Power sector effects of alternative options for de-fossilizing heavy-duty vehicles -- go electric, and charge smartly

TL;DR

This study compares the power sector impacts of different de-fossilization options for heavy-duty vehicles in Germany, finding that battery-electric vehicles with smart charging are most cost-effective and environmentally favorable.

Contribution

It provides a comparative analysis of various de-fossilization pathways for heavy-duty vehicles and their implications for the power sector in a high-renewable energy context.

Findings

Flexibly charged BEV have the lowest power sector costs.

Indirect electrification via e-fuels is less energy efficient and more costly.

BEV and ERS-BEV favor solar PV, while hydrogen and e-fuels favor wind.

Abstract

Various options are discussed to de-fossilize heavy-duty vehicles (HDV), including battery-electric vehicles (BEV), electric road systems (ERS), and indirect electrification via hydrogen fuel cells or e-fuels. We investigate their power sector implications in future scenarios of Germany with high renewable energy shares, using an open-source capacity expansion model and route-based truck traffic data. Power sector costs are lowest for flexibly charged BEV that also carry out vehicle-to-grid operations, and highest for e-fuels. If BEV and ERS-BEV are not optimally charged, power sector costs increase, but are still substantially lower than in scenarios with hydrogen or e-fuels. This is because indirect electrification is less energy efficient, which outweighs potential flexibility benefits. BEV and ERS-BEV favor solar photovoltaic energy, while hydrogen and e-fuels favor wind power and increase fossil electricity generation. Results remain qualitatively robust in sensitivity analyses.