• 关键词：全生命周期评价  增程式电动汽车  纯电动汽车  内燃机汽车  环境效益  减碳经济性

• 基金项目：国家重点研发计划（No.SQ2021YFE0192900）；国家自然科学基金（No.71173072）；陕西省重点产业创新链项目（No.2020ZDLGY16-08）；陕西省青年科技新星人才支持计划项目（No.2021KJXX-15）；陕西交通运输厅科研项目（No.21-17R）

• 陈轶嵩
• 长安大学汽车学院，西安 710064

• 兰利波
• 长安大学汽车学院，西安 710064

• 杜轶群
• 长安大学汽车学院，西安 710064

• 王童
• 长安大学汽车学院，西安 710064

• 许海波
• 长安大学汽车学院，西安 710064

• 陈昊
• 长安大学汽车学院，西安 710064

• 摘要：为完善增程式电动汽车（Extended range electric vehicle，EREV）全生命周期环境影响和经济效益评价研究，对EREV、纯电动汽车（Battery electric vehicle，BEV）和内燃机汽车（Internal combustion engine vehicle，ICEV）进行了对比分析.基于生命周期评价理论和生命周期成本分析方法，构建了车辆生命周期资源消耗、能源消耗、环境影响和成本评价模型，针对不同汽车各阶段材料消耗、能源消耗和环境排放三大特性，识别EREV、BEV和ICEV的环境负荷差异，并从初始购置成本、使用维护成本和报废回收成本3个方面评价了EREV、BEV和ICEV的生命周期成本差异.综合碳排放特性和经济属性，进一步提出减碳经济性评价指标，科学评价EREV和BEV的环境效益和减碳经济性，并讨论了不同电力结构下EREV、BEV和ICEV的生命周期温室气体排放情况和减碳经济性变化.对增程式电动汽车进行全生命周期内综合评价研究，进一步明确EREV在多种能源类型汽车技术路线中的环境效益和减碳经济性.结果表明，相比于ICEV，BEV和EREV在运行使用阶段和全生命周期具有降低化石能源消耗和碳排放的优势，但BEV在原材料获取和制造装配阶段表现出较高的碳排放和矿产资源消耗，EREV在生命周期具有较高的矿产资源消耗. EREV的减碳成本低于BEV，减碳经济性较好.电力结构的优化有助于EREV和BEV减碳经济性的提高.

• Abstract：To improve the research on life cycle environmental and economic benefit evaluation of extended range electric vehicles （EREV）， a comparative analysis was made among EREV， battery electric vehicles （BEV） and internal combustion engine vehicles （ICEV）. The evaluation models of vehicle life cycle resource consumption， energy consumption， environmental impact and cost were constructed based on life cycle assessment and life cycle cost. According to the three characteristics of different vehicles each stage about material consumption， energy consumption and environmental emission， the environmental burdens differences of EREV， BEV and ICEV were identified. Moreover， life cycle cost differences of EREV， BEV and ICEV were evaluated from the three aspects about initial purchase cost， use and maintenance cost and scrap and recovery cost. Carbon reduction economic evaluation index was proposed based on comprehensive carbon emission characteristics and economic attributes， in order to evaluate the environment benefits and carbon reduction economy. The life cycle global warming potential of EREV， BEV and ICEV under different electricity structures and the change of carbon reduction economy were discussed to conduct comprehensive evaluation research on EREV in the whole life cycle， and further clarify the environmental benefit and carbon reduction economy of EREV in various energy type automobile technical routes. The results show that BEV and EREV have the advantage of reducing fossil energy consumption and carbon emission in the use and life cycle stage compared with ICEV， but BEV has higher carbon emission and mineral resource consumption in the raw material acquisition and manufacturing and assembly stage， while EREV has higher mineral resource consumption in life cycle stage.The carbon reduction cost of EREV is lower than that of BEV， and the carbon reduction economy of EREV is better than BEV. The optimization of power structure contributes to the improvement of carbon reduction economy of EREV and BEV.

• Key words：life cycle assessment  extended range electric vehicles  battery electric vehicles  internal combustion engine vehicles  environmental benefit  carbon reduction economy

• 
  摘要点击次数： 259 全文下载次数： 473