Cradle-to-Grave Lifecycle Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Light-Duty Passenger Vehicles in China: Towards a Carbon-Neutral Future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vehicle electrification is considered a pathway for on-road transportation decarbonization in China. Different from the conventional gasoline vehicles whose emissions are mainly released from vehicle tailpipes, emissions of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) are from the upstream processes of electricity generation and vehicle manufacturing, thus a comprehensive lifecycle analysis and comparison of BEVs with gasoline vehicles is required to quantify the emission mitigation benefit of vehicle electrification and determine the path to a carbon-neutral future. In the study, we compare the cradle-to-grave (C2G) lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of gasoline and electric vehicles in China and analyze the greenhouse gas emission reduction of vehicle electrification in different provinces. Results show that under the current technologies, the national average C2G GHG emissions for battery electric vehicles (BEVs) of 100 miles (i.e., 160 km) and 300 miles (i.e., 480 km) all-electric range (AER) are 231 and 279 g CO2eq/km, respectively, 22% and 5% lower than those for gasoline internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs). Improving vehicle fuel efficiency by hybridizing gasoline ICEVs can effectively reduce C2G emissions to 212 g CO2eq/km. At the provincial level, C2G GHG emissions of BEVs vary according to the provincial electricity mix. In eight provinces, C2G GHG emissions of BEVs with 300 miles AER (BEV300s) are higher than those of gasoline ICEVs due to the GHG-intensive coal-based electricity mix. In the future scenario, with low carbon fuels (such as high-level bioethanol blending gasoline) and electricity decarbonization, the national average C2G emissions of hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and BEV300s can be reduced to 55 and 73 g CO2eq/km, respectively. Further decrease of C2G GHG emissions relies on reducing vehicle-cycle emissions from material processing and vehicle component manufacturing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".