INNOVATION OF AUTOMOBILES
Introduction
Climate change is a major environmental threat to humanity. The emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) to the environment remains a significant challenge faced by contemporary society. The technological advancements due to industrialization and globalization significantly explain the rise in GHGs emissions. When it comes to the GHGs emissions, the transport sector is among the top industries perpetuating these emissions to the atmosphere. Lee, Vandiver, Viswanathan, and Subramanian (2012) claims that the transport industry accounts for 23% of global energy-related emissions, which are mostly from light-duty vehicles (LDVs). As a result, various mitigation options have been put in place in the transport industry for the reduction of these emissions. However, the critical question to ask is the capability of these options to reduce GHG emissions in light of the upcoming climatic changes. Besides, debates exist on the strength of the present climate change mitigation options in society. Accordingly, it is necessary to assess the validity of energy conservation technologies brought about by the innovation of automobiles in the transport sector in the mitigation of climate change in the society.
The Innovation of Energy Efficient Automobiles
The demand in the transportation sector across the globe has resulted in the global rise of the number of vehicles by over 965 million (Marcelo Ketzer, Rodrigo & Einloft, 2012). Marcelo Ketzer, Rodrigo, and Einloft(2012) projects that due to the motorization in China, Japan, and other countries, these numbers will rise to 1.3 billion by the end of 2020. Currently, the GHGs emissions within the transport industry amount to 6,543 MtCO2; 74.5% of these are produced by land transport (Marcelo Ketzer, Rodrigo & Einloft, 2012). This figure represents 22% of the global human-made emissions. Consequently, as the number of vehicles increases, so is the increase in GHGs emissions to the atmosphere if stringent measures are not put in place. On the other hand, methane gas (CH4) is a significant GHG, and its emission has significantly increased from 20 to 35 Tg from 2008 to 2014, respectively (Franco, Mahieu, Emmons, Tzompa-Sosa, Fischer, Sudo, & Strong, 2016). Waheed (2012) illustrates the contribution of various sectors to CO2 emissions, as shown in Figure 1.1. Based on the representation below, light-duty vehicles emit 10% of the total transportation emissions, 14% is from other transportation, a clear indicator of the threat of high energy-consuming cars to the environment.
Figure 1.1 estimation of global CO2 production by sector across regions (Waheed, 2012)
Based on the rising concern regarding the total emission of GHGs in the transport sector, various automobile energy-efficient innovations have been encouraged in automobile industries across the globe. According to Yamaguchi (2012), the innovation of energy-efficient automobiles, specifically electric vehicles, has played a significant role in energy conservation. These electric vehicles include hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), and all-electric vehicles (AEVs) (Yamaguchi, 2012). Prius developed the hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) technology exclusively powered by renewable energy. The hybrid electric vehicle combines the fuel-driven power source such as the conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) with the electric motor(renewable source of energy) and battery in various blends. The recharging of these vehicles is through regenerative braking and engine charging with no dependence on external charging from the grid. According to Yamaguchi (2012), HEVs save energy though different ways: first by shutting off the engine when the vehicle is at a standstill, improving the baking damages, and making use of the electricity generated in recharging of the battery. Besides, these vehicle’s electric motor is used to boost up power during vehicle acceleration, and this permits engine downsizing hence improving the efficacy of the engine. Yamaguchi (2012) puts that this innovation of HEVs, unlike conventional motors, has high reliability, efficiency in terms of energy conservation, and low noise. A good is the HEVs is the Japanese Toyota Prius Hybrid, which has the belt drive alternator starter systems offering 40-50% fuel benefit (Yamaguchi, 2012).
Another significant automobile innovation is the plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), which are connected to the external source of electricity generated from renewable energy sources such as wind energy in order to restore battery adding to regenerative braking( Cheng & Zhu, 2014). the external electricity generated from renewable energy sources is additional energy sources that improve the PHEVs’ energy efficiency. According to Suberu, Mustafa, and Bashir (2014), the plug-in hybrid electric vehicles have the most extensive energy storage system, and future improvements in the battery and fuel cell technologies are anticipated to play a considerable role in the consumption of power on a large scale basis. Besides, Yamaguchi (2012) mentions the all-electric vehicles (AEVs) which are run on electricity only. According to Kuo( 2012), even though energy diversification from the liquid fuels will be a gradual process, the use of power generated from renewable sources of energy such as wind and hydrogen and hydrogen will be adopted in the contemporary society due to the emergence of automobiles such as the HEVs, PHEVS, and AEVs. This is because the gasoline engine has high power consumption, and their speed and safety attracted consumers. However, more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly sources generating power through renewable energy sources have been proposed in an attempt to reduce transport-related emissions (Kuo, 2012).
The Proposed Mitigation Potential of HEVs, PHEVs, AEVs
The full potential of any mitigation option can be achieved only if there is the domination of low carbon electricity. An important aspect to consider in establishing the mitigation potential of electric automobile innovation is its increase in cost and market penetration potential. Maximilian (2012) establishes the fact that the cost of electric vehicles is high; consequently, cost affects the usage of these vehicles for transport, which in return impacts its mitigation potential. According to Maximilian (2012), the automobile innovations-HEVs, PHEVs, and AEVs are fuel-efficient and dependent on electricity generated by renewable energy sources and, therefore, the potential to reduce the emission of GHGs is high compared to the internal combustion engine vehicle dependent on non-renewable energy. Cintas, Berndes, Cowie, Egnell, Holmström, and Ågren (2016) reiterate that the anticipated market demands of the forest-based bioenergy will significantly result in higher carbon and other greenhouse gases reduction in the atmosphere. Hoffert, Caldeira, Benford, Criswell, Green, Herzog and Lightfoot (2002) in addressing the paths to global climate stability asserts that higher percentage of the mitigation potential of automotive innovations is possible as the battery electric vehicles have 21-27% energy efficiency while HEVs have an energy efficiency of 30-35% and 30-37% for fuel cell electric vehicles. T
Technical potential to reduce emissions by 2030 is there: Energy efficiency and vehicle performance improvements: à 30-50% relative to 2010 depending on mode and transport type
he World energy outlook provides a clear view of how the world transport would look like in an energy-efficient scenario (See Fig. 1.2) if the electric vehicles are embraced in reducing the emission of greenhouse gases (Hoeven,2013). This is clear evidence that electric vehicles will have a greater potential to mitigate climate change if they continue to penetrate the global market.
Fig.1.2 World Energy Outlook- Mitigation potential of electric vehicles by 2015(Hoeven, 2013).
Evidence for the Mitigation Potential of AEVs, HEVs, PHEVs
In an attempt to evaluate the potential of the innovation of automobiles in mitigation climate change, various researcher has been conducted across the globe. Chang, Wu, Pan, Zhu, and Chen (2017) conducted a case study to analyze the capacity additions of various power technologies and energy inputs in the reduction of emissions in China between 2015 and 2030. Using the baseline model methodology, analysis of the power demand and supply in shanghai and the mitigation potential of the electrification in China was conducted. The findings of the research indicated that between 2015 to 2030, power demand-supply has grown from 340 GWh to 3600GWh yielding a 10% reduction in GHGs emissions(Chang, Wu, Pan, Zhu, and Chen, 2017). Accordingly, electrification does not only result in CO2 emission reduction but rather reduces the emission of other pollutant gases such as sulfur and nitrogen oxides, thereby enhancing environmental protection. Based on this research, it is clear that electrification has greater potential to mitigate climate change. This is an empirical research providing statistical information observing the issues of generalizability and reliability and is, therefore, a credible source.
In another research conducted by Denis et al. (2014) aimed at establishing the ways into deep decarburization Australia by 2020, the researchers review shreds of literature and reports that electrification and fuel switching by lightweight vehicles is critical to climate change mitigation. In their research, Denis et al. (2014) found out that the use of electric vehicles in Australia has resulted in a 75% reduction of emissions. Accordingly, the research concludes that the innovation of automobiles, specifically involving electric vehicles, has greater potential to mitigate climate change if their global market penetration is increased. Moriarty and Honnery (2012) add to this research by asserting that Australia’s TravelSmart interventions encourage the use of alternative power sources based on renewable energy as they have proved to be environmental friendly since the measures such as prohibiting the use of private cars are effective yet hard to implement. Zakeri, Dehghanian, Fahimnia and Sarkis (2015) too adds to the this research by affirming that Australian automobile manufacturing companies have accepted yield to TravelSmart techniques which has resulted to reduced rate of energy usage. Currently, Australia has more than 1.5 million solar P.V., which have been installed across the country, allowing the vehicles to run of solar-powered energy, and this has resulted in a reduction of over 180 megatonnes in GHGs emissions (ASBEC, 2016). Denis et al. (2014) research is a peer review of various literature on the topic and is, therefore, a reliable source of evidence of the mitigation potential of electric vehicles.
Besides, Brown, Kim, Smith, and Southworth (2017), in their case study set to explore the effect of imenergy efficiency as a carbon mitigation strategy, highlight that energy-efficient technology such as the U.S. electrification of the transport sector is effective in carbon emission reduction. Using the National Energy Modeling System, the researchers evaluated the demand and supply policy of electrification centered on the mitigation costs, air pollution, carbon leakage and natural gas plant hypotheses. The research found out that electrification based on renewable energy significantly reduced the emission of CO2 in the United States. According to Brown, Kim, Smith, and Southworth (2017), the generation of hybrid as a mitigation option for vehicle emissions in the U.S. New York City significantly led to a 10% fuel economy and the acceleration capacity improvement and consequently resulted to a reduction in emissions. Waheed(2012) adds to this scientific evidence by asserting that Obama’s “Cash For Clunkers” program aimed at removing fuel consuming vehicles on roads led to a GDP of 4% from the sale of electric vehicles and consequent reducing GHGs emissions. Notably, Brown, Kim, Smith, and Southworth(017) research observes presents statistical information of the mitigation potential of automobile innovations and is therefore a reliable source of evidence.
Controversy around the mitigation potential of the option
The major controversy around the mitigation potential of the diverse innovations of automobiles revolves around energy efficiency versus demand (Maximilian, 2012). The innovation of these automobiles result to rebound effect in which improvements in energy efficiency does not fully yield the anticipated energy saving. In economic terms, energy-efficient technologies make the energy services cheap, thereby increasing demand in what is known as elasticity of demand (Granberg & Glover, 2014). Consequently, more efficient cars might tempt consumers to drive faster and as a result counteracting the potential energy savings. According to Glover (2011), the rebound effect is dependent on the elasticity of demand which is stronger with consumers as compared to the industrial plants.
The Potential Barriers for achieving Mitigation Potential
The automobile innovations of electric vehicles have the potential to mitigate carbon emissions by a greater percentage but are, however, faced with barriers that hinder their efficiency. The first major barrier is the lack of financing to implement these innovations in most countries (Maximilian, 2012). Still, these automobiles are highly-priced on the market, and most consumers are not ready to purchase such expensive vehicles with longer recharging time and shorter range. This explains the reason behind the market penetration failures. Consequently, low usability of these vehicles significantly hinders the achievement of the mitigating potential of these alternative power sources. Also, barriers resulting from the incomplete implementation of these energy-efficient technologies greatly affect the mitigation potential of these technologies. Accordingly, limited public awareness on the potential for these innovations to mitigate climate change and their significant in saving energy are the potential barriers to these mitigation option. According to Byrne and Taminiau (2016), greater access to energy and development of sustainability will be achieved through reliance of market forces. Consequently, policy approaches aimed at realizing the economic potential of the technology can help to remove these barriers and therefore greater access to energy and sustainability.
The implementation of Greening transport by the European Union
The European Union has implemented the “Greening Transport” initiative aimed at introducing the use of energy-efficient vehicles such as the HEVs, and PHEVs in Europe and Germany (Martinez de Alegrı’a, Azucena Vicente& Larrea Basterra, 2012). In April 2009, the European Commission offered a directive for to promote the use of clean vehicles in transportation in order to stimulate their market penetration. Notably, since these automobiles are highly-priced compared to conventional vehicles, the directive aimed at creating sufficient demands for these vehicles to make sure that the economies of scale result in a reduction in the cost of the clean energy-efficient vehicles. The “Greening Transport” implementation was based on the pillars of the voluntary dedication of the automotive industry to cut emissions, the improvement in the promotion of the efficiency of renewable energy, and the use of fuel-efficient vehicles. Germany confronted with the target to reduce emissions by 80–95% by 2050 through the “greening transport” initiative (Hohmeyer and Bohm, 2015). The question arises as to whether these target swill be achieved. Following the implementation of the greening transport, the European Automobile Manufacturers Association committed to reducing the emissions from new cars 140 g CO2/km by 2008, and this was significantly achieved in Europe. Chen, Seiner, Suzuki, and Lackner (2012) reports that China’s “Green transport” scheme has yielded significant efforts in the transition to clean technologies. Pan, Ma, and Zhang (2011) reiterate that the greening transport initiative in China has potentially led to great economic growth.The priority of the European automobile manufacturers association is to increase the electric vehicle market share while reducing the dependence on oil in the transport sector in European Union member states countries. The measures which are geared towards the reduction of fuel consumption have great capability to reduce GHG emission and save on car fuel. According to DeLlano-Paz, Calvo-Silvosa, Antelo, and Soares (2015), the low carbon strategy of the European Union has a 20% reduction of GHG emission and is therefore coherent and well developed and will, therefore, achieve the mitigating climate change target.
Accordingly, a review of countries’ impressive reduction potential can help give a clear view of the European Union’s realistic mitigation potential. According to California, electricity ranging between $0.10 and $0.15/kWh produced impressive results in reducing CO2 emissions (Krothapalli and Greska, 2012). Denmark, with its 5.5 million people, has remained on top of climate change mitigation through its use of diverse usage of renewable energy solutions (Maegaard, 2012). According to Corsatea (2014), this evidence is promising for the European Union’s Greening Transport to achieve a 25% reduction potential if the proper coordination of the policy is exploited.
Conclusion
One major source of Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) impacting negatively to the environment is the transport sector. GHG accounts for approximately 23% of the global energy-related emissions as the energy usage in the transport sector is high as compared to any other sector. However, for society to effectively combat GHGs emissions, then there is a need to alter the transport industry. Accordingly, some of the mitigation options include the use of alternative fuels and the power source. The innovation of automobiles based on renewable energy sources has been a significant mitigation option against climate change. The electric vehicles encompassing the HEVs, PHEVs, and AEVs are the mitigation options discussed. These vehicles have the potential to mitigate climate change based on scientific shreds of evidence provided. However, the main barrier to the efficacy of the innovation of automobiles is the financial costs leading to incomplete implementation. However, it is properly implemented and coordinated; electric vehicles initiatives such as the European union’s “Greening transport” implementation can achieve mitigation in Europe and abroad. If the electric vehicles solely generating electricity from renewable energy have a greater potential to minimize CO2 emissions as discussed above, then it follows that the society should encourage the use of these energy-efficient technologies to realize change.
References
ASBEC, L. C. (2016). High Performance: How buildings can make a significant contribution to Australia’s emissions and productivity goals, in. Australian Sustainable Built Environment Council.
Brown, M. A., Kim, G., Smith, A. M., & Southworth, K. (2017). Exploring the impact of energy efficiency as a carbon mitigation strategy in the U.S. Energy Policy, 109, 249-259.
Byrne, J., & Taminiau, J. (2016). A review of sustainable energy utility and energy service utility concepts and applications: realizing ecological and social sustainability with a community utility. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 5(2), 136-154.
Chang, Z., Wu, H., Pan, K., Zhu, H., & Chen, J. (2017). Clean production pathways for the regional power-generation system under emission constraints: A case study of Shanghai, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 989-1000.
Chen, W. Y., Seiner, J., Suzuki, T., & Lackner, M. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of climate change mitigation. Springer.pp100-1221
Cheng, M., & Zhu, Y. (2014). The state of the art of wind energy conversion systems and technologies: A review. Energy Conversion and Management, 88, 332-347.
Cintas, O., Berndes, G., Cowie, A. L., Egnell, G., Holmström, H., & Ågren, G. I. (2016). The climate effect of increased forest bioenergy use in Sweden: evaluation at different spatial and temporal scales. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 5(3), 351-369.
Corsatea, T. D. (2014). Technological capabilities for innovation activities across Europe: Evidence from wind, solar, and bioenergy technologies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 37, 469-479.
DeLlano-Paz, F., Calvo-Silvosa, A., Antelo, S. I., & Soares, I. (2015). The European low-carbon mix for 2030: The role of renewable energy sources in an environmentally and socially efficient approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 48, 49-61.
Denis, A, Graham, P. Csiro, S. Hatfield-Dodds, C. Jotzo, F., Bryan, A., & Nolan, M. (2014). PATHWAYS TO DEEP DECARBONISATION IN 2050: How Australia can prosper in a low carbon world, pp. 11-169
Franco, B., Mahieu, E., Emmons, L. K., Tzompa-Sosa, Z. A., Fischer, E. V., Sudo, K., … & Strong, K. (2016). Evaluating ethane and methane emissions associated with the development of oil and natural gas extraction in North America. Environmental Research Letters, 11(4), 044010.
Glover, L. (2011). Personal Carbon Budgets for Transport. GAMUT, Australasian Centre for the Governance and Management of Urban Transport, University of Melbourne.
Granberg, M., & Glover, L. (2014). Adaptation and maladaptation in Australian national climate change policy. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 16(2), 147-159.
Hoffert, M. I., Caldeira, K., Benford, G., Criswell, D. R., Green, C., Herzog, H., & Lightfoot, H. D. (2002). Advanced technology paths to global climate stability: energy for a greenhouse planet. Science, 298(5595), 981-987.
Hohmeyer, O. H., & Bohm, S. (2015). Trends toward 100% renewable electricity supply in Germany and Europe: a paradigm shift in energy policies. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 4(1), 74-97.
Krothapalli, A. & Greska, B. (2012). Solar Concentrators, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA, pp. 1264-1292
Kuo, J. (2012). Technological Options for Reducing Non-CO2 GHG Emissions, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, California State University, Fullerton, CA, USA, pp 1783-1816
Lee, S., Vandiver, M. Viswanathan, B. Subramanian, V. (2012). Harvesting Solar Energy Using Inexpensive and Benign Materials, 1221-1233
Maegaard, P. (2012Integrated Systems to Reduce Global Warming, Nordic Folkecenter for Renewable Energy, Hurup Thy, Denmark, pp1893-1940
Marcelo Ketzer, J. Rodrigo S. Einloft, S. (2012). Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions with CO2 Capture and Geological Storage, pp1407-1435
Martı’nez de Alegrı’a M., Azucena Vicente, M. Larrea Basterra, M. (2012). Promotion of Renewables and Energy Efficiency by Politics: Case Study of the European Union, pp. 278-313
Maximilian Lackner. (2012). Energy Efficiency: Comparison of Different Systems and Technologies, pp. 884-896
Moriarty, P. & Honnery, D. (2012). Reducing Personal Mobility for Climate Change Mitigation, pp. 1946-1973
Pan, J., Ma, H., & Zhang, Y. (2011). Green economy and green jobs in China: Current status and potentials for 2020. Worldwatch Institute.
Suberu, M. Y., Mustafa, M. W., & Bashir, N. (2014). Energy storage systems for renewable energy power sector integration and mitigation of intermittency. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 35, 499-514.
Van der Hoeven, M. (2013). World energy outlook 2012. International Energy Agency: Tokyo, Japan.
Waheed Uddin. (2012). Mobile and Area Sources of Greenhouse Gases and Abatement Strategies, pp 778-834
Wei-Yin Chen, John Seiner, Toshio Suzuki & Maximilian Lackner (eds.), (2012). Handbook of Climate Change Mitigation, Springer Science& Business Media, LLC, pp. 618-649
Yamaguchi, M. Climate Change Mitigation A Balanced Approach to Climate Change, Springer-Verlag London 2012, pp 180-222
Zakeri, A., Dehghanian, F., Fahimnia, B., & Sarkis, J. (2015). Carbon pricing versus emissions trading: A supply chain planning perspective. International Journal of Production Economics, 164, 197-205.