Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of life cycle environmental performance of public road transport modes in metropolitan regions

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A comparative life cycle energy and environmental inventory has been developed for public road transport modes in metropolitan regions in India. The environmental performance of public bus transport (PBT) and intermediate public transport (IPT) modes, viz. taxi and auto-rickshaw, in Mumbai Metropolitan Region has been assessed and compared at off-peak, average and peak levels of vehicle occupancy. Moreover, the environmental performance of vehicles adhering to Bharat Stage (BS) emission norms has been assessed. The inventory captures both vehicle operation (tail-pipe emissions) and non-operation components (e.g. vehicle manufacturing, vehicle maintenance and fuel production). GaBi 6.5 has been used to assess the environmental impact in terms of global warming, acidification, eutrophication, photochemical ozone creation, abiotic depletion potential and primary energy demand. The functional unit of the study was defined as passenger kilometre travelled in 15 years, the service lifetime of the vehicle. The results show that tail-pipe emissions dominate the life cycle environmental impact of PBT (75% of 17.2 g CO2-eq/PKT), taxi (78% of 85 g CO2-eq/PKT) and auto-rickshaw (78% of 78 g CO2-eq/PKT). However, in case of vehicles adhering to BS-VI stringent emission norms, vehicle non-operation components dominate the life cycle environmental impact of public road transport modes. Therefore, vehicle non-operation components should be considered while addressing the environmental performance of public road transport modes. For all three occupancy levels, PBT is environment-friendly compared to IPT modes. However, the break-even point assessment highlights that the bus services should be operated with at least 11 passengers to make its global warming potential equivalent to IPT modes. In case of shared services of the taxi and auto-rickshaw, this equivalency increases to 23 and 29 passengers, respectively. Eventually, this study provides the benchmark that can lead regional transport planners to more informed and prioritized mitigation measures for improving the environmental footprint of public transportation in metropolitan regions in India.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ADP:

Abiotic depletion potential

AP:

Acidification potential

BEB:

Battery electric bus

BEST:

Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport

BS:

Bharat Stage emission norms

CAGR:

Compound annual growth rate

CNG:

Compressed natural gas

CTS:

Comprehensive Transport Study

EP:

Eutrophication potential

GHG:

Greenhouse gas

GWP:

Global warming potential

HC:

Hydrocarbons

HFCB:

Hydrogen fuel cells-powered buses

ICEB:

Internal combustion engine bus

IPT:

Intermediate public transport

LCA:

Life cycle assessment

LCI:

Life cycle inventory

LCIA:

Life cycle impact assessment

MCGM:

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

MMR:

Mumbai Metropolitan Region

MMRDA:

Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority

NEERI:

National Environmental Engineering Research Institute

ODP:

Ozone depletion potential

OHE:

Overhead equipment

PBT:

Public bus transport

PED:

Primary energy demand

PKT:

Passenger kilometre travelled

PMSD:

Preventive maintenance schedule and docking

POCP:

Photochemical ozone creation potential

VKT:

Vehicle kilometre travelled

References

  • Aggarwal P, Jain S (2014) Energy demand and CO2 emissions from urban on-road transport in Delhi: current and future projections under various policy measures. J Clean Prod 128:48–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ally J, Pryor T (2007) Life-cycle assessment of diesel, natural gas and hydrogen fuel cell bus transportation systems. J Power Sources 170:401–411

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ashok Leyland (2016) Specifications for 12 meter long distance runner chassis. Ashok Leyland, Chennai

    Google Scholar 

  • Bajaj Auto (2017) Technical specifications for CNG fueled auto-rickshaw. http://www.bajajauto.com/bajajre/alternate-optima-tech-specs.html#

  • BEST (2014) Comparative annual operational and financial data for the period 2003-04 to 2012-12. Data published online by BEST, Mumbai. http://www.bestundertaking.com. Accessed 20 Dec 2018

  • Bhandari M, Advani P, Parida S Gangopadhyay (2015) Consideration of access and egress trips in carbon footprint estimation of public transport trips: case study of Delhi. J Clean Prod 85(15):234–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Chester M, Horvath A (2009) Environmental assessment of passenger transportation should include infrastructure and supply chains. Environ Res Lett 4:024008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chester M, Pincetl S, Elizabeth Z, Eisenstein W, Matute J (2013) Infrastructure and automobile shifts: positioning transit to reduce life-cycle environmental impacts for urban sustainability goals. Environ Res Lett 8:015041

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cooney G (2011) Life cycle assessment of diesel and electric public transportation buses. Master’s Thesis, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

  • Cooney G, Hawkins TR, Marriott J (2013) Life cycle assessment of diesel and electric public transportation buses. J Ind Ecol 1:1. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12024

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • CPCB (2011) Air quality monitoring, emission inventory and source apportionment study for Indian cities. Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, New Delhi, India

  • CPCB (2015) Status of pollution generated from road transport in six mega cities. Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, New Delhi, India

  • Dattilo CA, Zanchi L, Del Pero F, Delogu M (2017) Sustainable design: an integrated approach for lightweighting components in the automotive sector. Smart Innov Syst Technol 68:291–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Pero F, Delogu M, Pierini M (2017) The effect of lightweighting in automotive LCA perspective: estimation of mass-induced fuel consumption reduction for gasoline turbocharged vehicles. J Clean Prod 154:566–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delogu M, Del Pero F, Pierini M (2016) Lightweight design solutions in the automotive field: environmental modelling based on fuel reduction value applied to diesel turbocharged vehicles. Sustainability 8:1167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delogu M, Maltese S, Del Pero F, Zanchi L, Pierini M, Bonoli A (2018) Challenges for modelling and integrating environmental performances in concept design: the case of an automotive component lightweighting. Int J Sustain Eng 11(2):135–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ercan T, Tatari O (2015) A hybrid life cycle assessment of public transportation buses with alternative fuel options. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1213–1231

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fameli KM, Assimakopoulos VD (2015) Development of a road transport emission inventory for Greece and the Greater Athens area: effects of important parameters. Sci Total Environ 505:770–786

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gulia S, Shiv Nagendra SM, Barnes J, Khare M (2018) Urban local air quality management framework for non-attainment areas in Indian cities. Sci Total Environ 619–620:1308–1318

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Howkins TR, Singh B, Majeau-Bettez G, Stromann AH (2012) Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional and electric vehicles. J Ind Ecol 17(1):53–64

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly JC, Sullivan JL, Burnham A, Elgowainy A (2015) Impacts of vehicle weight reduction via material substitution on life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions. Environ Sci Technol 49:12535–12542

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kim HC, Wallington TJ (2013) Life-cycle energy and greenhouse gas emission benefits of lightweight in automobiles: review and harmonization. Environ Sci Technol 47:6089–6097

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kliucininkas L, Matulevicius J, Martuzevicius D (2012) The life cycle assessment of alternative fuel chains for urban buses and trolleybuses. J Environ Manage 99:98–103

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Koffler C (2013) Life cycle assessment of automotive lightweight through polymers under US boundary conditions. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2013(19):538–545

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar AK, Ketzel M, Patil RS, Ole H (2016) Vehicular pollution modelling using operational street pollution model (OSPM) for Chembur, Mumbai (India). Environ Monit Assess 188(6):349

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Majeau-Bettez G, Hawkins TR, Strømman AH (2011) Life cycle environmental assessment of lithium-ion and nickel metal hydride batteries for plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 45:4548–4554

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maji KJ, Dikshit AK, Deshpande A (2017) Disability-adjusted life years and economic cost assessment of the health effects related to PM2.5 and PM10 pollution in Mumbai and Delhi, in India from 1991 to 2015. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:4709–4730

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mani A, Pai A, Aggarwal R (2012) Sustainable urban transport in India: role of the auto-rickshaw sector. World Resources Institute, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • MCGM (2016) Comprehensive mobility plan for greater Mumbai, volume I: main report. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM), Mumbai

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza JF, Josa A, Rieradevall J, Gabarrell X (2015) Environmental impact of public charging facilities for electric two-wheelers. J Ind Ecol 20(1):54–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michal V, Beranek V, Vojtech K, Petr J, Pechout M, Vorisek T (2018) On-road and laboratory emissions of NO, NO2, NH3, N2O and CH4 from late-model EU light utility vehicles: comparison of diesel and CNG. Sci Total Environ 616–617:774–784

    Google Scholar 

  • MMRDA (2008) Comprehensive transport study for Mumbai metropolitan region. Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (MMRDA), Mumbai

    Google Scholar 

  • MMRDA (2017) Basic transport & communications statistics for Mumbai metropolitan region. Transport & communications division. Metropolitan Regional Development Authority (MMRDA), Mumbai

    Google Scholar 

  • Nanaki EA, Koroneos CJ, Xydis G, Dimitrios R (2014) Comparative environmental assessment of Athens urban buses-diesel, CNG and biofuel powered. Transp Policy 35:311–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NEERI (2010a) Air quality assessment, emissions inventory and source apportionment studies: Mumbai. National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Mumbai

    Google Scholar 

  • NEERI (2010b) Air quality assessment, emissions inventory and source apportionment study for Indian cities. National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI), Mumbai

    Google Scholar 

  • Notter DA, Gauch M, Widmer R, Wager P, Stamp A, Zah R, Althaus H (2010) Contribution of Li-ion batteries to the environmental impact of electric vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 44:6550–6556

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ou X, Zhang X, Chang S (2010) Alternative fuel buses currently in use in China: life cycle fossil energy use, GHG emissions and policy recommendations. Energy Policy 38:406–418

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rahman MH, Chin HC, Haque MM (2010) Sustainability in road transport: an integrated life cycle analysis for estimating emissions. In: International conference on sustainable built environment (ICSBE): the state of the art

  • Samaras C, Meisterling K (2008) Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles: implications for policy. Environ Sci Technol 42:3170–3176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shen W, Han W, Chock D, Chai Q, Zhang A (2012) Well-to-wheels life-cycle analysis of alternative fuels and vehicle technologies in China. Energy Policy 49:296–307

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shinde AM, Dikshit AK, Singh RK, Campana PE (2018) Life cycle analysis based comprehensive environmental performance evaluation of Mumbai Suburban Railway, India. J Clean Prod 188:989–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shlaes E, Mani A (2013) A case study of Auto-rickshaw sector in Mumbai. EMBARQ India

  • Singh A, Gangopadhyay S, Nanda PK, Bhattacharya S, Sharma C, Bhan C (2008) Trends of greenhouse gas emissions from the road transport sector in India. Sci Total Environ 390:124–131

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sundvor CF (2013) Life cycle assessment of road vehicles for private and public transportation. Master thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway

  • Taptich MN, Horvath A, Chester M (2016) Worldwide greenhouse gas reduction potentials in transportation by 2050. J Ind Ecol 1:1. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thein S, Chang YS (2014) Decision making model for lifecycle assessment of lithium-ion battery for electric vehicle—a case study for smart electric bus project in Korea. J Power Sources 249:142–147

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • thinkstep (2010) Life cycle CO2e assessment of low carbon cars 2020–2030: for the low carbon vehicle partnership. thinkstep Sustainability Solutions Private Limited, Mumbai

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonje B (2015) Environmental assessment of bus transport in the Trondheim region. Master’s thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway

  • University of Leiden (2001) Centre for environmental studies: CML 2001 characterization method. http://www.cml.leiden.edu/. Accessed 20 Dec 2018

  • Xavier B, Margarita T, David A, Noemi P, Cristina R, Andrés A, Xavier Q (2018) Effect of public transport strikes on air pollution levels in Barcelona (Spain). Sci Total Environ 610–611:1076–1082

    Google Scholar 

  • Zackrisson M, Avellan L, Orlenius J (2010) Life cycle assessment of lithium-ion batteries for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles—critical issues. J Clean Prod 18:1519–1529

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors sincerely thank the management and the staff of the BEST public bus transport for providing the data needed for carrying out the present research study. The first author would like to acknowledge the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India, for providing financial assistance.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Environmental Science and Engineering (CESE), Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India

    Amar Mohan Shinde & Anil Kumar Dikshit

  2. thinkstep Sustainability Solutions Pvt. Ltd., a subsidiary of thinkstep AG, Mumbai, India

    Rajesh Kumar Singh

Authors
  1. Amar Mohan Shinde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anil Kumar Dikshit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rajesh Kumar Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anil Kumar Dikshit.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix A: The general specifications of bus (Ashok Leyland 2016)

Specifications

Chassis

Flat-ladder steel frame

Engine

H Series HA135LT3, 6 cylinder

Engine power

135 kW (180 HP) @ 2500 rpm

Maximum torque (Nm)

550 Nm @ 1500–2100 rpm

Gearbox

6 speed ZF-S6-36 (synchromesh)

Rear axle

Fully floating, single-speed hypoid gear

Tyre

10 R 20 radial

Body

Extruded aluminium

Length, height and width (mm)

11,000, 3215 and 2540

Kerb weight

 

 Diesel bus

9850 kg

 CNG bus

10,250 kg

Passenger capacity

70 (50 seating + 20 standing)

Appendix B: Materials required for manufacturing of shell and furnishing interiors of bus

Component

Material

Percentage by mass

Shell

 Trough floor

Rolled mild steel

35.2

 Sidewall and roof

Extruded aluminium

50.9

 Floor sheet

Aluminium sheet

13.9

Total

100

Furnishing interiors

 Exterior panel

Aluminium sheet

11.3

 Interior panel

Stainless steel sheet

1.8

Aluminium sheet

7.0

 Seats

Mild steel

10.9

LDPE plastic

8.1

 Windows

Glass

39.8

Rubber

1.8

 Handholds

Cast aluminium

6.5

 Paint

–

0.6

 Front module

Steel channels and sheet

12.4

Total

100

Appendix C: Major components of bus chassis

Component

Percentage by mass

Underframe

18.7

Suspension

14.9

Battery

1.6

Engine

8.3

Propeller

3.1

Radiator

0.7

Gearbox and clutch

2.7

Steering

1.0

Brake drums

6.2

Rims

4.1

Tyres

2.4

Rear axle

18.1

Front axle

9.4

Cylinders

8.1

Grease, oils and paint

0.6

Total

100

Appendix D: Materials required for replacement of furnishing interiors, PMSD and refurbishment of bus

Component

Percentage by mass

Replacement of furnishing interiors

 Trough floor

10.2

 Shell

8.8

 Floor sheet

15.9

 Battery

9.1

 Radiator

2.1

 Gearbox (clutch replt.)

4.4

 Brake drums

17.9

 Tyres

21.1

 Axle shaft

7.7

 Engine (piston)

2.9

Total

100

PMSD

 Lubrication

43.4

 Paint

3.7

 Unit replacement

52.9

Total

100

Refurbishment

 Exterior panel

11.3

 Interior panel

8.7

 Seats

19.0

 Windows

41.5

 Handholds

6.5

 Paint

0.6

 Front module

12.4

Total

100

Appendix E: General specifications of the auto-rickshaw (Bajaj Auto 2017)

Specifications

Chassis

Pressed steel sheets and sections

Engine

CNG 2-stroke

Engine power

7.25 kW @ 5500 rpm

Engine displacement

198.8 cc

Maximum torque (Nm)

14.9 Nm @ 3750 rpm

Rear axle

Fully floating axle shaft

Tyre

(4.00-8) 4PR

Length, height and width (mm)

2800, 1778 and 1330 mm

Kerb weight

421 kg

Passenger capacity

3

Appendix F: Materials required for manufacturing and maintenance of the taxi and auto-rickshaw

Vehicle component/material

Percentage by mass

Taxi

Auto-rickshaw

Manufacturing of vehicle

 Steel

61.0

49.9

 Aluminium

5.6

10.5

 Copper

0.7

1.0

 Glass

3.3

4.0

 Paint

3.0

4.8

 Plastic

20.5

19.7

 Tyres

0.7

1.7

 Battery

1.2

3.3

 Fluids

4.1

5.2

Total

100

100

Maintenance of vehicle

 Tyre

10.0

10.7

 Paint

13.3

10.2

 Battery

10.3

14.2

 Fluids

66.4

64.9

Total

100

100

Appendix G: Fuel consumption (in 1000 t) and PKT (in billion) for PBT in 15 years

Years

Diesel

CNG

PKT

2013–2015

63

186

35

2016–2018

66

175

37

2019–2021

69

181

40

2022–2024

68

180

43

2025–2027

72

180

46

Total

337

902

201

Appendix H: Fuel consumption (in 1000 t) and PKT (in billion) for the taxi and auto-rickshaw in 15 years

Year

Taxis

Auto-rickshaws

CNG consumption

PKT

CNG consumption

PKT

2013–2015

122

5.2

246

4.6

2016–2018

138

5.9

283

5.3

2019–2021

146

6.3

300

5.7

2022–2024

153

6.7

318

6.0

2025–2027

164

7.1

340

6.4

Total

723

31.2

1487

28.0

Appendix I: Population of PBT, taxi and auto-rickshaw since 2013–2027

Year

PBT

Taxi

Auto-rickshaw

2013

4327

57,095

111,591

2014

4288

57,798

109,170

2015

4011

65,094

128,120

2016

3921

66,396

130,811

2017

4224

67,724

133,558

2018

4317

69,078

136,362

2019

4412

70,460

139,226

2020

4509

71,869

142,150

2021

4608

73,307

145,135

2022

4710

74,773

148,183

2023

4813

76,268

151,295

2024

4919

77,794

154,472

2025

5027

79,349

157,716

2026

5138

80,936

161,028

2027

5251

82,555

164,410

Average fleet/annum

4565

71,366

140,882

Appendix J: Emission factors (g/km) for CNG and diesel buses, CNG fuelled taxi and auto-rickshaw, and sulphur content of diesel fuel (ppm) (CPCB 2011, 2015)

Emission norms

Year of implementation

CO

HC

NOx

CO2

Sulphur

Diesel buses

 BS-II

2002

3.97

0.26

6.77

668.0

500

 BS-III

2005

3.92

0.16

6.53

602.0

350

 BS-IV

2010

2.78

0.11

4.57

553.8

50

 BS-VI

2020

0.56

0.03

0.52

492.9

10

CNG buses

 BS-II

2002

3.72

3.75

6.21

806.5

–

 BS-III

2005

3.72

3.75

6.21

806.5

–

 BS-IV

2010

2.64

2.63

4.35

733.9

–

 BS-VI

2020

0.53

0.74

0.49

638.5

–

Taxis (CNG fuelled)

 BS-I

2000

0.60

0.36

0.74

131.2

–

 BS-II

2002

0.60

0.36

0.74

131.2

–

 BS-III

2005

0.47

0.31

0.37

126.9

–

 BS-IV

2010

0.38

0.16

0.19

126.9

–

 BS-VI

2020

0.38

0.16

0.15

126.9

–

Auto-rickshaws (CNG fuelled)

 BS-I

2000

1.37

2.53

0.2

62.4

–

 BS-II

2005

1.15

1.63

0.16

71.5

–

 BS-III

2010

0.77

1.09

0.11

71.5

–

 BS-IV

2016

0.62

0.69

0.07

71.5

–

 BS-VI

2023

0.33

0.69

0.05

71.5

–

Appendix K: Mileage (km/kg) of CNG and diesel buses, CNG fuelled taxi and auto-rickshaw

Emission norms

Diesel buses

CNG buses

Taxis

Auto-rickshaws

BS-I

–

–

19.60

25.20

BS-II

3.32

2.61

19.60

26.90

BS-III

3.42

2.61

21.33

28.51

BS-IV

3.90

2.89

22.61

29.93

BS-VI

4.13

3.16

24.86

31.72

Appendix L: Sensitivity of final results to the fuel consumption (kg/km) of the vehicle

Mode of transport

Variation (%)

GWP (%)

AP (%)

EP (%)

POCP (%)

ODP (%)

ADP (%)

PED (%)

PBT

− 10

− 1.83

− 3.39

− 1.17

− 2.79

− 5.55

− 1.51

− 8.53

+10

1.83

3.39

1.17

2.79

5.55

1.51

8.53

Taxis

− 10

− 1.35

− 4.37

− 2.14

− 3.16

− 7.11

− 0.46

− 8.24

+10

1.35

4.37

2.14

3.16

7.11

0.46

8.24

Auto-rickshaws

− 10

− 1.81

− 5.63

− 3.22

− 0.98

− 7.71

− 0.58

− 8.16

+10

1.81

5.63

3.22

0.98

7.71

0.58

8.16

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shinde, A.M., Dikshit, A.K. & Singh, R.K. Comparison of life cycle environmental performance of public road transport modes in metropolitan regions. Clean Techn Environ Policy 21, 605–624 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-018-01661-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-018-01661-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation