Pitfalls of the existing positive environmental impact assessment methods: an EV case

The growing global efforts toward net zero emissions have sparked the need for stringent tracking and quantifying the decarbonisation progress. Over the last decade, a number of methods have been proposed to define and quantify the positive environmental impacts (PEIs) of products or actions. Although the current methods are all predominantly based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), their definitions, scopes, and approaches are distinct from each other, and they have not gained widespread acceptance in academia or industry. This paper examines the case of electric vehicles (EVs) to critically evaluate existing PEI assessment methods, aiming to uncover the inherent pitfalls. The results highlight three primary risks: (1) the potential for manipulation of results calculated by current methods, (2) insufficient consideration of potential rebound effects and the implications when accounting for product volume, and (3) ambiguity in what can be quantified as PEI. Accordingly, an alternative definition of PEI is proposed with suggested further research pathways.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Procedia CIRP
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2025.01.069
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.73
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Pitfalls of the existing positive environmental impact assessment methods: an EV case

Sami Kara, Zexi Liang, Konrad Otto, Michael Zwicky Hauschild et al.
1 citations
Procedia CIRP
Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
0.73
article

Pitfalls of the existing positive environmental impact assessment methods: an EV case

Sami Kara, Zexi Liang, Konrad Otto, Michael Zwicky Hauschild, Wen Li
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The growing global efforts toward net zero emissions have sparked the need for stringent tracking and quantifying the decarbonisation progress. Over the last decade, a number of methods have been proposed to define and quantify the positive environmental impacts (PEIs) of products or actions. Although the current methods are all predominantly based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), their definitions, scopes, and approaches are distinct from each other, and they have not gained widespread acceptance in academia or industry. This paper examines the case of electric vehicles (EVs) to critically evaluate existing PEI assessment methods, aiming to uncover the inherent pitfalls. The results highlight three primary risks: (1) the potential for manipulation of results calculated by current methods, (2) insufficient consideration of potential rebound effects and the implications when accounting for product volume, and (3) ambiguity in what can be quantified as PEI. Accordingly, an alternative definition of PEI is proposed with suggested further research pathways.

Procedia CIRPVol. 135
The University of Melbourne (AU), UNSW Sydney (AU), Technical University of Denmark (DK)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
0.73
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Pitfalls of the existing positive environmental impact assessment methods: an EV case — Sami Kara, Zexi Liang, et al. · Procedia CIRP (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS