Ishizaki, K. and Nakano, M.
Paper:
Forecasting Life Cycle CO2 Emissions of Electrified Vehicles
by 2030 Considering Japan’s Energy Mix
Keita Ishizaki† and Masaru Nakano
Graduate School of System Design and Management, Keio University
4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama 223-8526, Japan
† Corresponding author, E-mail: keita.ishizaki@keio.jp
[Received April 28, 2018; accepted September 17, 2018]
This paper presents a comprehensive life-cycle analy-
sis of CO2 (LCCO2 ) emissions from automobiles using
a hybrid life-cycle inventory approach to predict the
growth of electrified vehicles in Japan. Herein, the hy-
brid electric vehicle (HEV), plug-in HEV (PHEV), and
battery electric vehicle (BEV) versions of the mass-
produced Toyota Prius hatchback are analyzed, con-
sidering the automobile-usage environment in Japan.
In particular, a breakeven analysis of HEV vs. PHEV
vs. BEV is conducted in terms of LCCO2 emissions
that are affected by (i) outside air temperature and
(ii) CO2 emissions during power generation from the
present day up to 2030. Our results show that HEV
has the lowest LCCO2 emissions when the current
thermal-power-dependent electricity generation mix
(average for 2012–2014) is considered, followed in or-
der by PHEV and BEV. However, it is predicted that
in 2030, PHEV will have the lowest LCCO2 emissions,
followed in order by HEV and BEV, as it is antici-
pated that nuclear and renewable energy sources will
be widely available by 2030. PHEV is expected to
gain popularity by 2030. Regarding BEV, large quan-
tities of CO2 emissions are emitted during battery pro-
duction. Furthermore, due to the domestic electricity
generation mix from the present day up to 2030, the
LCCO2 emissions of BEV will exceed those of HEV
and PHEV.
Keywords: electricity generation mix, air conditioning,
clean energy vehicle, life cycle assessment
1. Introduction
The industrial sector accounts for 27% of the CO2
emissions in Japan, with the transportation sector ac-
counting for another 17%. Both of these sectors must
strive to reduce CO2 emissions [1]. Of particular note
is that, in addition to improvements to internal combus-
tion engine vehicles (ICEVs) and hybrid electric vehicles
(HEVs) as measures to reduce CO2 emissions during ve-
hicle operation, next generation vehicles, such as battery
electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel cell vehicles (FCVs),
which do not produce any tailpipe CO2 emissions, are
806
gradually being introduced into the market. Of these,
BEVs, which have received much attention recently, had a
global market share exceeding 1% in 2015 [2]. However,
in order to realize a society of sustainable mobility, it is
necessary to reduce life cycle CO2 (LCCO2 ) emissions.
The LCCO2 emissions of vehicles propelled by elec-
tricity are directly affected by their energy mix. With the
energy mix in Japan following the 2011 Tohoku Earth-
quake, the average for 2012–2014 showed thermal power
generation accounting for 88% of the total, with consid-
erable CO2 emissions being emitted during power gen-
eration. For 2030, the goal is to reduce CO2 emissions
from power generation by increasing nuclear and renew-
able energy sources [3–5]. According to the Federation of
Electric Power Companies’ “Environmental Action Plan
for Electric Power Industry,” the target CO2 emissions
(considering fuel combustion (Direct) and transmission of
electricity from power plant to end-user (Transfer)) in fis-
cal 2030 have been set at 0.37 kg-CO2 /kWh [6]. In other
words, by considering variations in CO2 emissions during
power generation from the present to 2030, it is possible
to grasp future trends in the LCCO2 emissions of electri-
fied vehicles.
The energy efficiency of HEVs in operation has greatly
improved recently. For example, the Japanese emis-
sion regulation (JC08 mode) fuel economy of the fourth-
generation Toyota Prius (2017) is 40.8 km/L, with fuel
savings of about 25% over that of the third-generation
model (2009). On the other hand, with the BEV, which al-
ready has a high energy efficiency, the JC08 mode driving
efficiency for the second-generation Nissan Leaf (2017)
is 8.33 km/kWh, which does not show an improvement
over that of the first-generation model (2010). Moreover,
according to Johnson, it was reported that ICEV fuel ef-
ficiency is significantly lower as a result of in-cabin air
conditioning (Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning:
HVAC) [7]. With regard to BEVs as well, it has also been
reported that in-cabin air conditioning is the factor that
has the greatest influence on driving efficiency [8–10].
By considering the influence of in-vehicle air condition-
ing on LCCO2 emissions, it is possible to carry out an
analysis that takes into account geographical influences.
Prior studies in this area, however, have been limited. In
other words, with the recent shift to electrified vehicles
in the automotive market, it is important to take into con-
Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.12 No.6, 2018

sideration the electricity generation mix, latest technical
progress, and vehicle usage environment in appropriately
assessing the LCCO2 emissions of electrified vehicles.
In past studies related to this research, Romejko et al.
assessed air pollution from BEV and ICEV, taking into
account Japan’s electricity generation mix in 2015 [11].
Bauer et al. reported life cycle assessment (LCA) results
based on ICEV-, HEV-, BEV-, and FCV-related simula-
tions for large sedans. The study took into account CO2
emissions at the time of power generation, 2012 and 2030,
and in-cabin air conditioning which were defined as a
constant values [12]. In these researches, the likelihood
of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) being more
popular in the future [13] was not taken into account.
Meanwhile, Onat et al. reported LCA results, based on
the electricity generation mix for North America, related
to the first-generation Nissan Leaf as well as the third-
generation Toyota Prius HEV and PHEV [14]. In this re-
search, CO2 emissions from BEVs during battery manu-
facture was set to a value much lower than the ones in the
report of Ellingsen et al. and Kim et al. [15, 16]. More-
over, this research did not take into account CO2 emis-
sions resulting from in-cabin air conditioning during ve-
hicle operation. In other words, in terms of the LCCO2
emissions of electrified vehicles, to the best of our knowl-
edge, there have not been many reports that have taken
into consideration both the automobile use environment
and the future electricity generation mix in Japan.
Therefore, to predict the growth of electrified vehi-
cles, we did a study on mass-produced, domestically
manufactured, Toyota Prius-class hatchback HEV, PHEV,
and BEV, carrying out a domestic LCCO2 emissions
study that takes into account in-cabin air conditioning
and the future electricity generation mix. Meanwhile,
it is assumed that there will be 900 hydrogen stations,
which are essential for FCVs, in Japan by 2030, a small
number compared to the number of refueling stations
(about 31,000 in 2016) and charging stations (about 7,000
in 2016). The total road distance in Japan, which refers to
general national roads and prefectural roads but not mu-
nicipal roads, is assumed to be 184,000 km. By 2030,
there will be hydrogen stations established at 200 km in-
tervals, making this a big barrier to the spread of FCVs.
We therefore excluded FCVs from this research [17–20].
Following the introduction set out in Section 1, Sec-
tion 2 introduces our analytical conditions and methods.
To the extent possible, we selected data that is available
to the public. In Section 3, we show the results of our
electricity generation mix analysis, our analytical results
of CO2 emissions caused by in-cabin air conditioning dur-
ing automobile operations, and the results of our analysis
of LCCO2 emissions. In Section 4, we present the con-
clusions reached in this study.
Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.12 No.6, 2018
Forecasting Life Cycle CO2 Emissions of Electrified Vehicles
by 2030 Considering Japan’s Energy Mix
Table 1. Description of the analytical conditions for this study.
Considered life Production, operation, and
cycle phase maintenance phases
Mass-produced, passenger vehicles:
Vehicle
HEV, PHEV, and BEV
Energy source 2 types: Gasoline fuel and electric
Driving mode JC08 mode with the use of HVAC
Outside air −4–29◦ C
temperature (Mean monthly temperature)
Annual mileage 10,575 km
Lifetime mileage 150,000 km (approximately 15 years)
Tires: 3-year intervals
Maintenance items Lead-acid batteries: 3-year intervals
and intervals Engine oil: 7,500 km intervals,
oil amount 4.0 L (density: 0.84 kg/L)
2. Research Methods
2.1. Analysis Methods
The life cycle of automobiles consists of five phases:
development, production, operation, maintenance, and
disposal. In this research, we consider the three phases
of production, operation, and maintenance, which are the
main sources of CO2 emissions. Table 1 shows the an-
alytical conditions for this study. In the next and subse-
quent sections, we describe in detail the vehicles that were
analyzed and the conditions.
2.2. Vehicles Analyzed
In order to take into account the latest technical
progress, three mass-produced vehicle types were ana-
lyzed: HEV, PHEV, and BEV. These are comparable to
vehicles that Japanese drivers may consider when pur-
chasing automobiles. We settled on the fourth-generation
Toyota Prius, which is popular worldwide, for the HEV
and PHEV types. For the BEV type, we selected the
second-generation Nissan Leaf, which is also popular
worldwide [21]. The specifications of the vehicles ana-
lyzed are shown in Table 2. In the present study, it is
assumed that the gasoline properties are 12.53 kWh/kg,
3.18 kg-CO2 /kg, and 0.730 kg/L [22].
2.3. Conditions for CO2 Emissions Analysis During
Vehicle Manufacture
Regarding CO2 emissions at the time of vehicle man-
ufacture, Kudoh et al. reported using a hybrid life-cycle
inventory (LCI) method that estimated the amount of CO2
emissions during vehicle manufacture from constituent
material volumes and an input-output table [23].
The hybrid LCI method is most commonly used for
evaluating CO2 emissions produced during the raw ma-
terial extraction and manufacturing stage. In this study,
estimates were made based on these reported values. The
807
Ishizaki, K. and Nakano, M.

Table 2. Specifications of mass-production vehicles ana- Table 3. Assumed masses of vehicle components for the
lyzed (2017 calendar year model in Japan). analysis.

Toyota Toyota Nissan Component masses

Prius HEV Prius PHEV Leaf BEV Engine: 120 kg [24]
JC08 efficiency 40.8 km/L 37.2 km/L Battery pack: 24.5 kg [25]
– HEV
(gasoline) 4.46 km/kWh 4.07 km/kWh Motor and generator: 22.7 kg [26]
Power control unit: 12.6 kg [26]
JC08 efficiency
– 10.54 km/kWh 8.33 km/kWh Engine: 120 kg [24]
(electric)
Battery pack: 120 kg [27]
PHEV
JC08 petrol Motor and generator: 22.7 kg [26]
1,550 km 1,590 km –
range Power control unit: 12.6 kg [26]
JC08 electric Battery pack: 300 kg [28]
– 68.2 km 400 km BEV Motor: 57.4 kg [29]
range
Power control unit: 16.2 kg [30]
Engine capacity 1.8 L 1.8 L
–
(output) (72 kW) (72 kW)
Motor output try (METI), the Federation of Electric Power Companies,
53 kW 53 kW
(generator 85 kW and the Association of Biomass Power Generators [3–5],
(23 kW) (23 kW)
output) taking into account conditions prior to the 2011 earth-
Li-battery
0.75 kWh 8.8 kWh 40 kWh
quake (the average for 2008–2010), conditions after the
capacity earthquake (the average for 2012–2014), and conditions
Fuel tank for 2030 (the target). For estimates of VtW CO2 emis-
38 L 43 L – sions, we used the JC08 mode fuel or electricity con-
capacity
sumption, which is the current Japanese test cycle of en-
Vehicle weight 1,360 kg 1,510 kg 1,490 kg
ergy efficiency. In addition, even in Japan, the worldwide
Vehicle width 1.76 m 1.76 m 1.79 m harmonized light duty test procedure (WLTP, extra high
and length 4.54 m 4.65 m 4.48 m speed phase is excluded in Japan) will be introduced from
Tire size 195/65R15 195/65R15 205/55R16 the end of 2018, and since the primary correlation has
Heat pump
been confirmed between WLTP (Japan) fuel economy and
Cabin heating Exhaust the JC08 mode fuel economy, the results of this research
Exhaust Heat pump
system heat could be utilized for the long term [31].
heat
Regarding annual mileage, we decided to use the an-
nual average mileage of 10,575 km/year for private pas-
weights of major components used in this study are shown senger cars, the mileage published by the Ministry of
in Table 3. Regarding the CO2 emissions attributable to Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MLIT) [32]. The av-
electricity use during the manufacturing process, we took erage usage period for passenger cars in Japan has gradu-
into account the electricity generation mix for 2008 to ally grown longer and was about 13 years as of 2016 [33].
2030, as indicated in Section 2.4. Because vehicle use may be expected to become even
longer in the future, in this research, we selected a us-
age period of about 15 years and a lifetime mileage of
2.4. Conditions for CO2 Emissions Analysis During 150,000 km. Moreover, with regards to in-cabin air con-
Vehicle Operations ditioning energy consumption, we estimated the average
We considered Well-to-Vehicle (WtV, consideration of annual value from values provided in the literature (details
the fuel or electricity from resource recovery to deliver are given in Section 3.2). With regard to actual driving re-
to the vehicle) and Vehicle-to-Wheel (VtW, consideration sults, efficiency fluctuations were estimated from the dif-
of the vehicle from the tank or battery to the wheel) CO2 ferences between HVAC energy consumption and JC08
emissions resulting from the usage of in-cabin air condi- driving energy.
tioning. First, we utilized the low heating value presented
in the report by the Japan Automobile Research Institute
to estimate WtV CO2 emissions [22]. We adopted the 2.5. Conditions for CO2 Emissions Analysis During
values published by the Central Research Institute of the Vehicle Maintenance
Electric Power Industry to estimate CO2 emissions from We considered three components – tires, lead-acid bat-
fuel production to power generation [4]. We adopted the teries, and engine oil – as maintenance replacement parts.
report of the Japan Automobile Research Institute to es- For tires, we used data on raw materials procurement, pro-
timate domestic power transmission efficiency and bat- duction, and distribution processes for general-purpose
tery charging efficiency after power generation [22]. Re- tires (195/65 R15, 8.6 kg/tire) for the life cycle, as pub-
garding the electricity generation mix, we used the data lished by the Japan Automobile Tire Association [34]. We
released by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Indus- did not look at snow tires. We used values in the LCA lit-

808 Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.12 No.6, 2018


1200
Energy demand [billion kWh]
1000
800
600
400
200
0 Hydro
2008-2010 2012-2014
[Year]
Fig. 1. Japan’s energy demand and electricity generation
mix in 2008–2010 (actual), 2012–2014 (actual), and 2030
(target) [3–5].
800
Well-to-Vehicle (WtV) CO2 emissions
700
600
500
[g-CO2/kWh]
400
300
200
100
0 WtV CO2 emissions amount to 306 g-CO2 /kWh [22].
Gasoline
Charging
Fig. 2. The Well-to-Vehicle (WtV) CO2 emissions per kWh
in 2008–2010 (actual), 2012–2014 (actual), and 2030 (tar-
get) in Japan (low heating value) [3–5, 22].
erature reported by Takeshima for lead-acid batteries [35].
For engine oil, assuming the usage of mineral-based oil
(both Group II and Group III) as the base oil, we used
values in the literature that took both the base oil and addi-
tives into consideration [36, 37], assuming specific gravity
to be 0.84 g/cm3 [38]. The replacement interval for tires
and lead-acid batteries was set to every three years. The
engine oil change interval was set to 7,500 km, and the
amount to 4.0 L.
3. Results
3.1. Electricity Generation Mix Analysis
Figure 1 shows the electricity generation mixes to be
used through 2030, and Fig. 2 shows the Well-to-Vehicle
(WtV) CO2 emissions (g-CO2 /kWh) for each electricity
generation mix.
With the electricity generation mix prior to the To-
hoku Earthquake of 2011, i.e., the average for 2008–
2010, CO2 emissions during power generation (consid-
ering Direct and other processes related upstream pro-
Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.12 No.6, 2018
Forecasting Life Cycle CO2 Emissions of Electrified Vehicles
by 2030 Considering Japan’s Energy Mix
Solar vision of fuel and downstream management (Indirect))
Wind are estimated at 445 g-CO2 /kWh [3–5]. Furthermore,
Biomass WtV CO2 emissions that took into consideration trans-
mission loss (Transfer, 5.1%) and charge loss to the elec-
Geothermal
Nuclear tric vehicle (charger AC to DC conversion loss and bat-
Coal-fired
tery charge loss, and those are included in the energy
consumption of JC08 mode (Charging), 14% in total) are
LNG-fired
545 g-CO2 /kWh [22].
Oil-fired
If we look at the recent electricity generation mix (the
average for 2012–2014) following the earthquake, ther-
2030
mal power generation accounted for 88% of the power
supply composition ratio, with WtV CO2 emissions re-
maining at the high level of 737 g-CO2 /kWh.
For 2030, the aim is to reduce CO2 emissions dur-
ing power generation by increasing nuclear and renew-
able energies [3]. According to the Federation of Elec-
tric Power Companies’ “Environmental Action Plan for
Electric Power Industry,” target CO2 emissions (con-
sidering Direct and Transfer) in fiscal 2030 are set to
370 g-CO2 /kWh [6]. In this study, estimated CO2
emissions in 2030 (considering Direct and Transfer) are
369 g-CO2 /kWh, consistent with the target value, while
WtV CO2 emissions are estimated to be 502 g-CO2 /kWh.
Meanwhile, with regard to the gasoline used for HEVs
and PHEVs, the WtV energy efficiency from fuel pro-
duction to refueling of the vehicle is high, at 83%, while
2008-2010 2012-2014 2030
Electricity generation mix [Year] 3.2. Analysis of Energy Efficiency when
Transfer Direct Indirect In-Cabin Air Conditioning is Used
During Vehicle Operation
We will now look at the results of an efficiency impact
analysis that evaluates the use of in-cabin air condition-
ing. IID, Inc., Hayes et al., Kadokura et al., Suzuki et al.,
De Gannaro et al., and Yuksel et al. reported the energy
efficiency effects of in-cabin air conditioning in JC08,
the US federal test procedure FTP-72 (or LA 4), and the
worldwide harmonized light vehicles test cycle (WLTC)
modes and during actual operations for ICEVs, HEVs,
and BEVs. It has been confirmed that the energy effi-
ciencies of ICEVs, HEVs, and BEVs fluctuate, depending
on the outside air temperature during operations [39–45].
These reports could not confirm energy efficiency im-
provements for the ICEVs and HEVs when excessive ex-
haust heat is utilized for in-cabin heating (Fig. 3). The re-
sults imply that engine operation of the ICEVs and HEVs
after cold-starts causes equivalent efficiency loss to the in-
cabin heating of BEVs, although further study is needed.
In other words, given the correlation between vehicle op-
erational energy efficiency when using in-cabin air condi-
tioning and the outside air temperature, in-cabin air con-
ditioning energy can be expressed by Eq. (1). For outside
air temperature, we considered the average monthly tem-
perature from January to December in 24 Japanese cities
located from the northernmost prefecture of Hokkaido to
the southernmost prefecture of Okinawa [46].
E AC = (−0.0045t 3 + 0.249t 2 − 5.33t + 48.7)10−2 E Dr ,
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
809
Ishizaki, K. and Nakano, M.

100 25

LCCO2 emissions considering energy

Relative driving energy efficiency (a)
90 20

mix in 2008–2010 [t-CO2]

with the use of HVAC [%]
HVAC (Tokyo)
80 15 Driving
Maintenance
70
10 Production
60
5

50
y = -0.0013x3 - 0.0065x2 + 1.78x + 74.5 0
(R² = 0.94) BEV HEV PHEV PHEV PHEV
40 (CD (CD (CD
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 100%) 80%) 60%)
Outside air temperature [oC] 25

LCCO2 emissions considering energy

[BEV/Real] Yuksel et al., 2015 [42] (b)
20

mix in 2012–2014 [t-CO2]

[BEV/JC08] Kadokura et al., 2012 [39]
HVAC (Tokyo)
[BEV/LA4] Hayes et al., 2011 [43]
15 Driving
[BEV/WLTC] De Gennaro et al., 2014 [44]
[HEV/JC08] Suzuki et al., 2015 [45] Maintenance
[HEV/Real] IID, 2015 [41] 10 Production
[ICEV/JC08] Kadokura et al., 2014 [40]
Regression curve 5

0
Fig. 3. The impact of the Heating, Ventilation, and Air Con- BEV HEV PHEV PHEV PHEV
ditioning (HVAC) system on driving energy efficiency at var- (CD (CD (CD
ious outside air temperatures (modified by the authors) [39– 100%) 80%) 60%)
45]. Real: real driving efficiency. 25
LCCO2 emissions considering energy

(c)
20
HVAC (Tokyo)
mix in 2030 [t-CO2]

E AC : in-cabin air conditioning energy, 15

Driving
Maintenance
E Dr : JC08-mode vehicle driving energy, 10 Production

t: average annual temperature [◦ C].

As a result, when we consider Tokyo’s annual average
temperature of 15◦ C, the average annual CO2 emissions
of vehicle operations increase by 9% due to in-cabin air
conditioning, regardless of the vehicle drive system. In
Japan’s northernmost prefecture, Hokkaido, which has an
annual average temperature of 9◦ C, CO2 emissions in-
crease by an average of 18% during vehicle operations,
while in the southernmost prefecture of Okinawa, which
has an annual average temperature of 21◦ C, CO2 emis-
sions increase by an average of 5% during vehicle opera-
tion.
3.3. LCCO2 Emissions Analysis
The results of analyses of LCCO2 emissions before and
after the 2011 earthquake as well as for target 2030 are
shown in Fig. 4. In addition, the travel distance on a single
charge for the Prius PHEV when in-cabin air condition-
ing is used will range from an annual average of 58 km
in Hokkaido to 65 km in Okinawa. Given the PHEV util-
ity factor in Japan, when the travel distance on a single
charge is 60 km, the charge depleting mode (CD) ratio is
assumed to be about 70% [47]. Therefore, in this study,
three conditions are assumed for the utility factor: 100%,
80%, and 60%.
First, with regard to CO2 emissions at the time of ve-
hicle manufacture, because the comparison of the three
5
0
BEV HEV PHEV PHEV PHEV
(CD (CD (CD
100%) 80%) 60%)
Fig. 4. The life cycle CO2 (LCCO2) emissions of BEV,
HEV and PHEV in Japan, considering Japan’s energy mix
(a) in 2008–2010 (average), (b) in 2012–2014 (average), and
(c) in 2030 (target). CD: charge depleting mode.
vehicles involves equivalent vehicle classifications, re-
sults are in proportion to battery capacity. Specifically,
considering the electricity generation mix from 2008 to
2030, CO2 emissions at the time of manufacture of a
40 kWh lithium-ion battery for BEV are estimated to
be 103–113 kg-CO2 /kWh (4.12–4.51 t-CO2 /battery); the
assumed electricity consumption for the production is
1,935 kWh/battery, which accounts for 20–27% of CO2
emissions from the battery production. These values are
lower than those reported by Ellingsen et al. (172 kg-
CO2 /kWh), Kim et al. (140 kg-CO2 /kWh), and Kudoh
et al. (138 kg-CO2 /kWh), due to attribution of a variety
of factors for the production, such as production volume,
as well as difference of the specific energy [15, 16, 23].
Therefore, continued investigation is essential.

810 Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.12 No.6, 2018


650
CO2 intensity of energy mix [g-CO2/kWh]
PHEV/BEV's breakeven against HEV
600
PHEV (CD 100%)
550
PHEV (CD 80%)
500
PHEV (CD 60%)
450
400
BEV
350
300
9 12 15
Mean annual temperature [oC]
o o
(Hokkaido 9 C - Okinawa 21 C)
Fig. 5. Breakeven analysis results for PHEV and BEV vs.
HEV in terms of LCCO2 emissions affected by (i) the out-
side air temperature and (ii) CO2 emissions during power
generation (considering Direct and Indirect). CD: charge de-
pleting mode.
For HEV, PHEV, and BEV, as CO2 emissions during
vehicle operations account for more than 47% of LCCO2
emissions, the electricity generation mix has a signifi-
cant impact on LCCO2 emissions. Rankings of LCCO2
emissions for HEV, PHEV, and BEV thus differed before
and after the earthquake, as well as for 2030. HEV has
the lowest LCCO2 emissions following the earthquake, as
CO2 emissions during power generation have stayed at a
high level (the average for 2012–2014), followed in or-
der by PHEV and BEV. Meanwhile PHEV has the low-
est LCCO2 emissions before the earthquake and for 2030,
followed in order by HEV and BEV. CO2 emissions dur-
ing production of BEV are as much as 1.7 times that of
HEV, resulting from CO2 emissions during battery manu-
facture. In all, regarding the electricity generation mixes
before and after the earthquake, as well as for target 2030,
it was confirmed that maximum LCCO2 emissions are ob-
tained. Increasing battery capacity extends driving range
and improves convenience, but it is not the preferred op-
tion from the viewpoint of reducing LCCO2 emissions.
In other words, considering usage in Japan up until 2030,
PHEV will be an effective solution for achieving compat-
ibility between driving range and reduced LCCO2 emis-
sions (Table 2).
3.4. Breakeven Analysis for PHEV and BEV vs.
HEV in Terms of LCCO2 Emissions Affected
by Outside Air Temperature and CO2
Emissions During Power Generation
Breakeven analysis results for PHEV and BEV vs.
HEV in terms of LCCO2 emissions affected by the outside
air temperature and CO2 emissions during power genera-
tion (considering Direct and Indirect) (discussed in Sec-
tions 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3) are shown in Fig. 5. We used
Eq. (1), for in-cabin air conditioning energy, taking into
account temperatures from Hokkaido, the northernmost
location in Japan, to Okinawa, the southernmost prefec-
ture.
Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.12 No.6, 2018
Forecasting Life Cycle CO2 Emissions of Electrified Vehicles
by 2030 Considering Japan’s Energy Mix
700
CO2 intensity of energy mix [g-CO2/kWh]
600
BEV's breakeven against PHEV
2012-2014 Mix 500
2030 Mix 2012-2014 Mix
400
PHEV (CD 100%) 2030 Mix
PHEV (CD 80%) 300 PHEV (CD 80%)
PHEV (CD 60%)
PHEV (CD 60%) PHEV (CD 60%)
200
BEV
100 PHEV (CD 80%)
0
18 21 9 12 15 18 21
Mean annual temperature [oC]
(Hokkaido 9oC - Okinawa 21oC)
Fig. 6. Breakeven analysis results for BEV vs. PHEV in
terms of LCCO2 emissions affected by (i) the outside air
temperature and (ii) CO2 emissions during power genera-
tion (considering Direct and Indirect). CD: charge depleting
mode.
As a result, for PHEV when the utility factor is 100%, if
the CO2 emissions during power generation (considering
Direct and Indirect) fall below 595–585 g-CO2 /kWh, the
LCCO2 emissions will be lower than that for HEV. When
CO2 emissions at the time of power generation are 558–
546 g-CO2 /kWh or less with PHEV (when the utility fac-
tor is 80%), or when CO2 emissions during power gener-
ation are 498–482 g-CO2 /kWh or less with PHEV (when
the utility factor is 60%), the LCCO2 emissions will be
lower than those for HEV. On the other hand, with BEV,
in order to achieve lower LCCO2 emissions than HEV, it
is necessary to reduce CO2 emissions during power gen-
eration to 394–378 g-CO2 /kWh or less.
3.5. Breakeven Analysis for BEV vs. PHEV in
Terms of LCCO2 Emissions Affected by
Outside Air Temperature and CO2 Emissions
During Power Generation
In accordance with Section 3.4, the results of breakeven
analysis for BEV vs. PHEV in terms of LCCO2 emissions
are shown in Fig. 6.
Assuming that the utility factor for PHEV is 60%, if
the CO2 emissions during power generation (considering
Direct and Indirect) fall to 304–288 g-CO2 /kWh or less,
the LCCO2 emissions of BEV will be lower than that
of PHEV. If the utility factor for PHEV is 80%, when
CO2 emissions during power generation fall below 137–
118 g-CO2 /kWh, the LCCO2 emissions for BEV will be
lower than that for PHEV. On the other hand, if the util-
ity factor for PHEV is 100%, the LCCO2 emissions for
BEV will be higher, irrespective of the amount of CO2
emissions emitted during electricity generation. In other
words, some measures are required to promote the use of
BEV. These include promoting nuclear and renewable en-
ergies beyond the goals set for the target 2030 electricity
generation mix as well as reducing battery capacity.
811
Ishizaki, K. and Nakano, M.
4. Conclusion
We conducted a LCCO2 emissions study to predict the
growth of electrified vehicles in Japan, taking into ac-
count the domestic power supply framework (from 2008
to 2030), the latest technological progress, and the au-
tomobile usage environment for mass-produced, Toyota
Prius-class hatchbacks (HEV, PHEV, and BEV). The fol-
lowing are our findings.
1. With the use of in-cabin air conditioning, CO2 emis-
sions during vehicle operations increase with the
outside air temperature, irrespective of the driving
system of the vehicle, although further investiga-
tion is needed. In Japan’s northernmost prefecture,
Hokkaido, which has an average annual temperature
of 9◦ C, CO2 emissions increase by an average of
18% annually during vehicle operations; in Tokyo,
which has an average annual temperature of 15◦ C,
the average annual increase is 9%; and in Japan’s
southernmost prefecture, Okinawa, which has an av-
erage annual temperature of 21◦ C, the average an-
nual increase is 5%.
2. HEV has the lowest LCCO2 emissions, when the
current domestic electricity generation mix (the
average for 2012–2014) is considered, followed
by PHEV and BEV, respectively. In a thermal
power generation-dependent electricity generation
mix, with improved HEV thermal efficiency, PHEV
and BEV do not contribute to the reduction of
LCCO2 emissions.
3. On the other hand, it is predicted that PHEV will
have the lowest LCCO2 emissions, followed by HEV
and BEV, respectively, in 2030. By 2030, it is antic-
ipated that nuclear and renewable energies will be
widely available. PHEV is expected to gain popular-
ity by 2030.
4. Large quantities of CO2 emissions are emitted during
the production of BEV batteries. Furthermore, tak-
ing into account the domestic electricity generation
mix from the present day to 2030, the LCCO2 emis-
sions of BEV will be higher than those of HEV and
PHEV. In other words, the popularization of BEV
will require increasing the shares of nuclear and re-
newable energies beyond those targeted in the elec-
tricity generation mix for 2030, as well as reducing
battery capacity.
In this research, CO2 emissions during of vehicle oper-
ation are based on the JC08 mode. Other driving modes
and greenhouse gases or factors such as costs were not
considered. Moreover, we considered only tires, lead-
acid batteries, and engine oil as factors in CO2 emissions
during maintenance. Future studies should consider other
relevant factors.
812
References:
[1] National Institute for Environmental Studies, “National greenhouse
gas inventory report,” 2017. http://www.env.go.jp/earth/ondanka/
ghg-mrv/unfccc/material/NIR-JPN-2017 J.pdf [Accessed Decem-
ber 10, 2017]
[2] IEA/EVI, “Global EV outlook, beyond one million electric
cars,” Electric Vehicles Initiative of Clean Energy, Ministe-
rial, Paris, 2016. https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/
publication/Global EV Outlook 2016.pdf [Accessed December 10,
2017]
[3] Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, “Long-term energy
supply and demand outlook,” 2015. http://www.meti.go.jp/press/
2015/07/20150716004/20150716004 2.pdf [Accessed December
10, 2017]
[4] E. Imamura, M. Iuchi, and S. Bando, “Comprehensive assess-
ment of life cycle CO2 emissions from power generation technolo-
gies in Japan,” CRIEPI Socio-Economic Research Center Report
(No.Y06), 2016.
[5] Biomass Power Association, “For promotion measures of
biomass power generation business,” 2016. http://www.meti.go.jp/
committee/chotatsu kakaku/pdf/026 01 00.pdf [Accessed Decem-
ber 10, 2017]
[6] The Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan, “En-
vironmental Action Plan for Electric Power Industry,” 2015.
https://www.fepc.or.jp/library/pamphlet/pdf/08 kankyokodo j.pdf
[Accessed December 10, 2017]
[7] V. H. Johnson, “Fuel used for vehicle air conditioning: a state-by-
state thermal comfort-based approach (No. 2002-01-1957),” SAE
Technical Paper, 2002.
[8] W. Li, P. Stanula, P. Egede, S. Kara, and C. Herrmann, “Determin-
ing the main factors influencing the energy consumption of electric
vehicles in the usage phase,” Procedia CIRP, Vol.48, pp. 352-357,
2016.
[9] M. Kagata and T. Sakata, “Energy management for an electric ve-
hicle,” Bulletin of Hokkaido University of Science, No.42, pp. 175-
178, 2016.
[10] S. Shibata and T. Nakagawa, “AI-EV (air-conditioner integrated
electric vehicle),” J. of Japan Society of Energy and Resources,
Vol.36, No.2, pp. 10-17, 2015.
[11] K. Romejko and M. Nakano, “Life Cycle Analysis of Emissions
from Electric and Gasoline Vehicles in Different Regions,” Int. J.
Automation Technol., Vol.11, No.4, pp. 572-582, 2017.
[12] C. Bauer, J. Hofer, H. J. Althaus, A. Del Duce, and A. Simons,
“The environmental performance of current and future passenger
vehicles: life cycle assessment based on a novel scenario analysis
framework,” Applied Energy, Vol.157, pp. 871-883, 2015.
[13] Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, “Correspon-
dence for structural change of the automobile industry,”
2017. http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/economy/keiei innovation/
sangyokinyu/GB/04.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2018]
[14] N. C. Onat, M. Kucukvar, and O. Tatari, “Conventional, hybrid,
plug-in hybrid or electric vehicles? State-based comparative carbon
and energy footprint analysis in the United States,” Applied Energy,
Vol.150, pp. 36-49, 2015.
[15] L. A. W. Ellingsen, G. Majeau-Bettez, B. Singh, A. K. Srivastava,
L. O. Valøen, and A. H. Strømman, “Life cycle assessment of a
lithium-ion battery vehicle pack,” J. of Industrial Ecology, Vol.18,
No.1, pp. 113-124, 2014.
[16] H. C. Kim, T. J. Wallington, R. Arsenault, C. Bae, S. Ahn, and J.
Lee, “Cradle-to-gate emissions from a commercial electric vehicle
Li-ion battery: a comparative analysis,” Environmental Science &
Technology, Vol.50, No.14, pp. 7715-7722, 2016.
[17] Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, “Trends in the num-
ber of volatile oil distributors and the number of service stations
(on a registered basis),” 2017. http://www.meti.go.jp/press/2017/07/
20170704007/20170704007-1.pdf [Accessed January 7, 2018]
[18] CHAdeMO Council, “Changes in installation site of quick charger,”
2017. https://www.chademo.com/wp/pdf/japan/qckasyosuii.pdf
[Accessed January 7, 2018]
[19] Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, “Revised version of hy-
drogen and fuel cell strategy road map,” 2015. http://www.meti.go.
jp/press/2015/03/20160322009/20160322009.html [Accessed Jan-
uary 7, 2018]
[20] Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, “Survey on charging in-
frastructure of EV · PHV,” 2017. http://www.meti.go.jp/meti lib/
report/H28FY/000026.pdf [Accessed January 7, 2018]
[21] Mitsubishi Motor, “Global sales rankings of EV/PHV/PHEV of
2017 first half,” 2017. https://www.hyogo-mitsubishi.com/news/
data20170915113000.html [Accessed January 7, 2018]
[22] Japan Automobile Research Institute, “Analysis report on over-
all efficiency and GHG emissions,” 2011. http://www.jari.or.jp/
Portals/0/jhfc/data/report/2010/pdf/result.pdf [Accessed December
10, 2017]
Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.12 No.6, 2018

[23] Y. Kudoh, K. Nansai, Y. Kondo, and K. Tahara, “Life Cycle CO2
Emissions of FCEV, BEV and GV in Actual Use,” The 23rd Int.
Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symp. & Exposition,
2007.
[24] J. Sullivan, J. Kelly, and A. Elgowainy, “Vehicle Materials: Mate-
rial Composition of Powertrain Systems,” Argonne National Labo-
ratory, 2015.
[25] Nikkei Technology, “Toyota Uses Smaller Li-ion, NiMH Batteries
for New Prius (1),” 2015. http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/atclen/news
en/15mk/112600193/ [Accessed December 10, 2017]
[26] A. S. Munro and A. Munday, “Advanced Strong Hybrid and Plug-
In Hybrid Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis,” 2017. https:
//www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/acc/mtr/hybrid phev report full.pdf [Ac-
cessed December 10, 2017]
[27] Toyota, “Frequent questions,” 2017. http://toyota.jp/faq/car/each-
model/priusphv/phv/0061.html [Accessed December 10, 2017]
[28] Y. Ota and T. Nakajima, “Electric Vehicle Charge-and-Share, Tokyo
City University,” 2017. http://mobilityintegrationsymposium.
org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/11/2B 6 Emob17 171
presentation Y Ota.pdf [Accessed December 10, 2017]
[29] Society of Automotive Engineering Japan, “The Handbook of Auto-
motive Engineering No.7: Design (EV and Hybrid Vehicles),” 2015.
[30] T. Burress, “Benchmarking State-of-the-Art Technologies,” Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, 2013. https://energy.gov/sites/prod/
files/2014/03/f13/ape006 burress 2013 o.pdf [Accessed December
10, 2017]
[31] Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, “About in-
troducing WLTP in fuel consumption test,” 2015. http:
//www.meti.go.jp/committee/sougouenergy/shoene shinene/
sho ene/jidosha wg/2015/pdf/001 07 00.pdf [Accessed December
10, 2017]
[32] Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, “Actual use of au-
tomobiles,” 2004. http://www.mlit.go.jp/jidosha/iinkai/seibi/5th/5-
2.pdf [Accessed December 10, 2017]
[33] Automobile Inspection and Registration Information Association,
“Automotive trend in Japan,” 2016. https://www.airia.or.jp/publish/
statistics/trend.html [Accessed December 10, 2017]
[34] Japan Automobile Tire Association, “Guidelines for estimat-
ing LCCO2 of tires: Ver. 2.0,” 2012. http://www.jatma.or.
jp/environment/pdf/lcco2guideline.pdf [Accessed December 10,
2017]
[35] S. Takeshima, “LCA of lead-acid batteries for automotive use,” FB
Technical News, Vol.57, pp. 3-7, 2001.
[36] M. Maruyama and N. Y. Gill, “Trends of fuel-economy low-
viscosity gasoline engine oils,” J. of Japanese Society of Tribolo-
gists, Vol.59, No.7, pp. 380-386, 2014.
[37] G. Girotti, A. Raimondi, G. Blengini, and D. Fino, “The con-
tribution of lube additives to the life cycle impacts of fully for-
mulated petroleum-based lubricants,” American J. of Applied Sci-
ences, Vol.8, No.11, pp. 1232-1240, 2011.
[38] T. Sagawa, S. Nakano, Y. Bito, Y. Koike, S. Okuda, and R. Suzuki,
“Development of low viscosity API SN 0W-16 fuel saving engine
oil considering chain wear performance (No. 2017-01-0881),” SAE
Int. J. of Fuels and Lubricants, Vol.10, No.2, pp. 469-477, 2017.
[39] S. Kadokura, D. Konno, H. Ezaki, K. Takeuchi, K. Sekine, C. Kat-
suyama, and T. Nishizawa, “Development of energy balance simu-
lation method for electric vehicle,” Calsonic Kansei Technical Re-
view, Vol.9, pp. 60-66, 2012.
[40] S. Kadokura, D. Konno, H. Ezaki, K. Sekine, C. Katsuyama, and
T. Nishizawa, “Development of energy balance simulation method
for vehicles,” Calsonic Kansei Technical Review, Vol.11, pp. 45-51,
2014.
[41] IID, Inc., “Elucidation of actual fuel consumption by clarification of
refueling data,” 2015. https://usite.jp/survey/actual-fuel-efficiency
[Accessed December 10, 2017]
[42] T. Yuksel and J. J. Michalek, “Effects of regional temperature
on electric vehicle efficiency, range, and emissions in the United
States,” Environmental Science & Technology, Vol.49, No.6,
pp. 3974-3980, 2015.
[43] J. G. Hayes, R. P. R. de Oliveira, S. Vaughan, and M. G. Egan, “Sim-
plified electric vehicle power train models and range estimation,”
2011 IEEE Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conf., pp. 1-5, 2011.
[44] M. De Gennaro, E. Paffumi, G. Martini, U. Manfredi, H. Scholz,
H. Lacher, H. Kuehnelt, and D. Simic, “Experimental investigation
of the energy efficiency of an electric vehicle in different driving
conditions (No. 2014-01-1817),” SAE Technical Paper, 2014.
[45] Y. Suzuki, K. Yamaguchi, K. Sakai, and S. Sato, “Quantitative anal-
ysis of factors affecting real fuel economy,” Report of Research
Institute of Traffic Safety and Environmental Studies, Independent
Administrative Institution, Vol.17, pp. 27-50, 2015.
[46] Time-j.net., “Temperature and rainfall statistics,” 2017. https://
weather.time-j.net/ [Accessed December 10, 2017]
Int. J. of Automation Technology Vol.12 No.6, 2018
Forecasting Life Cycle CO2 Emissions of Electrified Vehicles
by 2030 Considering Japan’s Energy Mix
[47] M. Hori, “Fuel Consumption Metrics of PHEV with the Utility Fac-
tor and Energy Equivalency,” J. of Society of Automotive Engineers
of Japan, Vol.68, No.7, pp. 74-80, No.20144565, 2014.
Name:
Keita Ishizaki
Affiliation:
Doctoral Course Student, Graduate School of
System Design and Management, Keio Univer-
sity
Address:
4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama 223-8526, Japan
Brief Biographical History:
2018 Received M.S. degree from Keio University
2018- Doctoral Course, Keio University
Main Works:
• “Low Viscosity Lubricant Contribution to Reduce Life Cycle CO2
Emissions on Passenger Vehicle,” J. of Japanese Society of Tribologists,
Vol.63, No.8, pp. 563-572, 2018.
Membership in Academic Societies:
• Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers (JSME)
• Japanese Society of Tribologists (JAST)
• Society of Automotive Engineers of Japan (JSAE)
Name:
Masaru Nakano
Affiliation:
Professor, Graduate School of System Design
and Management, Keio University
Address:
4-1-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama 223-8526, Japan
Brief Biographical History:
1980-2008 Principal Researcher and Laboratory Manager, Toyota Central
R&D Labs., Inc.
1980 Received B.S. and M.S. degrees from Kyoto University
1997 Received Ph.D. in Engineering from the Nagoya Institute of
Technology Operations Research
2008- Professor, Keio University
2013 Visiting Professor, ETH Zurich
Main Works:
• “Supply Chain Management for Sustainability,” K. M. Lee and J.
Kauffman (Eds.), “Handbook of Sustainable Engineering,” Springer,
pp. 427-450, May 2013.
• “Collaborative Design Supporting System for Manufacturing Systems,”
Japan Society of Mechanical Engineering (JSME) Int. J., Series C., Vol.45,
No.2, pp. 575-580, 2002.
• “An Integrated Analytical/Simulation Approach for Economic Design of
an AGV System,” J. of the Operations Research Society of Japan, Vol.43,
No.3, pp. 382-395, 2000.
Membership in Academic Societies:
• International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP)
• International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE)
• Council of Systems Engineering University Network (CESUN),
Executive Committee Member
• Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers (JSME)
• Operations Research Society of Japan (ORSJ)
• Japan Industrial Management Association (JIMA)
813
Copyright of International Journal of Automation Technology is the property of Fuji
Technology Press Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email articles for individual use.