Lifecycle modeling and assessment of unmanned aerial vehicles (Drones) CO2e emissions
Lifecycle modeling and assessment of unmanned aerial vehicles (Drones) CO2e emissions
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.trd.2017.09.011
复制
发表时间：
2017-12-01
影响因子：
7.6
通讯作者：
Figliozzi, Miguel A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Figliozzi, Miguel A.
目前还没有研究对无人机（UAV）或无人机与传统柴油货车、电动卡车、电动货车和三轮车相比减少CO（2）e生命周期（包括使用和车辆阶段）排放的潜在有效性进行建模。本研究提出了一种新的分析生命周期无人机和地面商用车辆的CO（2）e排放。不同的路线和客户配置建模分析。利用真实世界的数据，无人机的权衡和比较优势进行了讨论。运行排放的盈亏平衡点，结果清楚地表明，无人机是更多的CO（2）e效率，小有效载荷，比传统的柴油货车在每距离的基础上。当客户可以在一个交付路线分组时，会得到非常不同的结果。如果几个顾客可以聚集在一条路线上，那么无人机送货并不比三轮车或电动货车送货服务更有效。无人机飞行阶段的CO（2）e排放量很大，必须加以考虑。在比较每次交付的车辆生产和处置排放量时，地面车辆的效率更高。
There are no studies that model the potential effectiveness of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) or drones to reduce CO(2)e lifecycle (including both utilization and vehicle phase) emissions when compared to conventional diesel vans, electric trucks, electric vans, and tricycles. This study presents a novel analysis of lifecycle UAV and ground commercial vehicles CO(2)e emissions. Different route and customer configurations are modeled analytically. Utilizing real-word data, tradeoffs and comparative advantages of UAVs are discussed. Breakeven points for operational emissions are obtained and the results clearly indicate that UAVs are more CO(2)e efficient, for small payloads, than conventional diesel vans in a per-distance basis. Drastically different results are obtained when customers can be grouped in a delivery route. UAV deliveries are not more CO(2)e efficient than tricycle or electric van delivery services if a few customers can be grouped in a route. Vehicle phase CO(2)e emissions for UAVs are significant and must be taken into account. Ground vehicles are more efficient when comparing vehicles production and disposal emissions per delivery.