logo
calendar30 Dekabr 2025
view14
Main language:Uzbek

Ecological advantages and disadvantages of hybrid and alternative fuel vehicles

Field of Science:Computer ScienceAutomotive EngineeringElectrical and Electronic Engineering
pdf

61._Bahodirov_G_.M._-_G....pdf

PDF

Scientific electronic journal "Digital Economy"

Scientific electronic journal "Digital Economy"

Publish Articlesee more

ARTICLE ANNOTATION

quote
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the environmental characteristics of hybrid and alternative fuel vehicles, life cycle emissions (LCA), economic efficiency, and the possibilities of their application in Uzbekistan. The research was conducted based on literature analysis, LCA analysis of four types of vehicles, and calculations adapted to the energy system of Uzbekistan. The results show that the emission of electric vehicles at the operational stage is zero, but considering the production and source of electricity (coal and gas power plants predominate in Uzbekistan), the total emission is only 35-45% lower than that of gasoline-powered vehicles. Hybrid cars consume 40-50% less fuel and reduce emissions by 45%. Hydrogen vehicles are the purest in theory, but the hydrogen production process generates significant emissions. CNG vehicles reduce CO2 by 25% and are the most suitable solution for Uzbekistan.

AUTHORS

G.Bahodirov

ANDIJON DAVLAT TEXNIKA INSTITUTI

Tags

# emissions# hybrid vehicles# electric vehicles# hydrogen transport# CNG# biofuel# life cycle analysis# ecological transport

SIMILAR ARTICLES

OTHER ARTICLES IN THIS JOURNAL

Rate Article

0
0 ratings
5
4
3
2
1

Article Identifiers

ROI:

https://eroi.uz/11.142/A026-460506

DOI:

Not Available

References

IEA. Global Energy Review: CO₂ Emissions in 2023. Paris: International Energy Agency, 2024. 142 p.

Ahmadi P., Torabi S.H., Afsaneh H., et al. The effects of driving patterns and PEM fuel cell degradation on the lifecycle assessment of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles // International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. 2020. Vol. 45(5). P. 3340-3351. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.103

O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Ekologiya va atrof-muhitni muhofaza qilish vazirligi. Milliy iqlim strategiyasi 2030. Toshkent, 2022. 85 p.

Hawkins T.R., Singh B., Majeau-Bettez G., Strømman A.H. Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional and electric vehicles // Journal of Industrial Ecology. 2013. Vol. 17(1). P. 53-64. DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12084

Onat N.C., Kucukvar M., Tatari O. Conventional, hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric vehicles? // Energy. 2015. Vol. 86. P. 555-561. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2015.03.106

Messagie M., Boureima F.S., Coosemans T., Macharis C., Van Mierlo J. A range-based vehicle life cycle assessment incorporating variability in the environmental assessment of different vehicle technologies and fuels // Energies. 2014. Vol. 7(3). P. 1467-1482. DOI: 10.3390/en7031467

Romare M., Dahllöf L. The life cycle energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from lithium-ion batteries. Stockholm: IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, 2017. 58 p. DOI: 10.1038/s41893-019-0351-8

Hardman S., Tal G. Understanding discontinuance among California’s electric vehicle owners // Nature Energy. 2021. Vol. 6. P. 538-545. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.07.054

Kakoulaki G., Kougias I., Taylor N., Dolci F., Moya J., Jäger-Waldau A. Green hydrogen in Europe // Energies. 2021. Vol. 14(2). P. 462. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110024

Khan M.I., Yasmin T., Shakoor A. Technical overview of compressed natural gas (CNG) as a transportation fuel // Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2015. Vol. 51. P. 785-797. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.053