 2006]. The lifetime of a bus is specified as 12 years which is the industry
standard retirement age [ FTA 2006]. The average annual VMT for all automobiles was 11,100
and for buses 42,000 ( which is the annual mileage given a mandatory 500,000 mile lifetime)
[ Davis 2006, FTA 2006]. Lastly, PMT is calculated from VMT. The vehicle- specific factors are
summarized in Table 6.
Table 6 - Onroad vehicle parameters
Sedan SUV Pickup Bus
Vehicle Weight ( lbs) 3,200 4,600 5,200 25,000
Vehicle Lifetime ( yrs) 16.9 15.5 15.5 12
Yearly VMT ( mi/ yr) 11,000 11,000 11,000 42,000
Average Vehicle Occupancy ( pax) 1.58 1.74 1.46 10.5
Yearly PMT ( mi/ yr) 17,000 19,000 16,000 440,000
5.1.1 Manufacturing
The production of an automobile is a complex process relying on many activities and materials.
Several studies have estimated the impacts of automobile production sometimes including
limited direct and indirect impacts [ MacLean 1998, Sullivan 1998]. The production of an
automobile matches the economic sector Automobile and Light Truck Manufacturing (# 336110)
in EIOLCA which serves as a good estimate for the total direct and indirect impacts of the
process. This sector in EIOLCA is used to determine the total inventory for the three
automobiles. To determine automobile production costs,
the base invoice price is used. This is the price the
manufacturer sells the vehicle at to the dealer. A 20%
markup is removed from this price to exclude markups
and marketing. The base invoice prices are $ 21,000 for
the sedan, $ 29,000 for the SUV, and $ 20,000 for the
pickup [ AN 2005]. Reducing these prices by the markup
and inputting in EIOLCA produces the vehicle
environmental inventory. The general mathematical
framework is shown in Equation Set 1.
The bus manufacturing inventory is computed similarly.
An invoice price of $ 310,000 is used with a similar
markup [ FTA 2006]. Life- cycle assessments of bus
manufacturing have not been performed. The economic sector Heavy Duty Truck Manufacturing
(# 336120) was assumed to reasonably estimate the inventory for bus production.
Figure 2 – Automobile manufacturing
Source: http:// images. jupiterimages. com/
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 20 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Equation Set 1 – Onroad vehicle manufacturing
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I vehicle life
VMT
I I vehicle life
I I
onroad manufacturing
IO PMT
onroad manufacturing
IO VMT
onroad manufacturing
IO vehicle lifetime
×
−
= ×
−
= ×
= =
−
−
− −
,
,
, Impact determined from EIOLCA
5.1.2 Operation
Emissions from vehicle operation are computed using the EPA Mobile 6.2 model [ EPA 2003].
This software is designed to allow input of vehicle, operational, and fuel characteristics while
driving to estimate environmental inventory. Typical operational factors do not disaggregate
emissions into specific components such as driving, startup, tires and brakes, evaporative, and
idling. Instead, emission factors, which are based on hundreds of operating condition
parameters, are presented as representative of typical driving conditions. This does not allow for
specific questions to be answered such as when and where these emissions occurred. This
analysis disaggregates operational emissions by using the Mobile software. Not only are
emissions from driving presented but also from startup, braking, tire wear, evaporative losses,
and idling ( in the case of the bus). It is important to consider these specific conditions for
different reasons. Cold start emissions are the time when your catalytic converter is not
operating at peak efficiency. The catalytic converter’s purpose is to simultaneously oxidize
hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide and reduce nitrogen oxides through the chemistry in
Equation Set 2. During the time when the catalytic converter is not running optimally, your NOX,
VOC, and CO emissions will be larger ( in grams per VMT) than when the converter is warm.
Equation Set 2 – Catalytic converter chemistry
Oxidation Reactions:
2 · HNCM + ½ · ( N+ 4 · M) · O2 → N · H2O + M · CO2
2 · CO + O2 → 2 · CO2
Reduction Reaction:
2 · NOX → N2 + X · O2
PM emissions do not typically distinguish between combustion, tire wear, and brake pad wear.
With fluctuations in daily temperature, some gasoline in the fuel tank volatilizes and escapes in
the form of VOCs. This can also happen just after engine shut- off when fuel not in the tank
volatilizes ( hot- soak, resting, running, and crankcase losses are disaggregated). Additionally,
VOCs are emitted during refueling. These evaporative emissions are computed separately from
operational VOC emissions. Lastly, the time a bus spends idling can be as large as 20%
depending on the drive cycle [ CARB 2002]. While engine loads are lower than during driving,
fuel is still consumed and emissions result.
The Mobile software requires several inputs in order to calculate the inventory. The combined
fuel economy for each vehicle type is specified as 28 for the sedan, 17 for the SUV, 16 for the
pickup, and 6.2 for the bus [ EPA 2006]. Two scenarios are run: one for the summer months
where the average temperature is between 72 and 92° F and one for the winter months with
average temperatures between 20 and 40° F. In both scenarios, the Reid Vapor Pressure is
specified as 8.7 lbs/ in2 and a diesel sulfur fuel content of 500 ppm is used. The average
emission values are used from the summer and winter scenarios. Table 7 summarizes these
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 21 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
emission values. Energy consumption in the fuel is computed from fuel economy estimates and
the fuel’s energy content.
Table 7 – Emissions ( g/ VMT) from Mobile
Summer Winter Average Summer Winter Average Summer Winter Average Summer Winter Average
Operational Emissions
CO2 365 368 367 482 477 479 479 476 477 2,373 2,374 2,373
SO2 0.02 0.21 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.74 0.74 0.74
CO 9.5 12.4 10.9 9.6 13.8 11.7 9.6 14.0 11.8 4.4 4.5 4.5
NOX 0.80 0.89 0.85 0.76 0.92 0.84 1.00 1.21 1.10 17.65 17.99 17.82
VOC 0.28 0.35 0.31 0.33 0.43 0.38 0.35 0.46 0.41 0.55 0.56 0.55
Lead 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
PM10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.66 0.68 0.67
Non- Operational Emissions
Startup - CO 2.4 12.1 7.3 3.7 14.6 9.1 4.4 14.7 9.5 0.0 0.0 0.0
Startup - NOX 0.15 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.21 0.19 0.20 0.26 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00
Startup - VOC 0.22 0.48 0.35 0.28 0.62 0.45 0.30 0.66 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00
Brake Wear - PM10 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Tire Wear - PM10 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Evaporative Losses - VOC 0.81 0.29 0.55 0.72 0.28 0.50 0.72 0.28 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sedan SUV Pickup Bus
Multiplying the average emission factors in Table 7 for each vehicle by the VMT in the vehicle’s
lifetime yields the effect per vehicle lifetime. Similarly, dividing by the average occupancy yields
the effect per PMT.
For the bus, vehicle idling fuel consumption and emissions are computed differently. Average
bus idling fuel and emission factors of 0.47 gallons of diesel per hour, 4,600 g CO2/ hr, 80 g
CO/ hr, 120 g NOX/ hr, 8 g VOC/ hr, and 3 g PM10/ hr are used [ Clarke 2005, McCormick 2000].
Idling hours are based on the Orange County Drive Cycle with an average speed of 12 mi/ hr
[ CARB 2002].
5.1.3 Maintenance
Vehicle maintenance is separated into maintenance of the vehicle and tire replacement.
Maintenance and tire costs for sedans and SUVs are estimated by the American Automobile
Association ( AAA). Maintenance costs are $ 0.05/ VMT for the sedan and $ 0.056/ VMT for the
SUV. Tire costs are $ 0.008/ VMT for the sedan and SUV [ AAA 2006]. Pickup costs are
extrapolated from vehicle weights. For buses, the total yearly operating cost is $ 7.8/ VMT of
which 20% is attributed to maintenance [ FTA 2005b]. Multiplying lifetime VMT by these factors
yields lifetime costs for the two components. To estimate energy inputs and emission outputs
from automobile maintenance, EIOLCA is used because of the commensurate economic
sectors and processes. The Automotive Repair and Maintenance (# 8111A0) and Tire
Manufacturing (# 326210) sectors are used for the two components. The general framework for
normalizing these maintenance inventories to the functional units is shown in Equation Set 3.
Equation Set 3 – Onroad vehicle maintenance
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I vehicle life
VMT
I I vehicle life
I I
onroad ma enance
IO PMT
onroad ma enance
IO VMT
onroad ma enance
IO vehicle lifetime
×
−
= ×
−
= ×
= =
−
−
− −
, int
, int
, int Impact determined from EIOLCA
5.1.4 Automotive Repair
The use of brake cleaners, carburetor cleaners, choke cleaners, and engine degreasers
releases emissions which should be attributed to the automobile and bus infrastructure. The
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 22 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
California Air Resources Board Consumer Products Program has quantified the emissions of
VOCs and CO2 from production of 100 product categories [ CARB 1997]. The emissions of
automotive brake cleaners, carburetor and choke cleaners, and engine degreasers are reported
as 5.61, 6.48, and 2.21 tons per day for VOCs and 0.43, 0.15, and 0.04 tons per day for CO2 in
1997 in California. Energy inputs and other CAP emissions are not reported. The use of the
cleaners and degreasers encompasses not only automobiles but the entire spectrum of onroad
vehicles. In order to determine emissions per vehicle in the U. S., it is necessary to know the
California vehicle mix in 1997 as well as the number of VMT. Fleet characteristics are
determined from California and national fleet statistics [ Wards 1998, BTS 2005]. The California
fleet mix is not significantly different than the national average so extrapolation of total California
emissions to national emissions is done based on the number of vehicles. Implementing the
U. S. fleet mix in 2005 allows for the determination of total national VOC and CO2 emissions
from repair facilities. These stock emissions are then attributed to the sedan, SUV, pickup, and
urban bus as shown in Equation Set 4.
Equation Set 4 – Onroad vehicles repair facilities
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
onroad auto repair
IO VOC CO
onroad auto repair
IO PMT
vehicle
vehicle
onroad auto repair
IO VOC CO
onroad auto repair
IO VMT
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
onroad auto repair
IO VOC CO
onroad auto repair
IO vehicle lifetime
US
CA
onroad auto repair CA US
IO VOC CO
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I fleet share yr
VMT
I I fleet share yr
vehicle life
VMT
VMT
I I fleet share yr
yr
emission
vehicles
vehicles
yr
I emission
= × − × ×
= × − ×
−
= × − × ×
= × =
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
− −
−
−
,
/ 2
,
,
/ 2
,
,
/ 2
,
,
/ 2
5.1.5 Insurance
The money paid towards vehicle insurance provides the critical service of liability coverage. This
service requires facilities and operations which consume energy and emit pollutants. The
average cost of insuring a sedan is $ 900 per year and an SUV $ 920 per year in the U. S. [ AAA
2006]. Based on vehicle weights, it is estimated that a pickup truck costs $ 930 per year to
insure. For buses, the average yearly insurance costs is calculated from yearly operating costs
per mile ($ 7.8/ VMT) and percentage of operating costs attributed to insurance ( 2.6%) [ FTA
2005b, APTA 2006]. This results in an $ 8,500 per bus per year insurance cost.
The EIOLCA sector Insurance Carriers is used to estimate the inventory from this service for
each vehicle type. The lifetime insurance costs ( in $ 1997) is computed and input into this sector
for the environmental inventory as shown in Equation Set 5.
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 23 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Equation Set 5 – Onroad vehicle insurance
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I vehicle life
VMT
I I vehicle life
I
onroad insurance
IO vehicle lifetime
onroad insurance
IO PMT
onroad insurance
IO vehicle lifetime
onroad insurance
IO VMT
onroad insurance
IO vehicle lifetime
×
−
= ×
−
= ×
=
− − −
− − −
− −
, ,
, ,
, Impact determined from EIOLCA
5.1.6 Vehicle Results
The environmental inventories for the life- cycle components associated with the vehicles are
presented in Table 8 to Table 13 with all 3 functional units.
Table 8 – Sedan vehicle inventory
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
V, Manufacture Energy 100 GJ 550 kJ 350 kJ
GHG 8.5 mt GGE 45 g GGE 29 g GGE
SO2 20 kg 110 mg 67 mg
CO 110 kg 560 mg 350 mg
NOX 20 kg 110 mg 66 mg
VOC 21 kg 110 mg 70 mg
PM10 5.7 kg 30 mg 19 mg
Pb 0.027 kg 0.14 mg 0.092 mg
V, Operation ( Running) Energy 890 GJ 4,800 kJ 3,000 kJ
GHG 69 mt GGE 370 g GGE 230 g GGE
SO2 21 kg 110 mg 72 mg
CO 2,100 kg 11,000 mg 6,900 mg
NOX 160 kg 850 mg 530 mg
VOC 59 kg 310 mg 200 mg
PM10 20 kg 110 mg 68 mg
Pb - - -
V, Operation ( Start) CO 1,400 kg 7,300 mg 4,600 mg
NOX 32 kg 170 mg 110 mg
VOC 66 kg 350 mg 220 mg
V, Operation ( Tire) PM10 1.5 kg 8.0 mg 5.1 mg
V, Operation ( Brake) PM10 2.3 kg 13 mg 7.9 mg
V, Automotive Repair GHG 0.00015 mt GGE 0.00078 g GGE 0.00049 g GGE
V, Automotive Repair VOC 3.4 kg 18 mg 11 mg
V, Evaporative Losses VOC 100 kg 550 mg 350 mg
V, Tire Production Energy 19 GJ 99 kJ 63 kJ
GHG 1.3 mt GGE 7.2 g GGE 4.5 g GGE
SO2 2.4 kg 13 mg 8.2 mg
CO 19 kg 100 mg 63 mg
NOX 2.5 kg 13 mg 8.4 mg
VOC 3.2 kg 17 mg 11 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.4 kg 7.5 mg 4.7 mg
V, Maintenance Energy 40 GJ 210 kJ 140 kJ
GHG 3.3 mt GGE 17 g GGE 11 g GGE
SO2 8.4 kg 45 mg 28 mg
CO 33 kg 180 mg 110 mg
NOX 7.7 kg 41 mg 26 mg
VOC 9.7 kg 52 mg 33 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.6 kg 8.8 mg 5.6 mg
V, Fixed Costs / Insurance Energy 13 GJ 69 kJ 44 kJ
GHG 1.1 mt GGE 5.6 g GGE 3.6 g GGE
SO2 2.6 kg 14 mg 8.7 mg
CO 12 kg 62 mg 39 mg
NOX 2.9 kg 16 mg 9.8 mg
VOC 2.2 kg 12 mg 7.3 mg
PM10 0.55 kg 2.9 mg 1.9 mg
Pb - - -
Table 9 - SUV vehicle inventory
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
V, Manufacture Energy 150 GJ 850 kJ 490 kJ
GHG 12 mt GGE 71 g GGE 41 g GGE
SO2 28 kg 160 mg 94 mg
CO 150 kg 870 mg 500 mg
NOX 28 kg 160 mg 94 mg
VOC 29 kg 170 mg 98 mg
PM10 8.1 kg 47 mg 27 mg
Pb 0.039 kg 0.22 mg 0.13 mg
V, Operation ( Running) Energy 1,300 GJ 7,800 kJ 4,500 kJ
GHG 82 mt GGE 480 g GGE 280 g GGE
SO2 4.6 kg 27 mg 16 mg
CO 2,000 kg 12,000 mg 6,700 mg
NOX 140 kg 840 mg 480 mg
VOC 65 kg 380 mg 220 mg
PM10 18 kg 110 mg 61 mg
Pb - - -
V, Operation ( Start) CO 1,600 kg 9,100 mg 5,200 mg
NOX 32 kg 190 mg 110 mg
VOC 78 kg 450 mg 260 mg
V, Operation ( Tire) PM10 1.4 kg 8.0 mg 4.6 mg
V, Operation ( Brake) PM10 2.2 kg 13 mg 7.2 mg
V, Automotive Repair GHG 0.00011 mt GGE 0.00064 g GGE 0.00037 g GGE
V, Automotive Repair VOC 2.5 kg 15 mg 8.5 mg
V, Evaporative Losses VOC 86 kg 500 mg 290 mg
V, Tire Production Energy 17 GJ 99 kJ 57 kJ
GHG 1.2 mt GGE 7.2 g GGE 4.1 g GGE
SO2 2.2 kg 13 mg 7.4 mg
CO 17 kg 100 mg 57 mg
NOX 2.3 kg 13 mg 7.7 mg
VOC 2.9 kg 17 mg 9.8 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.3 kg 7.5 mg 4.3 mg
V, Maintenance Energy 41 GJ 240 kJ 140 kJ
GHG 3.3 mt GGE 19 g GGE 11 g GGE
SO2 8.6 kg 50 mg 29 mg
CO 34 kg 200 mg 110 mg
NOX 7.9 kg 46 mg 26 mg
VOC 10.0 kg 58 mg 33 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.7 kg 9.8 mg 5.7 mg
V, Fixed Costs / Insurance Energy 12 GJ 70 kJ 40 kJ
GHG 0.99 mt GGE 5.7 g GGE 3.3 g GGE
SO2 2.4 kg 14 mg 8.1 mg
CO 11 kg 63 mg 36 mg
NOX 2.7 kg 16 mg 9.1 mg
VOC 2.0 kg 12 mg 6.8 mg
PM10 0.51 kg 3.0 mg 1.7 mg
Pb - - -
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 24 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Table 10 - Pickup vehicle inventory
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
V, Manufacture Energy 100 GJ 580 kJ 400 kJ
GHG 8.3 mt GGE 48 g GGE 33 g GGE
SO2 19 kg 110 mg 77 mg
CO 100 kg 590 mg 410 mg
NOX 19 kg 110 mg 76 mg
VOC 20 kg 120 mg 80 mg
PM10 5.5 kg 32 mg 22 mg
Pb 0.026 kg 0.15 mg 0.11 mg
V, Operation ( Running) Energy 1,400 GJ 8,300 kJ 5,700 kJ
GHG 82 mt GGE 480 g GGE 330 g GGE
SO2 4.6 kg 27 mg 18 mg
CO 2,000 kg 12,000 mg 8,100 mg
NOX 190 kg 1,100 mg 760 mg
VOC 70 kg 410 mg 280 mg
PM10 18 kg 110 mg 73 mg
Pb - - -
V, Operation ( Start) CO 1,600 kg 9,500 mg 6,500 mg
NOX 39 kg 230 mg 160 mg
VOC 83 kg 480 mg 330 mg
V, Operation ( Tire) PM10 1.4 kg 8.0 mg 5.5 mg
V, Operation ( Brake) PM10 2.2 kg 13 mg 8.6 mg
V, Automotive Repair GHG 0.00011 mt GGE 0.00065 g GGE 0.00044 g GGE
V, Automotive Repair VOC 2.6 kg 15 mg 10 mg
V, Evaporative Losses VOC 86 kg 500 mg 340 mg
V, Tire Production Energy 17 GJ 99 kJ 68 kJ
GHG 1.2 mt GGE 7.2 g GGE 4.9 g GGE
SO2 2.2 kg 13 mg 8.8 mg
CO 17 kg 100 mg 68 mg
NOX 2.3 kg 13 mg 9.1 mg
VOC 2.9 kg 17 mg 12 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.3 kg 7.5 mg 5.1 mg
V, Maintenance Energy 41 GJ 240 kJ 160 kJ
GHG 3.3 mt GGE 19 g GGE 13 g GGE
SO2 8.6 kg 50 mg 34 mg
CO 34 kg 200 mg 140 mg
NOX 7.9 kg 46 mg 31 mg
VOC 10.0 kg 58 mg 40 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.7 kg 9.8 mg 6.7 mg
V, Fixed Costs / Insurance Energy 12 GJ 71 kJ 48 kJ
GHG 0.99 mt GGE 5.8 g GGE 4.0 g GGE
SO2 2.4 kg 14 mg 9.7 mg
CO 11 kg 64 mg 44 mg
NOX 2.7 kg 16 mg 11 mg
VOC 2.0 kg 12 mg 8.1 mg
PM10 0.52 kg 3.0 mg 2.1 mg
Pb - - -
Table 11 – Average bus vehicle inventory
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
V, Manufacture Energy 2,000 GJ 4,100 kJ 390 kJ
GHG 160 mt GGE 320 g GGE 31 g GGE
SO2 330 kg 670 mg 64 mg
CO 1,600 kg 3,100 mg 300 mg
NOX 300 kg 600 mg 58 mg
VOC 390 kg 780 mg 75 mg
PM10 87 kg 170 mg 17 mg
Pb 0.32 kg 0.65 mg 0.062 mg
V, Operation ( Running) Energy 11,000 GJ 22,000 kJ 2,100 kJ
GHG 1,200 mt GGE 2,400 g GGE 230 g GGE
SO2 370 kg 740 mg 70 mg
CO 2,200 kg 4,500 mg 420 mg
NOX 8,900 kg 18,000 mg 1,700 mg
VOC 280 kg 550 mg 52 mg
PM10 370 kg 740 mg 71 mg
Pb - - -
V, Operation ( Start) CO - - -
NOX - - -
VOC - - -
V, Operation ( Tire) PM10 6.0 kg 12 mg 1.1 mg
V, Operation ( Brake) PM10 6.3 kg 13 mg 1.2 mg
V, Automotive Repair GHG 0.00014 mt GGE 0.00029 g GGE 0.000027 g GGE
VOC 3.3 kg 6.7 mg 0.63 mg
V, Evaporative Losses VOC - - -
V, Idling Energy 560 GJ 1,100 kJ 110 kJ
GHG 40 mt GGE 80 g GGE 7.6 g GGE
SO2 - - -
CO 690 kg 1,400 mg 130 mg
NOX 1,000 kg 2,100 mg 200 mg
VOC 71 kg 140 mg 14 mg
PM10 25 kg 50 mg 4.7 mg
Pb - - -
V, Tire Production Energy 18 GJ 35 kJ 3.4 kJ
GHG 1.3 mt GGE 2.5 g GGE 0.24 g GGE
SO2 2.3 kg 4.6 mg 0.44 mg
CO 18 kg 36 mg 3.4 mg
NOX 2.4 kg 4.7 mg 0.45 mg
VOC 3.0 kg 6.1 mg 0.58 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.3 kg 2.7 mg 0.25 mg
V, Maintenance Energy 270 GJ 550 kJ 52 kJ
GHG 22 mt GGE 45 g GGE 4.2 g GGE
SO2 57 kg 110 mg 11 mg
CO 230 kg 460 mg 43 mg
NOX 52 kg 100 mg 10.0 mg
VOC 66 kg 130 mg 13 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 11 kg 23 mg 2.1 mg
V, Fixed Costs / Insurance Energy 86 GJ 170 kJ 16 kJ
GHG 7.0 mt GGE 14 g GGE 1.3 g GGE
SO2 17 kg 34 mg 3.3 mg
CO 78 kg 160 mg 15 mg
NOX 19 kg 39 mg 3.7 mg
VOC 14 kg 29 mg 2.7 mg
PM10 3.7 kg 7.3 mg 0.70 mg
Pb - - -
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 25 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Table 12 – Off- Peak bus vehicle inventory
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
V, Manufacture Energy 2,000 GJ 4,100 kJ 820 kJ
GHG 160 mt GGE 320 g GGE 65 g GGE
SO2 330 kg 670 mg 130 mg
CO 1,600 kg 3,100 mg 620 mg
NOX 300 kg 600 mg 120 mg
VOC 390 kg 780 mg 160 mg
PM10 87 kg 170 mg 35 mg
Pb 0.32 kg 0.65 mg 0.13 mg
V, Operation ( Running) Energy 11,000 GJ 22,000 kJ 4,500 kJ
GHG 1,200 mt GGE 2,400 g GGE 470 g GGE
SO2 370 kg 740 mg 150 mg
CO 2,200 kg 4,500 mg 890 mg
NOX 8,900 kg 18,000 mg 3,600 mg
VOC 280 kg 550 mg 110 mg
PM10 370 kg 740 mg 150 mg
Pb - - -
V, Operation ( Start) CO - - -
NOX - - -
VOC - - -
V, Operation ( Tire) PM10 6.0 kg 12 mg 2.4 mg
V, Operation ( Brake) PM10 6.3 kg 13 mg 2.5 mg
V, Automotive Repair GHG 0.00014 mt GGE 0.00029 g GGE 0.000058 g GGE
VOC 3.3 kg 6.7 mg 1.3 mg
V, Evaporative Losses VOC - - -
V, Idling Energy 560 GJ 1,100 kJ 220 kJ
GHG 40 mt GGE 80 g GGE 16 g GGE
SO2 - - -
CO 690 kg 1,400 mg 270 mg
NOX 1,000 kg 2,100 mg 420 mg
VOC 71 kg 140 mg 28 mg
PM10 25 kg 50 mg 10.0 mg
Pb - - -
V, Tire Production Energy 18 GJ 35 kJ 7.1 kJ
GHG 1.3 mt GGE 2.5 g GGE 0.51 g GGE
SO2 2.3 kg 4.6 mg 0.92 mg
CO 18 kg 36 mg 7.1 mg
NOX 2.4 kg 4.7 mg 0.95 mg
VOC 3.0 kg 6.1 mg 1.2 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.3 kg 2.7 mg 0.53 mg
V, Maintenance Energy 270 GJ 550 kJ 110 kJ
GHG 22 mt GGE 45 g GGE 8.9 g GGE
SO2 57 kg 110 mg 23 mg
CO 230 kg 460 mg 91 mg
NOX 52 kg 100 mg 21 mg
VOC 66 kg 130 mg 27 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 11 kg 23 mg 4.5 mg
V, Fixed Costs / Insurance Energy 86 GJ 170 kJ 34 kJ
GHG 7.0 mt GGE 14 g GGE 2.8 g GGE
SO2 17 kg 34 mg 6.9 mg
CO 78 kg 160 mg 31 mg
NOX 19 kg 39 mg 7.8 mg
VOC 14 kg 29 mg 5.8 mg
PM10 3.7 kg 7.3 mg 1.5 mg
Pb - - -
Table 13 – Peak bus vehicle inventory
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
V, Manufacture Energy 2,000 GJ 4,100 kJ 100 kJ
GHG 160 mt GGE 320 g GGE 8.1 g GGE
SO2 330 kg 670 mg 17 mg
CO 1,600 kg 3,100 mg 78 mg
NOX 300 kg 600 mg 15 mg
VOC 390 kg 780 mg 20 mg
PM10 87 kg 170 mg 4.4 mg
Pb 0.32 kg 0.65 mg 0.016 mg
V, Operation ( Running) Energy 11,000 GJ 22,000 kJ 560 kJ
GHG 1,200 mt GGE 2,400 g GGE 59 g GGE
SO2 370 kg 740 mg 18 mg
CO 2,200 kg 4,500 mg 110 mg
NOX 8,900 kg 18,000 mg 450 mg
VOC 280 kg 550 mg 14 mg
PM10 370 kg 740 mg 19 mg
Pb - - -
V, Operation ( Start) CO - - -
NOX - - -
VOC - - -
V, Operation ( Tire) PM10 6.0 kg 12 mg 0.30 mg
V, Operation ( Brake) PM10 6.3 kg 13 mg 0.31 mg
V, Automotive Repair GHG 0.00014 mt GGE 0.00029 g GGE 0.0000072 g GGE
VOC 3.3 kg 6.7 mg 0.17 mg
V, Evaporative Losses VOC - - -
V, Idling Energy 560 GJ 1,100 kJ 28 kJ
GHG 40 mt GGE 80 g GGE 2.0 g GGE
SO2 - - -
CO 690 kg 1,400 mg 34 mg
NOX 1,000 kg 2,100 mg 52 mg
VOC 71 kg 140 mg 3.6 mg
PM10 25 kg 50 mg 1.2 mg
Pb - - -
V, Tire Production Energy 18 GJ 35 kJ 0.88 kJ
GHG 1.3 mt GGE 2.5 g GGE 0.064 g GGE
SO2 2.3 kg 4.6 mg 0.11 mg
CO 18 kg 36 mg 0.89 mg
NOX 2.4 kg 4.7 mg 0.12 mg
VOC 3.0 kg 6.1 mg 0.15 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 1.3 kg 2.7 mg 0.067 mg
V, Maintenance Energy 270 GJ 550 kJ 14 kJ
GHG 22 mt GGE 45 g GGE 1.1 g GGE
SO2 57 kg 110 mg 2.9 mg
CO 230 kg 460 mg 11 mg
NOX 52 kg 100 mg 2.6 mg
VOC 66 kg 130 mg 3.3 mg
PM10 - - -
Pb 11 kg 23 mg 0.56 mg
V, Fixed Costs / Insurance Energy 86 GJ 170 kJ 4.3 kJ
GHG 7.0 mt GGE 14 g GGE 0.35 g GGE
SO2 17 kg 34 mg 0.86 mg
CO 78 kg 160 mg 3.9 mg
NOX 19 kg 39 mg 0.97 mg
VOC 14 kg 29 mg 0.72 mg
PM10 3.7 kg 7.3 mg 0.18 mg
Pb - - -
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 26 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
5.2 Infrastructure
Automobiles and buses cannot functionally exist without the infrastructure that supports them.
Roads, parking lots, lighting, and other components are necessary to allow vehicles to perform
their functions under a wide array of conditions. The infrastructure components included in this
analysis are:
• Roadway construction
• Roadway maintenance
• Parking construction and maintenance
• Roadway lighting
• Herbicides
• Salting
• Repair facilities
The methodologies used to calculate the environmental inventory and normalize results to the
functional units are described in the following sub- sections.
5.2.1 Roadway Construction
Roadways are constructed to achieve vehicle throughput. The following scheme is used to
identify the functionality of roadways in the U. S. [ FHWA 2000]:
• Interstate – Provide the highest mobility levels and highest speeds over long
uninterrupted distances ( typical speeds range from 55 to 75 mi/ hr)
• Arterial – Complement the interstate system but are not classified as interstate ( may be
classified as freeway). Connect major urban areas or industrial centers ( typical speeds
range from 50 to 70 mi/ hr).
• Collector – Connect local roads to interstates and arterials ( typical speeds range from 35
to 55 mi/ hr).
• Local – Provide the lowest mobility levels but are the primary access to residential,
business and other local areas ( typical speeds range from 20 to 45 mi/ hr).
The impacts from roadway construction are estimated
using PaLATE, a pavement life- cycle assessment tool
which estimates the environmental effects of roadway
construction [ PaLATE 2004]. PaLATE allows specification
of parameters for the design, initial construction,
maintenance, and equipment us in roadway construction.
Ten roadway types are evaluated for this analysis:
interstate, major arterials, minor arterials, collectors, and
local roadways in both the urban and rural context.
Roadways are designed with two major components, the
subbase and wearing layers. The subbase includes soil
compaction layers and aggregate bases which serve as
the foundation for the wearing layers. The wearing layers
are the layers of asphalt laid over the subbase. These
layers are what are replaced during roadway resurfacing.
Specifications for each roadway type were taken from the
American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials specifications for roadway design
[ AASHTO 2001]. These are shown in Table 14.
Figure 3 – Roadway construction
Source: http:// eroundlake. com/
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 27 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Table 14 - AASHTO roadway geometry by functional class
Functional Class Traveled Way
Width ( ft)
Both Shoulders
Width ( ft)
Parking
Width ( ft)
Total
Width ( ft) Note
Rural Interstate 48 28 0 76 Two lanes in each direction
Urban Interstate 48 28 0 76 Two lanes in each direction
Rural Major Arterial 23 12 0 35 One lane in each direction
Urban Major Arterial 23 12 0 35 One lane in each direction
Rural Minor Arterial 23 12 0 35 One lane in each direction
Urban Minor Arterial 23 12 11 46 One lane in each direction, parking on one side
Rural Collectors 22 10 0 32 One lane in each direction
Urban Collectors 22 10 10 42 One lane in each direction, parking
Rural Local 21 10 0 31 One lane in each direction
Urban Local 22 4 11 37 One lane in each direction, parking
Using this roadway geometry, specifications are input into PaLATE for environmental factors on
a per- roadway- mile basis ( see Appendix B). The roadway miles by functional class are shown in
Table 15 and are extrapolated out ten years based on historical mileage [ BTS 2005]. Ten years
represents the expected lifetime of the road so all infrastructure analyses evaluate roadways
over this horizon.
Table 15 - Roadway mileage by functional class at 10- year horizon
Interstate Urban Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 28,509
Interstate Rural Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 31,371
Major Arterial Urban Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 62,940
Major Arterial Rural Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 102,332
Minor Arterial Urban Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 109,123
Minor Arterial Rural Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 134,934
Collector Urban Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 113,735
Collector Rural Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 555,127
Local Urban Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 753,078
Local Rural Paved Road Miles ( 2005- 2014) 819,766
Multiplying these mileages by their environmental per- mile factors yields total emissions for
roadway construction. PaLATE computes all environmental factors except for VOCs, which are
computed separately. The asphalt market share is made up of 90% cement type, 3% cutback,
and 7% emulsified [ EPA 2001]. VOC emissions result from the diluent used in the asphalt mix.
Some of material volatilizes and escapes in the form of VOCs during asphalt placement,
estimated at 554 and 58 lbs VOC/ mt asphalt for the cutback and emulsified types. Only the
cutback and emulsified asphalts have diluent. It is estimated that during placement, the diluent
is 28% by volume of the cutback and 7% by volume of the emulsified type [ EPA 2001]. 75% and
95% of the diluent in cutback and emulsified types escapes during placement. Using these
factors, a weighted average VOC emission factor of 3.8 lbs VOC/ mt asphalt is determined for all
asphalt placement in the U. S. ( this includes all three types assuming that the market share type
weightings are used in roadways).
With total roadway constructions impacts of all environmental inventory computed,
normalization can occur to the functional units. This is done using VMT data by vehicle type
again extrapolated to 2014 [ BTS 2005]. Equation Set 6 details the inventory calculations to the
functional units for roadway construction.
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 28 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Equation Set 6 – Onroad infrastructure roadway construction
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
onroad road construction
IO
onroad road construction
IO PMT
vehicle
onroad road construction
IO
onroad road construction
IO VMT
vehicle
onroad road construction
IO
onroad road construction
IO vehicle life
road types
road life
road type
onroad road construction
IO
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I road life
VMT
I I road life
vehicle life
VMT
VMT
I I road life
mi
road mi
effect
I I in
×
−
= ×
−
= ×
−
×
−
= ×
× ⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎣
⎡
−
=
− −
−
− −
−
− −
− −
−
−
−
− Σ
, ,
, ,
, ,
,
5.2.2 Roadway Maintenance
Unlike construction, roadway maintenance is not determined by the number of vehicles but by
their respective weights and resulting damage to the pavement. The damage to a roadway
follows a fourth- power function of axle- loads ( weight per axle). Generally, damage to roadways
results from heavy vehicles such as trucks and buses. Equation Set 7 shows generalized
damage factors computed for various vehicle types ( a vehicle weight of 25,000 lbs is assumed
for the bus and 62,000 lbs for a freight truck) [ FTA 2006, Facanha 2006].
Equation Set 7 – Onroad infrastructure roadway maintenance damage factors
16
4
16
4
13
4
13
4
12
4
4
2.3 10
5
62000
2.4 10
2
25000
4.7 10
2
5200
2.9 10
2
4600
6.9 10
2
3200
#
× = ⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝
= ⎛
× = ⎟⎠
⎞
⎜⎝
= ⎛
× = ⎟⎠
⎞
⎜⎝
= ⎛
× = ⎟⎠
⎞
⎜⎝
= ⎛
× = ⎟⎠
⎞
⎜⎝
= ⎛
⎟⎠
⎞
⎜⎝
⎛
−
−
= =
−
DF lbs
DF lbs
DF lbs
DF lbs
DF lbs
axles
DF DamageFactor vehicle weight
freight truck
bus
pickup
SUV
sedan
While the SUV and pickup do 4 and 7 times more damage to the roadway than the sedan, the
bus and truck do 3,600 and 3,300 times more damage. The effects from the bus and truck dwarf
the effects from any other vehicles as shown in Table 16. As a result, only the maintenance on
roadways attributed to bus traffic is considered.
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 29 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Table 16 - Roadway damage fraction calculations by vehicle and functional class
Sedan Pickup SUV Van Motorcycle Other Bus Transit Bus Freight
Interstate ( Urban) 0.16% 0.39% 0.26% 0.06% 0.00% 1.60% 0.00% 97.54%
Interstate ( Rural) 0.06% 0.15% 0.10% 0.02% 0.00% 1.28% 0.00% 98.39%
Arterial ( Urban) 0.33% 0.83% 0.54% 0.12% 0.00% 1.98% 0.00% 96.20%
Arterial ( Rural) 0.14% 0.34% 0.22% 0.05% 0.00% 1.35% 0.00% 97.91%
Collector ( Urban) 0.33% 0.82% 0.53% 0.12% 0.00% 1.92% 2.99% 93.30%
Collector ( Rural) 0.17% 0.42% 0.27% 0.06% 0.00% 3.04% 5.57% 90.48%
Local ( Urban) 0.32% 0.79% 0.52% 0.11% 0.00% 1.90% 4.05% 92.31%
Local ( Rural) 0.18% 0.44% 0.29% 0.06% 0.00% 3.04% 5.46% 90.53%
Roadway maintenance is considered to be the replacement of the wearing layers after 10 years
on all roadway types. PaLATE is again used to determine the life- cycle emissions from
reconstruction of the wearing layers ( VOCs are again calculated separately). Total emissions for
the U. S. roadway system are then determined using the same methodology described in § 5.2.1.
To determine what portion of total maintenance inventory is attributable to bus operations
requires use of the damage factors. For every VMT by vehicle type, it is multiplied by the
damage factor for the vehicle type to compute total damage. Next, the ratio of bus damage to
roadways to total damage is taken and multiplied by the total impact. This yields the portion of
inventory attributed on roadways to buses based on damage as shown in Equation Set 8.
Equation Set 8 – Onroad infrastructure roadway maintenance
( )
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
onroad road ma enance
IO
onroad road ma enance
IO PMT
vehicle
onroad road ma enance
IO
onroad road ma enance
IO VMT
vehicle
vehicle
onroad road ma enance
IO
onroad road ma enance
IO vehicle lifetime
road types all road type
bus road type
road type
onroad road ma enance
IO
vehicle types
bus bus bus all type type
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I road life
VMT
I I road life
vehicle life
VMT
VMT
I I road life
D
D
I I
D VMT DF D VMT DF
×
−
= ×
−
= ×
−
×
−
= ×
⎟ ⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜ ⎜
⎝
⎛
= ×
= × = ×
− −
−
− −
−
− −
− −
− −
−
−
−
−
Σ
Σ
, int , int
, int , int
, int , int
,
, int ,
5.2.3 Parking
The effects of parking area construction and maintenance are similar to the effects of roadway
construction and maintenance. Energy is required and emissions result from the production and
placement of asphalt. Additionally, parking garages, often constructed of steel, have additional
material and construction requirements. There are an estimated 105M parking spaces in the
U. S. of which ⅓ are on- street with the remaining ⅔ in parking garages and surface lots [ IPI
2007, EPA 2005]. The typical parking space has an area of 300 ft2 plus access ways [ TRB
1991]. Roadside and surface lot parking spaces are assumed to have lifetimes of 10 and 15
years while parking garages have lifetimes of 30 years [ TRB 1991]
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 30 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Parking is disaggregated into roadside, surface lots, and parking garages. The 35M roadside
spaces cover an area of 12B ft2, assumed to be constructed primarily from asphalt. There are
over 16,000 surface lots in the U. S. making up 36M spaces [ Census 2002]. This represents an
area of 18B ft2 assuming an additional 50% area for access ways. Lastly, there are 35,000
parking garages in the U. S. with an average area of 150,000 ft2 per floor [ MR 2007, TRB 1991].
Parking garages constitute 10B ft2 of paved area plus the
impact from the structures. PaLATE is used to determine
total impact from the parking paved area under the
assumption that asphalt is the primary construction
materials [ PaLATE 2004]. All parking surfaces are
assumed to have two wearing layers ( each with a 3 inch
depth). Roadside parking and surface lots also have a
subbase layer with a 12 inch depth. VOC emissions are
calculated separately using the same methodology
described in § 5.2.1. The life- cycle impacts of the parking
garages are computed as a steel- framed structure based
on square- foot estimates [ Guggemos 2005].
Figure 4 – Surface lot
Source: http:// www. denverinfill. com/
With total impacts computed for all three parking space types, the estimated lifetimes are used
to annualize the inventory values. Parking lots are is assumed to increase proportionally with
the number of registered vehicles in the U. S.. With a total annual impact determined, Equation
Set 9 is used to normalize results.
Equation Set 9 – Onroad infrastructure parking construction and maintenance
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
VMT vehicle
onroad parking
IO
onroad parking
IO PMT
vehicle
VMT vehicle
onroad parking
IO
onroad parking
IO VMT
vehicle
vehicle
VMT vehicle
onroad parking
IO
onroad parking
IO vehicle lifetime
onroad parking
IO
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I share yr
VMT
I I share yr
vehicle life
VMT
VMT
I I share yr
I Annual impact from parking construction and ma enance
= × × ×
= × ×
−
= × × ×
=
−
−
− −
,
, ,
,
, ,
,
, ,
, int
5.2.4 Roadway and Parking Lighting
A 2002 U. S. lighting inventory study estimates annual electricity consumption by lighting sectors
including roadways and parking lots [ EERE 2002]. The study estimates electricity consumption
for traffic signals, roadway overhead lights, and parking lot lights. In 2001, these components
consumed 3.6, 31 and 22 TWh [ EERE 2002]. Assuming that roadway and parking lot lighting
increases linearly with road miles, an extrapolation is performed to 2005. Multiplying this
electricity consumption by national electricity production factors yields the environmental
inventory [ Deru 2007]. With the 2005 roadway and parking lighting inventory computed, the
methodology shown in Equation Set 10 is used to normalize to the functional units.
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 31 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Equation Set 10 – Onroad infrastructure roadway and parking lighting
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
IO
road parking lighting yr
onroad road parking lighting
IO PMT
vehicle
IO
road parking lighting yr
onroad road parking lighting
IO VMT
vehicle
vehicle
IO
road parking lighting yr
onroad road parking lighting
IO vehicle lifetime
PMT
VMT
VMT
yr
E
I E EF
VMT
yr
E
I E EF
vehicle life
VMT
VMT
yr
E
I E EF
= × × ×
= × ×
−
= × × ×
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
− −
/ ,
, /
/ ,
, /
/ ,
, /
5.2.5 Herbicides and Salting
Herbicides are routinely used for vegetation management along roadways. The U. S. is the
world’s largest consumer and producer of pesticides primarily due to the dominating share of
world agriculture production [ EPA 2004]. In 2001, the commercial, industrial, and government
sectors in the U. S. consumed 49M lbs of herbicides, roughly 8% of U. S. herbicide consumption.
This amounted to $ 792M ( in $ 2001) in pesticide expenditures. Assuming that herbicide use was
split evenly among the commercial, industrial, and government sectors and that all government
use went to roadways then roadways are responsible for ⅓ of this sector’s usage ( or 16M lbs
and $ 264M in 2001).
Over 70% of U. S. roadways are in potential snow
and ice regions requiring the application of over
10M tons of salt annually [ FHWA 2007, TRB
1991]. The cost of this salt is $ 30 per ton ( in
$ 1991) [ TRB 1991].
The production of herbicides and salt for
application along and on roadways is evaluated.
The energy and emissions from vehicles applying
these compounds is not included. It is assumed
that application of these materials increases
linearly with road miles. The sectors Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing (# 325180)
and Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing (# 325190) in EIOLCA are used to determine
the production inventories. Extrapolating usage of these compounds to 2005 based on road
miles, calculating their costs, and inputting into the respective EIOLCA sectors yields the
environmental inventories. Equation Set 11 shows the general framework for normalization to
the functional units.
Figure 5 – Roadways in potential snow regions
Source: FHWA 2007
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 32 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Equation Set 11 – Onroad infrastructure herbicides and salting
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
onroad herbicide salting
IO EIOLCA
onroad herbicide salting
IO PMT
vehicle
onroad herbicide salting
IO EIOLCA
onroad herbicide salting
IO VMT
vehicle
vehicle
onroad herbicide salting
IO
onroad herbicide salting
IO vehicle lifetime
onroad herbicide salting
IO
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I yr
VMT
I I yr
vehicle life
VMT
VMT
I I yr
I
= × ×
= ×
−
= × ×
=
− −
− −
− −
, / , /
, / , /
, / , /
, / herbicide or salt production impact in 2005
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 33 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
5.2.6 Infrastructure Results
Table 17 - Onroad infrastructure results for sedans
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
I, Roadway Construction Energy 140 GJ 740 kJ 470 kJ
GHG 9.7 mt GGE 52 g GGE 33 g GGE
SO2 17 kg 88 mg 56 mg
CO 28 kg 150 mg 93 mg
NOX 54 kg 290 mg 180 mg
VOC 98 kg 520 mg 330 mg
PM10 180 kg 980 mg 620 mg
Pb 0.00076 kg 0.0041 mg 0.0026 mg
I, Roadway Maintenance Energy - - -
GHG - - -
SO2 - - -
CO - - -
NOX - - -
VOC - - -
PM10 - - -
Pb - - -
I, Herbicides / Salting Energy 0.94 GJ 5.0 kJ 3.2 kJ
GHG 0.070 mt GGE 0.37 g GGE 0.24 g GGE
SO2 0.00014 kg 0.00074 mg 0.00047 mg
CO 0.00026 kg 0.0014 mg 0.00086 mg
NOX 0.000093 kg 0.00050 mg 0.00031 mg
VOC 0.000100 kg 0.00053 mg 0.00034 mg
PM10 0.000019 kg 0.00010 mg 0.000065 mg
Pb - - -
I, Roadway Lighting Energy 12 GJ 64 kJ 40 kJ
GHG 2.5 mt GGE 13 g GGE 8.5 g GGE
SO2 13 kg 67 mg 43 mg
CO 1.2 kg 6.5 mg 4.1 mg
NOX 4.2 kg 22 mg 14 mg
VOC 0.11 kg 0.58 mg 0.36 mg
PM10 0.14 kg 0.74 mg 0.47 mg
Pb 0.00020 kg 0.0011 mg 0.00067 mg
I, Parking Energy 7.7 GJ 41 kJ 26 kJ
GHG 1.6 mt GGE 8.5 g GGE 5.4 g GGE
SO2 38 kg 200 mg 130 mg
CO 10 kg 54 mg 34 mg
NOX 16 kg 84 mg 53 mg
VOC 4.9 kg 26 mg 16 mg
PM10 14 kg 72 mg 46 mg
Pb 0.000099 kg 0.00053 mg 0.00033 mg
Table 18 - Onroad infrastructure results for SUVs
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
I, Roadway Construction Energy 130 GJ 740 kJ 420 kJ
GHG 8.9 mt GGE 52 g GGE 30 g GGE
SO2 15 kg 88 mg 51 mg
CO 25 kg 150 mg 84 mg
NOX 49 kg 290 mg 160 mg
VOC 90 kg 520 mg 300 mg
PM10 170 kg 980 mg 560 mg
Pb 0.00070 kg 0.0041 mg 0.0023 mg
I, Roadway Maintenance Energy - - -
GHG - - -
SO2 - - -
CO - - -
NOX - - -
VOC - - -
PM10 - - -
Pb - - -
I, Herbicides / Salting Energy 0.94 GJ 5.5 kJ 3.2 kJ
GHG 0.070 mt GGE 0.41 g GGE 0.23 g GGE
SO2 0.00014 kg 0.00082 mg 0.00047 mg
CO 0.00026 kg 0.0015 mg 0.00086 mg
NOX 0.000094 kg 0.00054 mg 0.00031 mg
VOC 0.00010 kg 0.00058 mg 0.00033 mg
PM10 0.000019 kg 0.00011 mg 0.000065 mg
Pb - - -
I, Roadway Lighting Energy 11 GJ 64 kJ 37 kJ
GHG 2.3 mt GGE 14 g GGE 7.8 g GGE
SO2 12 kg 68 mg 39 mg
CO 1.1 kg 6.5 mg 3.7 mg
NOX 3.8 kg 22 mg 13 mg
VOC 0.099 kg 0.58 mg 0.33 mg
PM10 0.13 kg 0.74 mg 0.43 mg
Pb 0.00018 kg 0.0011 mg 0.00061 mg
I, Parking Energy 7.1 GJ 41 kJ 24 kJ
GHG 1.5 mt GGE 8.5 g GGE 4.9 g GGE
SO2 35 kg 200 mg 120 mg
CO 9.4 kg 54 mg 31 mg
NOX 14 kg 84 mg 48 mg
VOC 4.5 kg 26 mg 15 mg
PM10 12 kg 72 mg 42 mg
Pb 0.000091 kg 0.00053 mg 0.00030 mg
Table 19 - Onroad infrastructure results for pickups
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
I, Roadway Construction Energy 130 GJ 740 kJ 500 kJ
GHG 8.9 mt GGE 52 g GGE 36 g GGE
SO2 15 kg 88 mg 61 mg
CO 25 kg 150 mg 100 mg
NOX 49 kg 290 mg 200 mg
VOC 90 kg 520 mg 360 mg
PM10 170 kg 980 mg 670 mg
Pb 0.00070 kg 0.0041 mg 0.0028 mg
I, Roadway Maintenance Energy - - -
GHG - - -
SO2 - - -
CO - - -
NOX - - -
VOC - - -
PM10 - - -
Pb - - -
I, Herbicides / Salting Energy 0.94 GJ 5.5 kJ 3.8 kJ
GHG 0.070 mt GGE 0.41 g GGE 0.28 g GGE
SO2 0.00014 kg 0.00082 mg 0.00056 mg
CO 0.00026 kg 0.0015 mg 0.0010 mg
NOX 0.000094 kg 0.00054 mg 0.00037 mg
VOC 0.00010 kg 0.00058 mg 0.00040 mg
PM10 0.000019 kg 0.00011 mg 0.000077 mg
Pb - - -
I, Roadway Lighting Energy 11 GJ 64 kJ 44 kJ
GHG 2.3 mt GGE 14 g GGE 9.3 g GGE
SO2 12 kg 68 mg 46 mg
CO 1.1 kg 6.5 mg 4.5 mg
NOX 3.8 kg 22 mg 15 mg
VOC 0.099 kg 0.58 mg 0.40 mg
PM10 0.13 kg 0.74 mg 0.51 mg
Pb 0.00018 kg 0.0011 mg 0.00072 mg
I, Parking Energy 7.1 GJ 41 kJ 28 kJ
GHG 1.5 mt GGE 8.5 g GGE 5.8 g GGE
SO2 35 kg 200 mg 140 mg
CO 9.4 kg 54 mg 37 mg
NOX 14 kg 84 mg 58 mg
VOC 4.5 kg 26 mg 18 mg
PM10 12 kg 72 mg 50 mg
Pb 0.000091 kg 0.00053 mg 0.00036 mg
Table 20 - Onroad infrastructure results for average
urban buses
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
I, Roadway Construction Energy 360 GJ 730 kJ 69 kJ
GHG 26 mt GGE 52 g GGE 4.9 g GGE
SO2 42 kg 84 mg 8.0 mg
CO 69 kg 140 mg 13 mg
NOX 140 kg 270 mg 26 mg
VOC 660 kg 1,300 mg 120 mg
PM10 460 kg 920 mg 88 mg
Pb 0.0020 kg 0.0039 mg 0.00037 mg
I, Roadway Maintenance Energy 110 GJ 210 kJ 20 kJ
GHG 5.4 mt GGE 11 g GGE 1.0 g GGE
SO2 1,500 kg 3,000 mg 290 mg
CO 20 kg 39 mg 3.7 mg
NOX 84 kg 170 mg 16 mg
VOC - - -
PM10 26 kg 52 mg 4.9 mg
Pb 0.00084 kg 0.0017 mg 0.00016 mg
I, Herbicides / Salting Energy 2.5 GJ 5.0 kJ 0.48 kJ
GHG 0.19 mt GGE 0.37 g GGE 0.036 g GGE
SO2 0.00037 kg 0.00075 mg 0.000071 mg
CO 0.00068 kg 0.0014 mg 0.00013 mg
NOX 0.00025 kg 0.00050 mg 0.000048 mg
VOC 0.00027 kg 0.00053 mg 0.000051 mg
PM10 0.000052 kg 0.00010 mg 0.0000098 mg
Pb - - -
I, Roadway Lighting Energy 12 GJ 23 kJ 2.2 kJ
GHG 2.4 mt GGE 4.9 g GGE 0.47 g GGE
SO2 12 kg 24 mg 2.3 mg
CO 1.2 kg 2.4 mg 0.22 mg
NOX 4.0 kg 8.1 mg 0.77 mg
VOC 0.10 kg 0.21 mg 0.020 mg
PM10 0.13 kg 0.27 mg 0.026 mg
Pb 0.00019 kg 0.00038 mg 0.000036 mg
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 34 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Table 21 - Onroad infrastructure results for off- peak
urban buses
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
I, Roadway Construction Energy 360 GJ 730 kJ 150 kJ
GHG 26 mt GGE 52 g GGE 10 g GGE
SO2 42 kg 84 mg 17 mg
CO 69 kg 140 mg 28 mg
NOX 140 kg 270 mg 54 mg
VOC - - -
PM10 460 kg 920 mg 180 mg
Pb 0.0020 kg 0.0039 mg 0.00078 mg
I, Roadway Maintenance Energy 110 GJ 210 kJ 42 kJ
GHG 5.4 mt GGE 11 g GGE 2.2 g GGE
SO2 1,500 kg 3,000 mg 610 mg
CO 20 kg 39 mg 7.9 mg
NOX 84 kg 170 mg 34 mg
VOC - - -
PM10 26 kg 52 mg 10 mg
Pb 0.00084 kg 0.0017 mg 0.00034 mg
I, Herbicides / Salting Energy 2.5 GJ 5.0 kJ 1.0 kJ
GHG 0.19 mt GGE 0.37 g GGE 0.075 g GGE
SO2 0.00037 kg 0.00075 mg 0.00015 mg
CO 0.00068 kg 0.0014 mg 0.00027 mg
NOX 0.00025 kg 0.00050 mg 0.000100 mg
VOC 0.00027 kg 0.00053 mg 0.00011 mg
PM10 0.000052 kg 0.00010 mg 0.000021 mg
Pb - - -
I, Roadway Lighting Energy 12 GJ 23 kJ 4.6 kJ
GHG 2.4 mt GGE 4.9 g GGE 0.98 g GGE
SO2 12 kg 24 mg 4.9 mg
CO 1.2 kg 2.4 mg 0.47 mg
NOX 4.0 kg 8.1 mg 1.6 mg
VOC 0.10 kg 0.21 mg 0.042 mg
PM10 0.13 kg 0.27 mg 0.054 mg
Pb 0.00019 kg 0.00038 mg 0.000076 mg
Table 22 - Onroad infrastructure results for peak
urban buses
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
I, Roadway Construction Energy 360 GJ 730 kJ 18 kJ
GHG 26 mt GGE 52 g GGE 1.3 g GGE
SO2 42 kg 84 mg 2.1 mg
CO 69 kg 140 mg 3.5 mg
NOX 140 kg 270 mg 6.8 mg
VOC - - -
PM10 460 kg 920 mg 23 mg
Pb 0.0020 kg 0.0039 mg 0.000098 mg
I, Roadway Maintenance Energy 110 GJ 210 kJ 5.3 kJ
GHG 5.4 mt GGE 11 g GGE 0.27 g GGE
SO2 1,500 kg 3,000 mg 76 mg
CO 20 kg 39 mg 0.98 mg
NOX 84 kg 170 mg 4.2 mg
VOC - - -
PM10 26 kg 52 mg 1.3 mg
Pb 0.00084 kg 0.0017 mg 0.000042 mg
I, Herbicides / Salting Energy 2.5 GJ 5.0 kJ 0.13 kJ
GHG 0.19 mt GGE 0.37 g GGE 0.0094 g GGE
SO2 0.00037 kg 0.00075 mg 0.000019 mg
CO 0.00068 kg 0.0014 mg 0.000034 mg
NOX 0.00025 kg 0.00050 mg 0.000012 mg
VOC 0.00027 kg 0.00053 mg 0.000013 mg
PM10 0.000052 kg 0.00010 mg 0.0000026 mg
Pb - - -
I, Roadway Lighting Energy 12 GJ 23 kJ 0.58 kJ
GHG 2.4 mt GGE 4.9 g GGE 0.12 g GGE
SO2 12 kg 24 mg 0.61 mg
CO 1.2 kg 2.4 mg 0.059 mg
NOX 4.0 kg 8.1 mg 0.20 mg
VOC 0.10 kg 0.21 mg 0.0052 mg
PM10 0.13 kg 0.27 mg 0.0067 mg
Pb 0.00019 kg 0.00038 mg 0.0000095 mg
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 35 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
5.3 Fuel Production ( Gasoline and Diesel)
5.3.1 Onroad fuels production
The life- cycle inventory for gasoline and diesel fuel production is calculated using EIOLCA. The
Petroleum Refineries (# 324110) economic sector is an accurate representation of the petroleum
refining process. Table 23 summarizes the parameters used to determine fuel production
impacts. The cost of fuel ( in 1997) represents the price of fuel reduced by various federal and
state taxes as well as distribution, marketing and profits [ MacLean 1998, EIA 2007, EIA 2007b].
Table 23 - Fuel production parameters by vehicle
Sedan SUV Truck Bus
Vehicle Fuel Gasoline Gasoline Gasoline Diesel
Cost of Fuel ($ 1997/ gal) 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.72
Vehicle Fuel Economy ( mi/ gal) 24 28 17 16
Vehicle Lifetime Miles ( mi/ vehicle- life) 190,000 170,000 170,000 500,000
Lifetime Fuel Consumed ( gal/ life) 6,700 10,000 11,000 81,000
Using the cost of fuel and the lifetime gallons consumed, a total lifetime cost is determined. This
is then input into EIOLCA for environmental inventory. The EIOLCA model estimates that for
every 100 MJ of energy of gasoline or diesel produced, and additional 16 were required to
produce it. This is 9 units of direct energy, during the production and transport process, and 7
units of indirect energy in the supply chain. Equation Set 12 summarizes the normalization of
output from EIOLCA.
Equation Set 12 – Onroad fuel production
vehicle
vehicle
vehicle
onroad fuel production
IO
onroad fuel production
IO PMT
vehicle
onroad fuel production
IO
onroad fuel production
IO VMT
onroad fuel production
IO
onroad fuel production
IO vehicle lifetime
PMT
VMT
VMT
I I vehicle life
VMT
I I vehicle life
I I
×
−
= ×
−
= ×
= =
− −
−
− −
−
− −
− −
, ,
, ,
, , Production Impact determined from EIOLCA
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 36 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
5.3.2 Onroad fuel production results
Table 24 - Onroad fuel production for sedans
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
F, Petroleum Refining Energy 120 GJ 660 kJ 420 kJ
GHG 11 mt GGE 59 g GGE 38 g GGE
SO2 21 kg 110 mg 72 mg
CO 30 kg 160 mg 100 mg
NOX 12 kg 66 mg 42 mg
VOC 14 kg 74 mg 47 mg
PM10 2.2 kg 12 mg 7.5 mg
Pb - - -
Table 25 - Onroad fuel production for SUVs
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
F, Petroleum Refining Energy 190 GJ 1,100 kJ 630 kJ
GHG 17 mt GGE 98 g GGE 56 g GGE
SO2 32 kg 190 mg 110 mg
CO 46 kg 270 mg 150 mg
NOX 19 kg 110 mg 63 mg
VOC 21 kg 120 mg 70 mg
PM10 3.3 kg 19 mg 11 mg
Pb - - -
Table 26 - Onroad fuel production for pickups
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
F, Petroleum Refining Energy 200 GJ 1,200 kJ 800 kJ
GHG 18 mt GGE 100 g GGE 71 g GGE
SO2 34 kg 200 mg 140 mg
CO 49 kg 280 mg 190 mg
NOX 20 kg 120 mg 80 mg
VOC 22 kg 130 mg 88 mg
PM10 3.5 kg 21 mg 14 mg
Pb - - -
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 37 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
Table 27 - Onroad fuel production for urban buses
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
F, Petroleum Refining Energy 1,400 GJ 2,900 kJ 270 kJ
GHG 130 mt GGE 260 g GGE 24 g GGE
SO2 250 kg 490 mg 47 mg
CO 350 kg 700 mg 67 mg
NOX 140 kg 290 mg 27 mg
VOC 160 kg 320 mg 30 mg
PM10 25 kg 51 mg 4.8 mg
Pb - - -
Table 28 - Onroad fuel production for off- peak urban buses
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
F, Petroleum Refining Energy 1,400 GJ 2,900 kJ 570 kJ
GHG 130 mt GGE 260 g GGE 51 g GGE
SO2 250 kg 490 mg 98 mg
CO 350 kg 700 mg 140 mg
NOX 140 kg 290 mg 57 mg
VOC 160 kg 320 mg 64 mg
PM10 25 kg 51 mg 10 mg
Pb - - -
Table 29 - Onroad fuel production for peak urban buses
Life- Cycle Component I/ O per Vehicle- Life per VMT per PMT
F, Petroleum Refining Energy 1,400 GJ 2,900 kJ 72 kJ
GHG 130 mt GGE 260 g GGE 6.4 g GGE
SO2 250 kg 490 mg 12 mg
CO 350 kg 700 mg 18 mg
NOX 140 kg 290 mg 7.2 mg
VOC 160 kg 320 mg 7.9 mg
PM10 25 kg 51 mg 1.3 mg
Pb - - -
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 38 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
5.4 Fundamental Environmental Factors for Onroad
The fundamental environmental factors for the onroad modes are shown in Table 30. These
factors are the bases each component’s environmental inventory calculations.
Table 30 - Fundamental Environmental Factors for Onroad Modes
Grouping Component Source
Vehicles
Manufacturing Sedan Manufacturing EIOLCA 2007 ( 336110), AN 2005 121 GJ/ veh. 10 mt/ veh. 23 kg/ veh. 124 kg/ veh. 23 kg/ veh. 24 kg/ veh. 32 g/ veh. 7 kg/ veh.
SUV Manufacturing EIOLCA 2007 ( 336110), AN 2005 103 GJ/ veh. 9 mt/ veh. 20 kg/ veh. 105 kg/ veh. 20 kg/ veh. 21 kg/ veh. 27 g/ veh. 6 kg/ veh.
Pickup Manufacturing EIOLCA 2007 ( 336110), AN 2005 146 GJ/ veh. 12 mt/ veh. 28 kg/ veh. 149 kg/ veh. 28 kg/ veh. 29 kg/ veh. 39 g/ veh. 8 kg/ veh.
Bus Manufacturing EIOLCA 2007 ( 336120), FTA 2006 114 GJ/ veh. 129 mt/ veh. 1.6 mt/ veh. 302 kg/ veh. 392 kg/ veh. 0.3 kg/ veh. 87 kg/ veh. 162 mt/ veh.
Sedan Operation Running MacLean 1998, EPA 2006, EPA 2003 4.8 MJ/ VMT 367 g/ VMT 0.11 g/ VMT 11 g/ VMT 0.8 g/ VMT 0.3 g/ VMT 0.11 g/ VMT
Startup EPA 2003 7 g/ VMT 0.2 g/ VMT 0.4 g/ VMT
Brake Wear EPA 2003 0.013 g/ VMT
Tire Wear EPA 2003 0.008 g/ VMT
Evaporative EPA 2003 0.6 g/ VMT
SUV Operation Running MacLean 1998, EPA 2006, EPA 2003 7.8 MJ/ VMT 479 g/ VMT 0.03 g/ VMT 12 g/ VMT 0.8 g/ VMT 0.4 g/ VMT 0.11 g/ VMT
Startup EPA 2003 9 g/ VMT 0.2 g/ VMT 0.5 g/ VMT
Brake Wear EPA 2003 0.013 g/ VMT
Tire Wear EPA 2003 0.008 g/ VMT
Evaporative EPA 2003 0.5 g/ VMT
Pickup Operation Running MacLean 1998, EPA 2006, EPA 2003 8.3 MJ/ VMT 477 g/ VMT 0.03 g/ VMT 12 g/ VMT 1.1 g/ VMT 0.4 g/ VMT 0.11 g/ VMT
Startup EPA 2003 10 g/ VMT 0.2 g/ VMT 0.5 g/ VMT
Brake Wear EPA 2003 0.013 g/ VMT
Tire Wear EPA 2003 0.008 g/ VMT
Evaporative EPA 2003 0.5 g/ VMT
Bus Operation Running EPA 2003 22 MJ/ VMT 2,373 g/ VMT 0.74 g/ VMT 4 g/ VMT 17.8 g/ VMT 0.6 g/ VMT 0.03 g/ VMT
Brake Wear EPA 2003 0.013 g/ VMT
Tire Wear EPA 2003 0.012 g/ VMT
Evaporative EPA 2003 0.0 g/ VMT
Idling Clarke 2005, CARB 2002, EPA 2003 65 MJ/ hr 4,614 g/ hr 80 g/ hr 121 g/ hr 8.2 g/ hr 2.9 g/ hr
Maintenance Vehicle Maintenance EIOLCA 2007 ( 8111A0) 5.2 TJ/$ M 423 mt/$ M 1090 kg/$ M 4340 kg/$ M 994 kg/$ M 1260 kg/$ M 0 kg/$ M 214 kg/$ M
Tire Maintenance EIOLCA 2007 ( 326210) 15.1 TJ/$ M 1090 mt/$ M 1960 kg/$ M 15200 kg/$ M 2030 kg/$ M 2600 kg/$ M 0 kg/$ M 1140 kg/$ M
Automotive Repair Stations CARB 1997 205 mt/ yr 4735 mt/ yr
Insurance Vehicle Insurance EIOLCA 2007 ( 524100) 1.0 TJ/$ M 84 mt/$ M 207 kg/$ M 934 kg/$ M 233 kg/$ M 173 kg/$ M 0 kg/$ M 44 kg/$ M
Infrastructure
Construction Roads and Highways PaLATE 2004, EPA 2001, MA 2005, BTS 2005 ( T1- 5) 63 MJ/ ft2 4 kg/ ft2 8 g/ ft2 13 g/ ft2 25 g/ ft2 45 g/ ft2 0.4 g/ ft2 85 g/ ft2
Maintenance Roads and Highways PaLATE 2004, EPA 2001, MA 2005, BTS 2005 ( T1- 5) 1.3 MJ/ ft2 65 g/ ft2 18 g/ ft2 236 mg/ ft2 1.0 g/ ft2 10 mg/ ft2 309 mg/ ft2
Vegetation Control Herbicide Production EIOLCA 2007 ( 325180), EPA 2004 529 MJ/ lb 31 kg/ lb 86 g/ lb 81 g/ lb 37 g/ lb 18 g/ lb 0 g/ lb 8 g/ lb
Deicing Salt Production EIOLCA 2007 ( 325190), TRB 1991 883 MJ/ ton 77 kg/ ton 122 g/ ton 322 g/ ton 108 g/ ton 144 g/ ton 0 g/ ton 21 g/ ton
Lighting Electricity Production EERE 2002, Deru 2007 205 PJ/ yr 758 g/ kWh 4 g/ kWh 365 mg/ kWh 1.3 g/ kWh 32 mg/ kWh 42 mg/ kWh 59 μg/ kWh
Parking Onroad and Surface Lot Parking PaLATE 2004, EPA 2001 42 MJ/ ft2 2.8 kg/ ft2 27 g/ ft2 13 g/ ft2 32 g/ ft2 36 g/ ft2 85 g/ ft2 0.6 mg/ ft2
Garage Parking PaLATE 2004, EPA 2001 8 MJ/ ft2 53 kg/ ft2 222 g/ ft2 380 g/ ft2 465 g/ ft2 36 g/ ft2 84 g/ ft2 0.0 mg/ ft2
Fuels
Gasoline Production Fuel Refining & Distribution EIOLCA 2007 ( 324110) 19 MJ/ gal 1.7 kg/ gal 3.2 g/ gal 4.6 g/ gal 1.9 g/ gal 2.1 g/ gal 0.33 g/ gal
Diesel Production Fuel Refining & Distribution EIOLCA 2007 ( 324110) 18 MJ/ gal 1.6 kg/ gal 3.0 g/ gal 4.3 g/ gal 1.8 g/ gal 2.0 g/ gal 0.31 g/ gal
Note: All environmental factors reported per $ M are shown per millions of 1997 dollars. Unique sources: AN 2005, BTS 2005, CARB 1997, CARB 2002, Clarke 2005, Deru 2007, EERE 2002, EIOLCA 2007, EPA 2001, EPA 2003, EPA 2004, EPA 2006, FTA 2006, MA 2005, MacLean 1998,
PaLATE 2004, TRB 1991
Energy GHG SO2 CO NOX VOC Pb PM
Environmental LCA of Passenger Transportation Page 39 of 125 Mikhail Chester, Arpad Horvath
University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Transportation Studies ( Working Paper # UCB- ITS- VWP- 2008- 2)
5.5 Onroad Summary
While non- operational environmental results show themselves in the onroad life- cycle
assessment, it is not necessarily apparent where these results originate. In this section, key
findings are discussed including the root of their causes.
5.5.1 Energy and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The onroad life- cycle assessment is composed of 17 components, not all of which have
significant contributions to energy and GHG emissions. The primary life- cycle contributors to
these two inventory categories are vehicle manufacturing, vehicle maintenance, roadway
construction and maintenance, roadway lighting, parking construction and maintenance, and
petroleum production. The attribution of these components increases energy consumption and
GHG emission per PMT by 37% to 51%.
Table 31 - Onroad energy inventory
Onroad Modes - Energy ( MJ) per Passenger- Mile- Traveled
3.0
4