Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/18931
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | ROOSEN, Jorg | - |
dc.contributor.author | MARNEFFE, Wim | - |
dc.contributor.author | VEREECK, Lode | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2015-06-09T12:12:23Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2015-06-09T12:12:23Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2015 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Transport reviews, 35 (6), p. 720-748 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0144-1647 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1942/18931 | - |
dc.description.abstract | A meta-analysis of 44 studies that conduct a private, external and/or total social cost comparison among conventional and electric vehicles shows that, independent of the studies’ goals, the results are often misleading. This distortion occurs because of the omission of one or more relevant cost components and/or the impact of divergent and often unspecified assumptions, which is demonstrated through three detailed examples. Although 30 studies compared private costs, one-third only considered purchase and fuel costs and ignored other costs. Charging infrastructure and residual value were only considered in four and eight studies, respectively. Thirty-five authors performed an external cost evaluation, of which 12 were expressed in monetary terms. The majority of the non-monetary studies only consider one external polluting factor, which is generally CO2/GHG, whereas the monetary studies generally evaluate four or more polluting factors. Furthermore, this article drafts a methodological checklist that (1) defines the preferred evaluation methods according to the study goals, (2) includes all private and external costs in the production, acquisition, usage and disposal stages as well as the existing policy measures and (3) lists the general assumptions that should be specified. This checklist enhances consistent comparability among various social cost studies of different vehicle types, and it supports policy-makers in drafting evidence-based transportation policy conclusions. | - |
dc.language.iso | en | - |
dc.rights | © 2015 Taylor & Francis | - |
dc.subject.other | conventional vehicles; cost analysis; cost comparison; electric vehicles; total cost of ownership; well-to-wheel. | - |
dc.title | A Review of Comparative Vehicle Cost Analysis | - |
dc.title.alternative | Comparative Vehicle Cost Analysis | - |
dc.type | Journal Contribution | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 748 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 6 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 720 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 35 | - |
local.format.pages | 31 | - |
local.bibliographicCitation.jcat | A1 | - |
dc.description.notes | Roosen, J (reprint author), Hasselt Univ, Fac Appl Econ, Martelarenlaan 42, BE-3500 Hasselt, Belgium. jorg.roosen@uhasselt.be | - |
local.type.refereed | Refereed | - |
local.type.specified | Article | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/01441647.2015.1052113 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | 000363743100004 | - |
item.validation | ecoom 2016 | - |
item.fullcitation | ROOSEN, Jorg; MARNEFFE, Wim & VEREECK, Lode (2015) A Review of Comparative Vehicle Cost Analysis. In: Transport reviews, 35 (6), p. 720-748. | - |
item.contributor | ROOSEN, Jorg | - |
item.contributor | MARNEFFE, Wim | - |
item.contributor | VEREECK, Lode | - |
item.accessRights | Restricted Access | - |
item.fulltext | With Fulltext | - |
crisitem.journal.issn | 0144-1647 | - |
crisitem.journal.eissn | 1464-5327 | - |
Appears in Collections: | Research publications |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Online publicatie Taylor Francis.pdf Restricted Access | Published version | 181.36 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
SCOPUSTM
Citations
6
checked on Sep 3, 2020
WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations
6
checked on May 2, 2024
Page view(s)
178
checked on Sep 7, 2022
Download(s)
152
checked on Sep 7, 2022
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.