{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0275, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013125, 'mean_word_length': 5.8418803418803416, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Life Cycle Assessment of Electric and Fuel Cell Vehicle Transport Based on Forest Biomass

Use of biomass‐based electricity and hydrogen in alternative transport could provide environmentally sustainable transport options with possible improvements in greenhouse gas balance. We perform a life cycle assessment of electric vehicle (EV) and fuel cell vehicle (FCV) powered by bioelectricity and biohydrogen, respectively, derived from Norwegian boreal forest biomass, considering the nonclimate neutrality of biological carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and alteration in surface albedo resulting from biomass harvesting—both with and without CO2 capture and storage (CCS)—while benchmarking these options against EVs powered by the average European electricity mix. Results show that with due consideration of the countering effects from global warming potential (GWP) factors for biogenic CO2 emissions and change in radiative forcing of the surface for the studied region, bioenergy‐based EVs and FCVs provide reductions of approximately 30%, as compared to the reference EV powered by the average European electricity mix. With CCS coupled to bioenergy production, the biomass‐based vehicle transport results in a net global warming impact reduction of approximately 110% to 120% (giving negative GWP and creating a climate‐cooling benefit from biomass use). Other environmental impacts vary from −60% to +60%, with freshwater eutrophication showing maximum reductions (40% for the EV case and 60% for the FCV case) and photochemical oxidation showing a maximum increase (60% in the FCV value chain).