MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402119872 · doi:10.1088/2634-4505/ad763f

Plug-in charging or electric roads? Powering U.S. long-haul heavy-duty trucks in 2050

2024· article· en· W4402119872 on OpenAlexafffund
Lih Wei Yeow, I. Daniel Posen, Heather L. MacLean

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Infrastructure and Sustainability · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsTruckHeavy dutyAutomotive engineeringEnvironmental sciencePlug-inElectric carsTransport engineeringAeronauticsEngineeringElectrical engineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pervasive plug-in fast chargers and/or electrified roadways (eRoads) might address the limited range, long recharging times, and reliance on greenhouse gas (GHG)-intensive, costly, and heavy batteries associated with electrifying long-haul heavy-duty trucks (HDTs). While these large-scale interventions shift environmental and cost burdens onto infrastructure, there is a lack of studies investigating how eRoads affect system-level GHG emissions, costs, material use, and peak electric grid power demands. We compare these aspects for the case of electrifying U.S long-haul HDTs (Class 8) in 2050 powered by combinations of plug-in fast chargers and eRoads. Our model accounts for battery downsizing, energy consumption, and truck operation patterns in quantifying life cycle impacts of batteries, plug-in chargers, eRoads, and hourly truck electricity demand. We find that plug-in fast chargers and eRoads reduce annualized 2050 HDT life cycle GHG emissions by 8% to 14% compared to using long-range batteries, which in turn have at least 50% lower emissions than diesel trucks. Conductive rails, overhead lines, and wireless eRoads (amortized across light- and heavy-duty vehicles) have lower system-wide costs than long-range batteries, plug-in fast chargers, or diesel trucks. Cost savings from smaller batteries, lower energy use and avoided recharging time offset high eRoads capital costs. While eRoads can reduce both system-level GHG and costs compared to diesel trucks, these reductions are sensitive to eRoads capital costs and losses from wireless power transfer and air resistance. eRoads require less lithium (87%) and copper (67%) than long-range batteries but increase regional peak power demands by up to 32%. Efficient wireless power transfer and aerodynamic pantographs enhance eRoads’ GHG and cost advantages, which may diminish if future batteries are more energy-dense, cheaper, or less GHG intensive. If successfully deployed, eRoads present opportunities for tighter integration between the transportation and electricity infrastructure systems, enabling optimized charging strategies to lower GHG emissions and costs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research Infrastructure and SustainabilitySame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207