On December 3, Jiang Kejun, a researcher at the Energy Research Institute of the National Development and Reform Commission, said at the "2015 Annual Report on the Development of China's Passenger Vehicle Fuel Consumption" that according to the current research report of the National Development and Reform Commission, in the next few years, pure electric vehicles are needed. The technology will be broken. In 2025, 10 years later, in the new car that will be sold domestically, there will be no traditional car with internal combustion engine as the power, instead it will be a new energy vehicle powered by pure electricity. There will be no traditional cars on sale in China in 2025, when traditional internal combustion engines will be included in the museum along with steam engines. . This paper believes that the energy form itself does not have good or bad, and it is the real energy saving to introduce the right energy into the field of use and use that is suitable for its highest efficiency. Is it all scientific and rigorous to replace all fuel vehicles with electric vehicles? Is it possible to happen within 10 years? This paper will discuss the development direction of pure electric vehicles from three aspects of energy consumption, emissions and economy. The basic background of China's electric power: China's power installed capacity has significant regional characteristics, more wind power in the northwest, more hydropower in the southwest, and more thermal power in North China. Thermal power accounts for the majority of the power supply in the power grids in northern China. For example, China's Beijing Jintang Power Grid has a capacity of 36,999 MW at the end of 2008, accounting for 96.8% of the total installed capacity. The energy consumption and pollution and emissions of fuel vehicles are mainly concentrated in the fuel use phase, while the energy consumption and pollution and emissions of electric vehicles are mainly concentrated in the fuel production stage. In addition to fuel vehicles, the high-power electric vehicles have lower life cycle emissions than HC fuels, and the remaining NOx, PM and SOx pollutant emissions are greater than the fuel tank life cycle emissions. Electric vehicles basically achieve zero emissions during driving, but their good cleanliness is to transfer air pollutants from the city to the surrounding areas away from the city by transferring exhaust emissions to the upstream manufacturing and power generation sides of the electric vehicle. The power generation base is realized. In 2013, the smog in winter in China changed from the partial phenomenon of some cities to the regional change in the country. Therefore, it is difficult to fundamentally alleviate the current situation of smog in China through the regional emission transfer of automobile exhaust pollutants. From the values ​​in the table, it can be obtained again. Under the current energy structure in China, the miniaturization of electric vehicles can guarantee energy saving and emission reduction in the whole life cycle. The list of vehicle acquisition costs is as follows: The list of vehicle usage costs is as follows: Note: Shanghai charging electricity price is 0.617 yuan / kWh, Shenzhen charging electricity price is 0.68 yuan / kWh, Hefei city charging electricity price is 0.5953 yuan / kWh. The average daily driving distance of consumers in Shanghai is 40km, with an average annual driving speed of 14400km (assuming 360 days per year); the daily average driving distance of consumers in Shenzhen is 35km, and the average annual driving distance is 12600km; the daily average driving distance of consumers in Hefei is 25km. The average annual driving distance is 9000km. In terms of vehicle maintenance costs, it mainly includes vehicle maintenance and repair costs, vehicle maintenance costs, insurance premiums, road maintenance fees, etc. The annual inspection and maintenance cost of pure electric vehicles is about every 100 km/6.16 yuan, and ordinary vehicles are every 100 km/14 yuan; In terms of cost, the number of cycles of battery charging is 2,000 times. Kraft Window Stand Up Pouch With Zipper,Frosted Window Kraft Stand Up Zipper Pouch,Matt Black Kraft Pouches With Window,Flat Bottom Standing Kraft Paper Bag Window Shenzhen Lehua Packaging Materials Co., Ltd , https://www.zjlehuapackaging.com
1. Comparison of energy consumption between electric vehicles and fuel vehicles Are all types of electric vehicles more energy efficient than fuel vehicles? Before the analysis, first spread the concept of “primary energy†and “secondary energyâ€.
Primary energy includes fossil fuels (such as raw coal, oil, crude oil, natural gas, etc.), nuclear fuel, biomass, hydro, wind, solar, geothermal, ocean, and tidal energy. Primary energy is divided into renewable energy and non-renewable energy. The former refers to natural energy that can be repeatedly produced, such as solar energy, wind energy, water energy, biomass energy, etc., all of which are from the sun and can be repeatedly produced; One point is mainly various types of fossil fuels and nuclear fuels.
Secondary energy refers to the energy obtained from the conversion of primary energy, including electrical energy, gasoline, diesel, liquefied petroleum gas and hydrogen energy. Secondary energy can be divided into “process energy†and “energy energyâ€. Electric energy is the most widely used process energy, while gasoline and diesel are the most widely used energy sources. Secondary energy can also be interpreted as energy that is reused from primary energy, such as burning coal to generate steam to drive the generator, and the generated electricity can be called secondary energy.
Because the electric energy used in electric vehicles and the gasoline and diesel used in fuel vehicles are secondary energy sources, the internationally accepted method is to use the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), which is also the car, when studying its energy consumption and emissions. The core content of industrial circular economy.
According to the concept of life cycle, for the research of vehicle fuel, the Argonne National Laboratory of the US Department of Energy proposed the "Well-to-Wheel" (WTW) evaluation system. The system is studied in the fuel system, which is divided into two stages: fuel-to-tank (WTT) and motor-used (Tank-to-Wheel, TTW) to study the energy of the entire production and use of motor fuel. Consumption, fuel economy, related pollutant emissions and greenhouse gas emissions.
Under the scenario of power generation installed capacity and energy structure in China in 2012, the life cycle evaluation results of three electric vehicles with different power consumption characteristics were calculated, which were 9.8kWh/100km (type I), 15kWh/100km (type II), 20kWh/ 100km (Type III) and two fuel vehicles with different oil slick characteristics, 8L/100km (Type A) (China's newly released new production vehicle fuel consumption standard) and 9.48L/100km (Type B). Referring to the actual situation of the vehicle, it is considered that the type III electric vehicle is similar to the B type fuel vehicle in comparison with the performance of the vehicle's driving force and comfort. The type II electric vehicle is similar to the A type fuel vehicle, and the type I electric vehicle and the 1.0L row are similar. The small fuel vehicles below the volume are similar. Check the data of China Power Grid Research Institute, and compare the energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions when using different energy generation methods as follows:
Table 1 Life cycle evaluation unit for electric vehicles and fuel vehicles of different models: kj/km
Combined with the above background, analyze the fuel life cycle evaluation of these three different power consumption characteristics of electric vehicles and two fuel-fuel vehicles with different fuel consumption characteristics. As shown in the table, the fossil energy consumption of Type II electric vehicles is increased compared with that of Type A fuel vehicles. 12.9%, carbon emissions increased by about 42.6%. The fossil energy consumption of the Type III electric vehicle is about 26.9% higher than that of the B type fuel vehicle, and the carbon emission is increased by about 60.2%. It can be seen from the results that the use of electric vehicles with similar performance instead of fuel vehicles not only reduces the energy consumption of fossils, but also greatly increases carbon emissions, contrary to the original intention of developing electric vehicles to ensure energy security and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. On the contrary, if an electric vehicle (small car) is used instead of a B-type fuel car, the energy consumption of the electric car fossil is only 62.2%, and the carbon emission is reduced to 74.9%. Through analysis, it can be found that using small electric vehicles instead of large-displacement fuel vehicles under China's current power structure can achieve better energy-saving and emission reduction effects.
Second, exhaust emissions comparison Is all electric vehicles more environmentally friendly than fuel vehicles? The calculation of emissions from non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), suspended particulate matter (PM), and sulfur oxides (SOx) in automobile exhaust is introduced in the life cycle assessment of automobiles. In order to facilitate comparison, increase the exhaust emission analysis of small electric vehicles, and sample them into small electric vehicles with a mass of 400 kg. The target value of economic indicators is 5 kWh/100 km. According to the average power supply standard coal consumption and SOx emissions of thermal power plants in the power industry, the basic results are analyzed as follows:
Third, the use of economic analysis is not all electric vehicles use the cost is lower than the fuel car? According to the nominal life cycle of pure electric vehicles and fuel vehicles, the life cycle is 15 years. The cost analysis formula is as follows:
C full life cycle cost = C vehicle price + C purchase tax - C government subsidies + C energy costs + C vehicle maintenance costs + C battery replacement costs of the three mainstream models of the basic parameters and price:
It can be analyzed that in the 15-year full life cycle, the Roewe E50 is used in the Shanghai area. In order to reflect the economic advantages, it must be that the national and local subsidies do not fall back, the oil price rises 10% per year and the battery price is 10% per year. The decline of the three at the same time guarantees that they are indispensable. For cities such as Hefei, where the average daily mileage is small, vehicles with a price of more than 150,000 yuan (in the case of guaranteed subsidy policy) do not have the fuel economy under the same conditions.
Everyone will sing "The motherland is a big garden, the flowers in the garden are really bright..." In fact, energy is also a big garden. Every energy method has its own characteristics. How to use the different characteristics of energy to maximize its efficiency. The place is to be carried out according to scientific standards. There is no class, not a one-size-fits-all approach. The sword is not as good as a kitchen knife, and the coffin is not as good as an axe. It is said that we cook daily. There is no electricity, gas, biogas, or even honeycomb coal and firewood. It must be based on the differences in regions and the scarcity of energy. Kinds of coexistence, no seeing can be unified! Similarly, according to the above analysis, electric vehicles and fuel vehicles have their own strengths. In their respective fields of strength, they play their respective mainstream roles, complement each other, and interdependence is the norm in the next 10 years. It is by no means impossible to replace them. It is a more pragmatic and scientific attitude to supplement, not replace, scientifically classify and develop miniaturized pure electric vehicles to replace fuel vehicles in their dominant areas.