Local environmental benefits of fuel cell buses-a case studyIntroductionLocal environmental effects of FC buses in GoteborgGoal and scopeEmission factorsSite-specific monetary valuation of particulatesSite-specific monetary valuation of noise reductionSite-specific monetary valuation of NOx reductionLocal environmental cost resultsThe monetary value of carbon dioxide reductionComparing the local environmental costs with the capital and fuel costsConclusionsAcknowledgementsReferencesLocal environmental benefits of fuel cell busesda case studyMagnus Karlstro¨m)Environmental Systems Analysis, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96 Go¨teborg, SwedenReceived 19 September 2003; accepted 22 December 2003AbstractThis study presents a quantitative assessment of the local environmental benefits of using fuel cell buses in comparison withEURO 5 diesel buses and compressed natural gas buses along a central bus route in Go¨teborg, Sweden, in 2006. The influence of fuelcell buses on the ambient concentration of NOx, particulates, and noise pollution is assessed and evaluated in monetary terms, andcompared with their capital and fuel. In addition, the greenhouse gas reduction potential is assessed. The results show that thepresent local environmental benefits are much smaller than the annualized purchase cost of a prototype fuel cell, but the localmonetary benefits will be meaningful to consider when comparing with the incremental costs of a mass-produced fuel cell bus.Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Keywords: Damage cost; Fuel cell bus; Public transport; Environmental benefits1. IntroductionFossil fuel use in the transportation sector divergesfrom the long-term goal of stabilising greenhouse gasesat levels that avoid ‘‘dangerous anthropogenic inter-ference with the climate system’’ [1,2]. Although theenvironmental performance of vehicles has improved,the transportation sector is still a major contributor toseveral other environmental problems [3].Fuel cells have the potential to reduce a range ofenvironmental problems associated with energy use, suchas emissions and energy resource depletion. The solidpolymer fuel cell (SPF C) or proton exchange membranefuel cell (PEM), which is a low-temperature fuel cell withhigh power density, is the most promising technologyfor fuel cell use in vehicles [4]. Before fuel cells can reachsignificant market shares, several barriers must be con-sidered, such as high cost and uncertain technical per-formance. In addition, the barriers created by social andeconomic systems in which technologies are embeddedshould be considered [5]. Strategic niche managementhas been proposed as a technology policy to encouragethe introduction of new technologies [6]. Niches canserve to demonstrate new technologies and help decreasethe costs of the technology. The innovation dynamics offuel cells and some of the barriers to the adoption of thetechnology have been discussed in an article by Hall andKerr [7].Even though it is doubtful whether the city busmarket is large enough to bring about dramatic costreductions from economies of scale, city buses have beenproposed as a nursing market for fuel cells because theyare easier to develop than the larger market of light-dut yvehicles [8] . A number of technical and institutionalarguments have been put forward to support this thesis[8e10]. For example, it is technically easier to designa fuel cell system for buses than for cars, fuel cell busescan be controlled and developed as public demonstra-tion projects, and the building of a hydrogen energysupply system is fairly easy because the buses arecentrally refuelled with compressed hydrogen. In addi-tion, city buses are used in densely populated areaswhere the environm ental benefits of zero tail pipeemissions are greater.This study presents a quantitative assessment of thelocal environmental benefits in monetary terms forusing fuel cell buses along a central bus route in Go¨te-borg, Sweden in the year 2006. The study is designed tostudy the significance of local environmental benefitsthrough a comparison of greenhouse gases and capitaland fuel costs.)Tel.: C46-31-7722158; fax: C46-31-7722172.E-mail address: [email protected] of Cleaner Production 13 (2005) 679e685www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro0959-6526/$ - see front matter Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2003.12.0162. Local environmental effects of FC buses in Go¨teborg2.1. Goal and scopeTo quantify the local environmental benefits of fuelcells and how they could influence the niche market ofcity buses, an assessment of bus route 60 in Go¨teborg in2006 was made. The case study, its scope, and vehiclealternatives have been chosen in consultation withrepresentatives from the Go¨teborg Environment andHealth Protection Agency and the Traffic and PublicTransport Authority [11].The bus route is approximately 9 km long. In 2002,the bus route averaged 100 return trips a day; that is, thebuses made 200 trips on each street each day andtravelled 657,000 km per year [11]. About 20 fuel cellbuses are needed during the busiest hour. This specificroute was chosen since the population is dense aroundit, which will increase the environmental benefits of lessparticulates and noise. The choice of a beneficialsituation relates to the focus on nursing markets ratherthan on a complete direct substitution of all buses.Fuel cell bus es are compared with two other busalternatives: compressed natural gas (CNG) buses andadvanced diesel buses. All buses were assumed tocomply with the EURO 5 emission standard. The fuelcell buses use hydrogen produced from decentralisedsteam reforming of natural gas.Only the use phase (‘‘tank-to-wheel’’) is considered inthis study. Thus, non-local emissions are not included,such as emissions from the production and distributionof natural gas and diesel. NOxand particulates were thepollutants studied. The only exception is that NOxemissions from the steam reforming to hydrogen areincluded because the emission occurs in the city. Noisereduction was also considered relevant.The monetary values on the environmental im-pacts are based on an SIKA report [12].1However, thevalues for noise reduction and particulates are adaptedto the conditions for bus route 60 (Table 1). Addition-ally, the SIKA values are compared to estimates intwo other studies about external values (Table 1). Theenvironmental costs are presented in 2001