The Environmental Benefits of Electric Vehicles as a Function of Renewable Energy The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Cornell, Ryan P. 2017. The Environmental Benefits of Electric Vehicles as a Function of Renewable Energy. Master's thesis, Harvard Extension School. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33826493 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA The Environmental Benefits of Electric Vehicles as a Function of Renewable Energy Ryan Cornell A Thesis in the Field of Sustainability and Environmental Management for the Degree of Master of Liberal Arts in Extension Studies Harvard University May 2017 Copyright 2017 Ryan Cornell Abstract This project analyzes the relative benefits of electric vehicles (EV) as compared to their internal combustion engine (ICE) counterparts. Specifically, I contrast the air pollutant related social costs that can be quantified and assigned to each type of vehicle. These costs are based on the externalities (per metric ton) associated with carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. The difference in social costs is defined as the appropriate EV Subsidy, where a positive EV Subsidy indicates that the social costs for an electric vehicle are less than the social costs for an internal combustion engine vehicle. My research was centered around answering the question: What impact does the percentage of renewable energy have on the appropriate subsidy for an electric vehicle and how does the percentage of renewable energy impact the GHG mitigation potential for electric vehicles? I hypothesized that the negative environmental impact for a 100% renewable energy powered electric vehicle would be lower than the impact from an internal combustion engine vehicle with an efficiency of 80 miles per gallon, that the appropriate federal subsidy for a 100% renewable energy powered electric vehicle would be over $3,000 (when compared to an internal combustion engine vehicle with an efficiency of 25.4 miles per gallon), and that a 100% renewable energy powered electric vehicle would produce 50% fewer greenhouse gas emissions than an internal combustion engine vehicle with an efficiency of 80 miles per gallon. I employed Argonne National Laboratory’s GREET Model, the AP2 Model, and a variety of meta-analyses to determine these social costs. Each cost is a function of a variety of factors. Social costs for the internal combustion engine vehicle strongly correlate with the vehicle’s miles per gallon, while the social costs for an electric vehicle strongly correlate with the percentage of renewable energy. Many studies look at a static grid, but I analyzed the impact that renewable energy has on the disparity in social costs between electric vehicles and gasoline-powered vehicles. Additionally, my model disaggregates grid-based and non-grid-based production costs, which allows production- based social costs to accurately reflect that percentage of renewable energy that is entered into the model. I conclude that the environmental benefits of electric vehicles are directly related to the level of renewable energy in the grid. The EV Subsidy for the 2016 grid (13.3% renewable energy) and an average internal combustion engine vehicle (25.4 miles per gallon) was $2,376, while the EV Subsidy for a 100% renewable energy grid reached $3,988. A 100% renewable energy grid also produced an electric vehicle with significantly lower social costs than a gasoline-powered vehicle with an efficiency of 80 miles per gallon (EV Subsidy = $1,071). Acknowledgements I am incredibly fortunate to have been surrounded by an amazing group of people that made this project possible. I want to start by thanking Dr. Mark Leighton. His guidance was invaluable and he was there for every step of this journey: from the great conversations that we had in Tuscany, to the formation of the thesis proposal, to the finished product. I also want to thank my friends and family members that looked over, proofread, and added insight to the project: Renee Cornell, Paul Cornell, Chad Cornell, Rob Cornell, and Jeff Simpson. I also want to thank Rob Cornell for planting a seed in my mind that grew into an integral part of my model. My Harvard SEM classmates have been an inspiration. I can’t imagine a more altruistic group of people and I am looking forward to the positive changes that these individuals bring about. I want to give a special “thank you” to Emily Holleran for her insight and friendship throughout this process. Emily’s comments and critiques helped to shape the foundation of my project and I only hope that I can return the favor. I am indebted to my extraordinary thesis direction: Dr. Jennifer Clifford. Jennifer was always available to help (even when she was on vacation) and her detailed insightful comments went above and beyond any expectations that I could have add. Thank you! I cannot thank my wife, Lisa, enough. She is my motivation, my support system, and the inspiration behind my project. Lisa’s innate altruism inspires me to make the world a better place and I can only hope that this project will have such an impact. v Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. v List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures ................................................................................................................... xii I. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 Research Significance and Objectives .................................................................... 2 Background ............................................................................................................. 4 Electric Vehicles ......................................................................................... 4 Electricity Generation and Emissions ......................................................... 5 The Coupling of Renewable Energy and Electric Vehicles ....................... 8 Renewable Energy and the Modern Grid ................................................. 10 The Grid of the Future .............................................................................. 13 Externalities and the Social Cost of Carbon ............................................. 14 The Relationship Between Renewable Energy and Externalities ............. 15 Research Questions, Hypotheses, and Specific Aims ........................................... 16 Specific Aims ............................................................................................ 17 II. Methods ...................................................................................................................... 18 Renewable Energy and the United States Grid ..................................................... 18 Proportional Model ................................................................................... 19 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Regression Model ...... 22 Combined Model ...................................................................................... 25 Social Cost: Electric Vehicle ................................................................................ 26 vi Power Plant Emissions .............................................................................. 28 Social Cost per kWh ................................................................................. 29 Social Cost for an Electric Vehicle ........................................................... 32 Social Cost: Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) Vehicle ..................................... 32 Social Cost for an ICE Vehicle ................................................................. 34 Non-Operating Costs ............................................................................................ 35 Subsidy and Variables .......................................................................................... 37 Monte Carlo Simulation ............................................................................ 38 III. Results ........................................................................................................................ 39 Carbon Dioxide Emissions ................................................................................... 39 The Electric Vehicle (EV) Subsidy ...................................................................... 41 Social Cost (SC) of Operating an Internal Combustion Engine Vehicle .. 41 Social Cost of Operating an Electric Vehicle ........................................... 42 Non-Operating Costs ................................................................................ 46 The Electric Vehicle Subsidy (Operation and Production Phase) ............ 47 Subsidy for an Electric Vehicle Powered by Photovoltaics ..................... 50 Monte Carlo Simulation ............................................................................ 52 Monte Carlo Simulation for 100% Photovoltaic-powered EV ................. 55 Carbon Dioxide Emissions ......................................................................