Technical and economical assessment of a multipurpose electric vehicle for farmers

被引:26
作者
Mousazadeh, Hossein [2 ]
Keyhani, Alireza [2 ]
Mobli, Hossein [2 ]
Bardi, Ugo [3 ]
Lombardi, Ginevra [1 ]
el Asmar, Toufic [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florence, Dipartimento Econ Agr & Risorse Terr, I-50100 Florence, Italy
[2] Univ Tehran, Agr Machinery Engn Dept, Tehran, Iran
[3] Univ Florence, Dipartimento Chim, I-50019 Sesto Fiorentino, Italy
关键词
Life-cycle cost; Payback period; Escalation; Discount rate; Present value; SYSTEM; HYBRID; GENERATOR; ENERGY; INDIA;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.05.009
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The RAMseS project, under the European Commission's 6th Framework: Program, is dedicated to the construction and test of low-power operations based on photovoltaic power and a multipurpose electric vehicle. In the present study, the life-cycle costs and economical indices for the vehicle during its life span were assessed, compared to those of a standard internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV). The results indicated that the life-cycle costs for the RAMseS vehicle and the ICEV are the same for a fuel unit price of 1.8 (sic)/L Also, the levelized cost of energy (LCE) for the RAMseS vehicle, was found to be 2.13 (sic)/kWh, while RAMseS LCE, without EV taken into account, was shown to be 0.62 (sic)/kWh. The RAMseS payback period (PBP) without EV taken into account was calculated to be 9 years if the value of the produced energy becomes at least 0.35 (sic)/kWh. Vehicles that use PV systems as their power source, such as RAMseS, will be economically effective for fuel costs higher than 1.8 (sic)/L., but considering the environmental benefits that are provided in terms of external costs, they can be considered profitable even at lower fuel costs. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1556 / 1562
页数:7
相关论文
共 26 条
[11]  
*EX TECHN IN EN, OPZS SOL BATT CAT
[12]   Economic and environmental comparison of conventional, hybrid, electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles [J].
Granovskii, Mikhail ;
Dincer, Ibrahim ;
Rosen, Marc A. .
JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES, 2006, 159 (02) :1186-1193
[13]  
Hunt D., 2001, FARM POWER MACHINERY, P75
[14]  
KHOUZAM KY, 1999, IEEE T ENERGY CONVER, P14
[15]   Economic viability of stand-alone solar photovoltaic system in comparison with diesel-powered system for India [J].
Kolhe, M ;
Kolhe, S ;
Joshi, JC .
ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2002, 24 (02) :155-165
[16]   A comparative life cycle energy cost analysis of photovoltaic and fuel generator for load shedding application [J].
Koner, PK ;
Dutta, V ;
Chopra, KL .
SOLAR ENERGY MATERIALS AND SOLAR CELLS, 2000, 60 (04) :309-322
[17]   The economics of photovoltaic stand-alone residential households: A case study for various European and Mediterranean locations [J].
Lazou, AA ;
Papatsoris, AD .
SOLAR ENERGY MATERIALS AND SOLAR CELLS, 2000, 62 (04) :411-427
[18]   Environmental assessment of RAMseS multipurpose electric vehicle compared to a conventional combustion engine vehicle [J].
Mousazadeh, Hossein ;
Keyhani, Alireza ;
Mobli, Hossein ;
Bardi, Ugo ;
Lombardi, Ginevra ;
el Asmar, Toufic .
JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2009, 17 (09) :781-790
[19]   Photovoltaic projects for decentralized power supply in India: A financial evaluation [J].
Nouni, M. R. ;
Mullick, S. C. ;
Kandpal, T. C. .
ENERGY POLICY, 2006, 34 (18) :3727-3738
[20]   Rural area power supply in Nigeria: A cost comparison of the photovoltaic, diesel/gasoline generator and grid utility options [J].
Oparaku, OU .
RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2003, 28 (13) :2089-2098