Life cycle assessment comparison of electric and internal combustion vehicles: A review on the main challenges and opportunities

Vinicius Braga Ferreira da Costa, Leonardo Bitencourt, Bruno Henriques Dias, Tiago Soares, Jorge Vleberton Bessa de Andrade and Benedito Donizeti Bonatto

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2025, vol. 208, issue C

Abstract: A notable shift from an internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs) fleet to an electric vehicles (EVs) fleet is expected in the medium term due to increasing environmental concerns and technological breakthroughs. In this context, this paper conducts a systematic literature review on life cycle assessment (LCA) research of EVs compared to ICEVs based on highly impactful articles. Several essential aspects and characteristics were identified and discussed, such as the assumed EV types, scales, models, storage technologies, boundaries, lifetime, electricity consumption, driving cycles, combustion fuels, locations, impact assessment methods, and functional units. Furthermore, LCA results in seven environmental impact categories were gathered and evaluated in detail. The research indicates that, on average, battery electric vehicles are superior to ICEVs in terms of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (182.9 g CO2-eq/km versus 258.5 g CO2-eq/km), cumulative energy demand (3.2 MJ/km versus 4.1 MJ/km), fossil depletion (49.7 g oil-eq/km versus 84.4 g oil-eq/km), and photochemical oxidant formation (0.47 g NMVOC-eq/km versus 0.61 g NMVOC-eq/km) but are worse than ICEVs in terms of human toxicity (198.1 g 1,4-DCB-eq/km versus 64.8 g 1,4-DCB-eq/km), particulate matter formation (0.32 g PM10-eq/km versus 0.26 g PM10-eq/km), and metal depletion (69.3 g Fe-eq/km versus 19.0 g Fe-eq/km). Emerging technological developments are expected to tip the balance in favor of EVs further. Based on the conducted research, we propose to organize the factors that influence the vehicle life cycle into four groups: user specifications, vehicle specifications, local specifications, and multigroup specifications. Then, a set of improvement opportunities is provided for each of these groups. Therefore, the present paper can contribute to future research and be valuable for decision-makers, such as policymakers.

Keywords: Electric vehicles; Internal combustion engine vehicles; Energy storage; Life cycle assessment; Environmental impacts; Systematic literature review (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032124007147
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:rensus:v:208:y:2025:i:c:s1364032124007147

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/bibliographic
http://www.elsevier. ... 600126/bibliographic

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2024.114988

Access Statistics for this article

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews is currently edited by L. Kazmerski

More articles in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().