Cell Reports Sustainability (Jun 2024)
Power sector effects of alternative options for de-fossilizing heavy-duty vehicles—Go electric, and charge smartly
Abstract
Summary: Various options are discussed to de-fossilize heavy-duty vehicles, including battery-electric vehicles (BEVs), electric road systems (ERS), and indirect electrification via hydrogen fuel cells or e-fuels. We investigate their power sector implications in future scenarios of Germany, with high renewable energy shares, using an open-source capacity expansion model and route-based truck traffic data. Power sector costs are the lowest for flexibly charged BEVs that also carry out vehicle-to-grid operations and the highest for e-fuels. If BEVs and ERS-BEVs are not optimally charged, power sector costs increase but are still substantially lower than in scenarios with hydrogen or e-fuels. This is because indirect electrification is less energy efficient, which outweighs potential flexibility benefits. BEVs and ERS-BEVs favor solar photovoltaic energy, while hydrogen and e-fuels favor wind power and increase fossil electricity generation. Results remain qualitatively robust in sensitivity analyses. Science for society: Battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) have emerged in the passenger car sector as the most promising option to de-fossilize transportation. But for heavy-duty vehicles, the technology space is open with alternative options. Aside from BEVs, electric road systems for dynamic power transfer and indirect electrification via hydrogen fuel cells or e-fuels are all alternatives. Although these options differ with respect to technology readiness, market development, and infrastructure requirements, we are interested in their interaction with future power sectors with large shares of variable renewable energy sources. Using an open-source model applied to Germany, we find that direct electrification with smart charging leads to the lowest power sector costs. The difference between pure BEVs and electric road systems is small. The use of hydrogen and e-fuels, by contrast, incurs much higher power sector costs because these options are less energy efficient, which outweighs their potential flexibility benefits.
