Site Loader

EXAMENSARBETE INOM MILJÖTEKNIK, AVANCERAD NIVÅ, 30 HP
-481965-31242000
STOCKHOLM, SVERIGE 2018
A systematic assessment of ‘efficient’ public buses
– A multi-criteria approach
ÉAMON MAGORRIAN
-913765546100000
0900112500
0903795500
-46926582550000

Examensarbete
En systematisk bedömning av drivaggregat och bränslealternativ för offentliga bussar
– En flerkriteriemetod
Éamon Magorrian
Godkänt
2018-februari-20 Examinator
Anna Björklund Handledare
Nils Brown
Examensarbete inom strategier för hållbar utveckling, Avancerad nivå Kurs: Hållbar teknik
Sammanfattning
Många regionala myndigheter och transportföretag har till uppgift att jobba med att välja en flotta “effektiva” bussar. Syftet med denna rapport var att skapa ett analysverktyg med flera kriterier genom att identifiera nyckelkriterier som definierar en “effektiv” offentlig busslösning. Därefter för att formulera logiska kvalitativa bedömningsskala för dessa kriterier för att jämföra olika transportalternativ med kvalitativ eller kvantitativ data.

De bedömda transportalternativen inkluderar bussar som körs på Diesel, Biogas, FAME, HVO, Bioethanol samt batteridrivna fordon som bedöms separat som möjlighet och laddning över natten. “Effektiva” busslösningar delades upp i sex nyckelområden som skulle beaktas vid upphandling av flottor. Ekonomiska överväganden var, ägandekostnader och marknadsandelar för fordon. Fordonsprestanda överväganden ingår; Räckvidd / tankningstid för ett fordon. Viktiga överväganden involverade i leveranssäkerhet var; Nationell energisäkerhet, Kortsiktig backupbränsle samt nuvarande och framtida politiskt stöd. En annan hänsyn till infrastruktur var; nödvändig förändring. När det gäller miljö och energi var viktiga fokusområden; För att driva växthusgasminskningar, luftförorening i förhållande till fordonsbestämmelserna för fordon, bullernivån, tillgången till näringsämnen och alternativa resurskonsekvenser. De sociala övervägandena bestämdes som; allmän åsikt och skapande av arbetstillfällen för ett område.

När bedömningsresultaten för varje busslösning sammanställdes för varje kriterium noterades att biogasbussar följt noga av HVO-bussar gjorde bäst enligt betygsskalan. Viktiga resultat genomfördes också med betoning på de viktigaste kriterierna enligt de undersökta intressenterna, vilket resulterade i att HVO och Biogas återigen utför de bästa..

Master Thesis
A systematic assessment of powertrain and fuel options for public buses
– A multi criteria Approach
Éamon Magorrian
Approved
2018-February-20 Examiner
Anna Björklund Supervisor
Nils Brown
Degree Project in Strategies for Sustainable Development, Second Cycle Master Program: Sustainable Technology
Abstract
Many regional authorities and transport providers are tasked with the challenging job of selecting a fleet of ‘efficient’ buses. The aim of this report was to create a multi-criteria analysis tool by identifying key criteria that define an ‘efficient’ public bus solution. Then to formulate logical qualitative assessment scales for these criteria to compare different transportation options using quantitative or qualitative data.

The assessed transportation options include buses running on Diesel, Biogas, Fatty acid methyl esters (FAME), Hydro-treated vegetable oils (HVO), Bioethanol as well as Battery Electric Vehicles assessed separately as opportunity and overnight charging. ‘Efficient’ bus solutions were broken into six key areas to be considered when procuring fleets. The Economic considerations highlighted; the cost of ownership and the market share of vehicles. Vehicle performance considerations included; the range/refuel time of a vehicle. Considerations involved in Delivery Reliability were; national energy security, whether there was a short-term backup fuel as well as current and future policy support. Another consideration regarding infrastructure was; the required level of change. Regarding Environment and Energy, considerations of merit involved; well to wheel greenhouse gas reductions, air pollution in relation to EURO vehicle regulations, noise levels, nutrient availability of an option as well as associated resource impacts. The social considerations were determined as; public opinion and job creation for an area.

When the assessment results for each bus solution were compiled for each criterion it was noted that Biogas buses followed closely by HVO buses scored the best according to the grading scale. Weighted results were also conducted emphasizing the most important criteria according to surveyed stakeholders which resulted in HVO and Biogas again performing the best.
KTH
SKOLAN FÖR ARKITEKTUR OCH SAMHÄLLSBYGGNAD
-91376583629500
FOREWORD
Here is the right place to acknowledge help, assistance, cooperation and inspiration important for the presented project provided by others. This section, which is optional, should be written in Times New Roman, 12 pt and 6 pt before, with justified alignment. Please, leave two empty rows before the body text.
The foreword chapter should be ended with the two rows Name(s), and Place and month written in Times New Roman 12 pt, and right adjusted. Name(s) should be 36 pt before and Place, month and year should be 12 pt before.

Name(s)
Place, month and year
ABBREVIATIONS
BEV- Battery Electric Vehicle
CO2- Carbon Dioxide
FAME- Fatty Acid Methyl Ester
HC- Hydro Carbons
HVO- Hydrotreated vegetable Oil
kWh- Kilowatt hour
LCA- Life Cycle Analysis
NOx- Nitrogen Oxides
RED- Renewable Energy Directive
SEK- Swedish KronarTCO- Total Cost of Ownership
TTW- Tank to wheel
VOC- Volatile Organic Compounds
WTW- Well to wheel
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOC o “1-3” h z u 1.Introduction PAGEREF _Toc519990158 h 122.Aim and Scope PAGEREF _Toc519990159 h 133.Methodology PAGEREF _Toc519990160 h 143.1Project Management PAGEREF _Toc519990161 h 143.2Assessment Method PAGEREF _Toc519990162 h 143.2.1Key areas and Questions: Introduction PAGEREF _Toc519990163 h 153.2.2Indicators and scales: Introduction PAGEREF _Toc519990164 h 153.2.3Certainty PAGEREF _Toc519990165 h 163.2.4Weighting PAGEREF _Toc519990166 h 163.2.5Inventory PAGEREF _Toc519990167 h 174.Assessed transport options PAGEREF _Toc519990168 h 184.1Vehicle Generalisations PAGEREF _Toc519990169 h 184.2Trends PAGEREF _Toc519990170 h 194.3Fossil PAGEREF _Toc519990171 h 214.3.1Diesel PAGEREF _Toc519990172 h 214.4Biofuels PAGEREF _Toc519990173 h 214.4.1Biogas PAGEREF _Toc519990174 h 214.4.2FAME PAGEREF _Toc519990175 h 234.4.3HVO PAGEREF _Toc519990176 h 244.4.4Bioethanol PAGEREF _Toc519990177 h 254.5Electricity PAGEREF _Toc519990178 h 264.5.1Battery Electric PAGEREF _Toc519990179 h 265.Defining ‘ Efficiency’ PAGEREF _Toc519990180 h 285.1Efficiency in Transport Policy PAGEREF _Toc519990181 h 285.2Key Areas of Efficiency PAGEREF _Toc519990182 h 296.Performance Indicators and Scales PAGEREF _Toc519990183 h 326.1Economy PAGEREF _Toc519990184 h 326.1.1Cost of ownership PAGEREF _Toc519990185 h 326.1.2Market Share PAGEREF _Toc519990186 h 336.1Vehicle Performance PAGEREF _Toc519990187 h 336.1.1Range/Refuel time PAGEREF _Toc519990188 h 336.2Delivery Reliability PAGEREF _Toc519990189 h 346.2.1National Energy Security PAGEREF _Toc519990190 h 346.2.2Short-term backup fuel PAGEREF _Toc519990191 h 366.2.3Current Policy PAGEREF _Toc519990192 h 366.2.4Future Policy PAGEREF _Toc519990193 h 376.1Infrastructure PAGEREF _Toc519990194 h 376.1.1Required Change PAGEREF _Toc519990195 h 376.2Environment and Energy PAGEREF _Toc519990196 h 386.2.1Well to wheel greenhouse gas reductions PAGEREF _Toc519990197 h 386.2.2Air Pollution PAGEREF _Toc519990198 h 386.2.3Noise levels PAGEREF _Toc519990199 h 396.2.4Nutrient availability PAGEREF _Toc519990200 h 406.2.5Resource constraints PAGEREF _Toc519990201 h 406.3Social PAGEREF _Toc519990202 h 416.3.1Public Opinion PAGEREF _Toc519990203 h 416.3.2Job creation PAGEREF _Toc519990204 h 417.Methodological Reflections PAGEREF _Toc519990205 h 427.1Indicators and scales PAGEREF _Toc519990206 h 428.Assessment Results PAGEREF _Toc519990207 h 438.1Economy PAGEREF _Toc519990208 h 438.1.1Cost of ownership PAGEREF _Toc519990209 h 438.1.2Market share PAGEREF _Toc519990210 h 468.1Vehicle Performance PAGEREF _Toc519990211 h 488.1.1Range/Refuel time PAGEREF _Toc519990212 h 488.2Delivery Reliability PAGEREF _Toc519990213 h 508.2.1National Energy Security PAGEREF _Toc519990214 h 508.2.2Short-term backup fuel PAGEREF _Toc519990215 h 578.2.3Current Policy PAGEREF _Toc519990216 h 588.2.4Future Policy PAGEREF _Toc519990217 h 608.1Infrastructure PAGEREF _Toc519990218 h 608.1.1Required Change PAGEREF _Toc519990219 h 608.2Environment and Energy PAGEREF _Toc519990220 h 628.2.1Well to wheel greenhouse gas reductions PAGEREF _Toc519990221 h 628.2.2Air Pollution PAGEREF _Toc519990222 h 678.2.3Noise levels PAGEREF _Toc519990223 h 688.2.4Nutrient Availability PAGEREF _Toc519990224 h 698.2.5Resource Constraints PAGEREF _Toc519990225 h 718.3Social PAGEREF _Toc519990226 h 728.3.1Public Opinion PAGEREF _Toc519990227 h 728.3.2Job creation PAGEREF _Toc519990228 h 738.4Compiled Overview PAGEREF _Toc519990229 h 769.Weighted Results PAGEREF _Toc519990230 h 7710.Discussion PAGEREF _Toc519990231 h 7811.Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc519990232 h 7912.Recommendations PAGEREF _Toc519990233 h 7913.References PAGEREF _Toc519990234 h 8014.Appendix PAGEREF _Toc519990235 h 85Weighting Survey PAGEREF _Toc519990236 h 85Weighting Calculations PAGEREF _Toc519990237 h 89
List of Figures
TOC
h z c “Figure” Figure 1. Overview of the Development ProcessFigure 2. Example of Assessment tool and resultFigure 3. Swedish buses by Length for 2017 (Sverige’s Bussföretag 2018)Figure 4. Procured bus types in Sweden for 2017 (Sveriges Bussföretag 2018)Figure 5. Swedish Buses by Weight for 2017 (Sverige’s Bussföretag 2018)Figure 6: Final Swedish Energy Use by Transport sector (Energimyndigheten 2015)Figure 7. Final Energy used in Swedish the Swedish Transport Sector by fuel (Energimyndigheten 2015)Figure 8. Biofuel use in the Swedish Transport Sector (Energimyndigheten 2015)Figure 9. Sources of Biogas used on the Swedish Market in 2015 (Statens energimyndighet 2015)Figure 10. Sources of HVO on the Swedish Market in 2015 (Statens energimyndighet 2015)Figure 11. Sources of Bioethanol on the Swedish Market for 2015 (Statens energimyndighet 2015)Figure 12. Sources of Electricity on the Swedish Market for 2015 (IVA 2016b)Figure 13. Total Cost of Ownership by Fuel typeFigure 14. Share of vehicle kilometres for Swedish public buses by fuel type for 2017 (Sveriges Bussföretag 2018)Figure 15. Range by Vehicle Type (Civitas 2016b, Traffic 21 2016)Figure 16. Carbon Intensity by fuelFigure 17. Well to Wheel emissions of specific fuelsFigure 18. Well to Wheel Emission savings for specific fuelsFigure 19. Associated NOx and PM emissions by fuel type (IVL 2017, CIVITAS 2016)Figure 20. Noise Levels by fuel type (CIVITAS 2016)Figure 21. Employment figures in the Norwegian Petroleum Industry (Norwegian Petroleum 2018)Figure 22. Weighted Indicator Score using Indicator ratings from Surve
IntroductionThis report focuses on various combinations of fuels and powertrains of use in public transport. This can provide municipalities, key decision makers and public transport operators with information that can aid them in selecting one or a combination of ‘efficient’ public buses for their region/city.

Often operating all day in cities and regional areas , buses are the backbone of many European public transport systems ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016). Presently, conventional diesel buses are widely utilized in public transportation globally. This is because they are well established, flexible to operate, and in Europe they meet the EURO VI requirements meaning their air pollution levels are significantly lower than older generations ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016). The modern market however has a wide range of operational propulsion technologies and fuels. This means that transport authorities have a far greater selection for their location, which is beneficial but also brings with it the burden of choice. With this choice it is evident that there must be an optimal solution available in the form of one bus type or a mix, specific for the region/city. In finding the solution however there are many challenges involved. Decision makers and transport organizations are required to make sustainable and cost effective decisions that both contribute to Global, European Union, and national goals that also fulfil specific requirements that are beneficial for a specific region/city. In doing so it is apparent that an ‘efficient’ solution is a multi-dimensional task wherein the dimensions require explicit definitions and assessment to facilitate better choices for the future.

Several studies have aimed at defining different dimensions involved in an ‘efficient’ bus solution for an area. Some studies focused on the total cost of a buses lifespan (American report) essentially assessing the cost efficiency. Others focused again on the costs as well as the Well to Well emissions of buses ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Nylund</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>168</RecNum><DisplayText>(Nylund &amp; Koponen 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>168</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943250″>168</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Book”>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Nylund, Nils-Olof</author><author>Koponen, Kati</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Fuel and technology alternatives for buses: Overall energy efficiency and emission performance</title></titles><dates><year>2012</year></dates><publisher>VTT</publisher><isbn>9513878686</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Nylund & Koponen 2012) assessing the cost and emission efficiency. Others more recently focused on the efficiency again regarding costs, emissions, tax support and availability of fuel supply ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Clean Fleets</Author><Year>2014</Year><RecNum>150</RecNum><DisplayText>(Clean Fleets 2014)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>150</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529932414″>150</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Clean Fleets,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Procuring clean and efficient road vehicles: Clean fleets guide</title></titles><dates><year>2014</year><pub-dates><date>November 2014</date></pub-dates></dates><pub-location>www.clean-fleets.eu</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Clean Fleets 2014). More recent work involved surveys with Swedish transport providers that identified the areas that they consider important when working toward selecting an ‘efficient’ transport solution. These areas included; energy efficiency, emission reductions, lower noise levels, climate conditions, infrastructure, long travel distances, fuel availability, costs, political priorities and current technology ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Xylia</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>146</RecNum><DisplayText>(Xylia &amp; Silveira 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>146</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1525287309″>146</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Generic”>13</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Xylia, Maria</author><author>Silveira, Semida</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Fuel options for public bus fleets in Sweden</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>f3-The Swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Xylia & Silveira 2015). It is then very clear that within this area of research there is gap in knowledge and a need to identify and assess the multiple dimensions of this decision making context to provide the best public bus solution for regions and cities.
For this project it was determined that when assessing the transportation alternatives, it was beneficial to utilize the Multicriteria analysis tool. As it is known for assisting in solving problems involving multiple alternatives and works well as a decision support tool ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Greco</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>226</RecNum><DisplayText>(Greco, Figueira &amp; Ehrgott 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>226</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532195264″>226</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Book”>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Greco, Salvatore</author><author>Figueira, J</author><author>Ehrgott, M</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Multiple criteria decision analysis</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>Springer</publisher><isbn>1493930931</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Greco, Figueira & Ehrgott 2016). It essentially aids in dividing the decision context into smaller and easier to understand parts. It allows for analysis of each part and can be integrated in a way that provides a meaningful solution. It was important that when this tool was selected that choices, generalizations and data was stated in order to remain as transparent as possible.
In this report the structure firstly states the outright aim, objectives and scope of the work. This is followed by the methodology section which addresses the steps that were taken in establishing the MCA tool. Followed by an introduction and justification for the powertrain/fuel combinations selected for assessment. The next stage involves the definition of an ‘efficient’ solution broken down into key areas and an answerable question. The next stage introduces the indicators which a set of criteria are selected to cover dimensions of each key area and answer the key question. These indicators are then qualitatively assessed so that data later used for each bus option can be graded according to the qualitative scale as; ‘Very Good-Very Bad’. The following stage will reflect on the established tool inclusive of the key areas, questions, indicators and scales. The next section will involve the assessment of the transport option according to the established scales. Each indicator will have justified data and highlight the grading of each individual transport option according to the qualitative scale by using either quantitative or qualitative data. A compiled overview is then shown to highlight the overall grading of each bus option according to the key areas and criteria. The next section will involve adapting the results to the priorities of specific stakeholders. In this sense it is apparent that each decision context has multiple dimensions but also each region/ city has multiple priorities. As each indicator is graded qualitatively from ‘Very Good-Very Bad’ where also a score has been assigned of ‘5-1’. This allows for each indicator to be rated in order of importance based on a survey provided to decision makers (in this case BRC representatives) and a weighting factor to be applied to each score within that indicator. This means that more prioritised indicator areas have a larger impact on the final scoring result.
Aim and ScopeAim
The aim of this report is to create a multi criteria analysis tool that can help companies identify the most ‘efficient’ public buses for their area.

Objectives
Establish key criteria regarding public bus procurement.

Formulate logical assessment scales for key criteria.

Evaluate powertrain and fuel combinations according to this framework.

Discuss and Inform future decision making and methodology development.

Research Question
What are the key characteristics to be accounted for in procurement of public buses and how do certain options compare?
Scope and Limitations
A combination of generic and feedstock specific data is used, this was primarily due to the data that was available. It was deemed important to assess a fuel according to its specific feedstock for some indicators however for others the results were unlikely to change. Vehicles selected in this report are focused on the most commonly used and conventional buses in Sweden. Vehicles in this report focus on only newly procured vehicles, some transport companies can add previously licenced vehicles to their fleet expectations for an older licensed vehicle are lower. Another limitation of this work is that the usage of public buses is not defined based on their use in a regional or urban environment. It has been noted that certain efficiencies or values may differ between these two types of uses and median values have often been used to account for both when relevant. Data used for assessing transport options does not date back later than 2012 however as values are derived from multiple reports certain improvements to technologies may not be accounted for. In many cases in this report quantitative data is collected and is qualitatively assessed by means of a scale. These scales were established by established policy or in cases were indicators touched on unenforced issues then logical argumentation was used to define the scale. The establishment of this tool and inclusion of key areas, questions, and indicators has been an ongoing participatory project where input was recorded from partners and those involved in the Biogas Research Centre. Despite the open nature of this approach some bias may be noted as the tool assesses multiple fuel/powertrain options and is in part organised by research group focused mainly on biogas.
MethodologyProject ManagementThis project has been an ongoing research area first conceived by the biogas Research Center with further assistance provided once this Master thesis commenced . The center which is funded by the Swedish Energy Agency, Linköping University and number of external organizations has a broad interdisciplinary approach that combines biogas related skills from several areas. It involves interactions with industry, academia and society via different disciplines and expertise. This report involved a literature review as well as on-going feedback from the BRC (figure 1)

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 1. Overview of the Development ProcessAssessment MethodThe assessment method was established around the idea of an ‘efficient’ bus solution. With the assistance of partners at the BRC this idea was broken down into multiple key areas with an attached key question. These key questions were then to be answered by answering certain criteria known as indicators. These indicators had justified scales so that bus solutions could be qualitatively assessed. When bus options were qualitatively assessed a certainty, rating was provided to highlight the level of accuracy involved in the data and assessment conducted (figure 2).

23619762506068009810753295650Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 2. Example of Assessment tool and result00Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 2. Example of Assessment tool and result
Key areas and Questions: IntroductionThis perspective was used as the base to identify key areas for the methodology to be established. Each key area was elaborated as a key question wherein the desired result was expressed. The identification process was conducted via an extensive literature review and a participatory approach from fellow researchers and participants in the Biogas Research Center. This has been an evolving process and will continue to be. Each area, question, and indicator form the cornerstone of the assessment methodology and has included diverse actors in the development to avoid bias.

Indicators and scales: IntroductionThe key areas and the key questions supply the direction and motivation for the work however for a multi criteria method to be conducted the criteria are essential. Thus, for each key question one or more indicators are defined as criteria to answer the question. For each indicator quantitative or qualitative scales are defined to support the process. Each indicator will utilize either generic data or specific data (this information will be explicitly stated). The scale defines the performance range from Very Bad to very good with a similar scoring attached 1-5 (Table 1).

Scale
Very good (5)
Good (4)
Satisfactory (3)
Bad (2)
Very bad (1)
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 1, Example of Grading Scale
CertaintyThe certainty of data in this assessment method has also been considered. Certainty has been evaluated by the user in terms of; relevance and reliability. Where data specific to the indicator was deemed not specifically relevant and not specifically reliable, the data available was given a certainty rating: poor (*) meaning high uncertainty. When data was deemed of some relevance and/or somewhat unreliable (i.e. grey literature) a satisfactory rating (**) meaning some uncertainty regarding perhaps the age, location or dynamic nature of data was apparent. Where data was deemed both relevant and reliable the certainty was deemed good with a low uncertainty value. Certainty was ranked from poor-good based on these areas (Table 2).
Scale Symbol Comment
Good *** Low uncertainty: Enough relevant information with good trustworthiness
Satisfactory ** Some uncertainty: Some relevant information is available, with some small question marks regarding trustworthiness.

Poor * High uncertainty: There is not enough relevant information, and/or the information is deemed untrustworthy.
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 2. Example of Certainty Performance Scale.
WeightingDespite the participatory nature of this methodology, different actors may critique the significance of the agreed upon indicators for this report. The method as it stands should form an important step in the advancing knowledge, however some indicators may also seem more pertinent to affecting change than others. Thus, a weighting protocol has been created to determine bespoke results in accordance with an actor or organizations priorities. This protocol involves a questionnaire (see appendix) that scores the importance of each indicator in relation to the decision-making context. In the previously explained scales that range from Very Bad to Very good the scales have also been assigned values of 1-5. The values attained in the assessment scale will then be multiplied by the weighting value attained from the questionnaire. This value will henceforth be referred to as the weighting factor. In a scenario were a transport option scores 4: good in the assessment scale and the decision maker has rated that indicator low on their priority list 2/10, the final weighted score will be 0.8 (Equation 1).
Equation SEQ Equation * ARABIC 1. Weighting using data from Survey
Assessment score x Weighting factor= Weighted score
e.g. 4 x 0.2= 0.8
The weighted results in this report have been compiled using the average weighting value attained from participants within the BRC, from a BRC conference (17.05.18) and through general correspondence.
InventoryTo answer the key questions for each selected transport option, an extensive literature review was conducted. Also, project participants and the wider BRC network was used to acquire the most accurate and up to date information.
Search and Collection
Literature of relevance were the target of the search with a variation of sources used in this stage of the report. The sources included;
Scientific text published in journal articles and reports
Grey literature such as nonscientific text from organizational reports, presentations. Non- scientific in this context meaning that the reports may not have been peer reviewed by the wider scientific community.
Searches were conducted pertaining to the key areas and specific transport options and feedstocks. The primary source of which was google scholar and the Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan academic database. All literature that was deemed relevant to the subject matter of this report was catalogued in Zotero software for organization and at the completion of this report the sources acquired amounted to 100 sources.

Classification and prioritization
Acquired sources in the Zotero database were then tagged with specific key words which categorized data in terms of;
Priority (High-low).

Area (which key area it related to).

Transport options (Information on selected public bus options).

Other (More specific tags for sections of the report).

Surveys
Once Key areas, Questions and Indicators were established then a Survey was created focusing on these. The survey described the logic and result that should be determined from assessing each indicator. The indicators were then to be scored out of 10 in terms of their significance to the decision making context. This operated to weight the result by prioritizing important aspects and reducing the influence of less important aspects. The survey was issued to members of the Biogas research center conference and allowed a weighting factors to be calculated.
Assessed transport optionsBefore commencing the assessment; the transport options to be assessed require an introduction as well as justification for their selection. In the case of the bus type generalizations have been made selection the most common type of dimensions for a public bus in Sweden. Similarly current trends with fuel use in Sweden has been analyzed to select the fuels to assess in this report.
Vehicle GeneralisationsSeveral generalisations have been made regarding the dimensions and type of buses assessed, with the most common type selected for study. These include the generalised use of a normal two axle bus, slightly longer than 12 meters with a weight approximately 14 tons without passengers. These assumptions are based on the most common aspects of procured buses in Sweden articulated (Figure 4, 5, and 6).
32385002613025Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 3. Swedish buses by Length for 2017 (Sverige’s Bussföretag 2018)Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 3. Swedish buses by Length for 2017 (Sverige’s Bussföretag 2018)32385001365250190502611120Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 4. Procured bus types in Sweden for 2017 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sveriges Bussföretag</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>163</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sveriges Bussföretag 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>163</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529939760″>163</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sveriges Bussföretag,</author></authors><tertiary-authors><author>Sveriges Bussföretag</author></tertiary-authors></contributors><titles><title>Statistik om bussbranschen: Mars 2018</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year><pub-dates><date>28/03/2018</date></pub-dates></dates><pub-location>Stockholm</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sveriges Bussföretag 2018)
Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 4. Procured bus types in Sweden for 2017 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sveriges Bussföretag</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>163</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sveriges Bussföretag 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>163</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529939760″>163</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sveriges Bussföretag,</author></authors><tertiary-authors><author>Sveriges Bussföretag</author></tertiary-authors></contributors><titles><title>Statistik om bussbranschen: Mars 2018</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year><pub-dates><date>28/03/2018</date></pub-dates></dates><pub-location>Stockholm</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sveriges Bussföretag 2018)
190501346200

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 5. Swedish Buses by Weight for 2017 (Sverige’s Bussföretag 2018)TrendsAs it stands biofuels are promoted for aviation and haulage with electricity being promoted for personal car use ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;CIVITASb;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;151;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(CIVITASb 2016);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;151;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″;151;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;CIVITASb,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;Netherlands;/pub-location;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(CIVITASb 2016). In recent years the energy use from road transport has been steadily increasing and constitutes most of the Swedish transport sector (Figure 6).

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 6: Final Swedish Energy Use by Transport sector ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Energimyndigheten;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;161;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Energimyndigheten 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;161;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529938108″;161;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Dataset”;59;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Energimyndigheten;/author;;/authors;;secondary-authors;;author;Energimyndigheten;/author;;/secondary-authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Energy in Sweden Facts and Figures 2015;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Energimyndigheten 2015)
Trends regarding the fuels used in the Swedish transport sector show that Diesel was a dominate force in Sweden for many years but is currently on the decline with increasing use of biofuels making up the gap in the demand (Figure 7).

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 7. Final Energy used in Swedish the Swedish Transport Sector by fuel ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Energimyndigheten;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;161;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Energimyndigheten 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;161;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529938108″;161;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Dataset”;59;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Energimyndigheten;/author;;/authors;;secondary-authors;;author;Energimyndigheten;/author;;/secondary-authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Energy in Sweden Facts and Figures 2015;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Energimyndigheten 2015)
Within that subset of biofuel growth in Sweden the dominant alternative has been biodiesel sources such as FAME and HVO possibly due to the simplistic nature of transition. Bioethanol had growth in the early 2000s with recent years showing a decline in use. Whereas Biogas has had a rather steady share of the market for several years (Figure 8).

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 8. Biofuel use in the Swedish Transport Sector ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Energimyndigheten;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;161;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Energimyndigheten 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;161;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529938108″;161;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Dataset”;59;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Energimyndigheten;/author;;/authors;;secondary-authors;;author;Energimyndigheten;/author;;/secondary-authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Energy in Sweden Facts and Figures 2015;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Energimyndigheten 2015)
FossilFossil fuels are a non- renewable resource and there are increasing concerns with the depletion of world reserves ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Höök;/Author;;Year;2013;/Year;;RecNum;164;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Höök ;amp; Tang 2013);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;164;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529941726″;164;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Journal Article”;17;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Höök, Mikael;/author;;author;Tang, Xu;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Depletion of fossil fuels and anthropogenic climate change—A review;/title;;secondary-title;Energy Policy;/secondary-title;;/titles;;periodical;;full-title;Energy Policy;/full-title;;/periodical;;pages;797-809;/pages;;volume;52;/volume;;dates;;year;2013;/year;;/dates;;isbn;0301-4215;/isbn;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Höök ; Tang 2013). Parallel to these concerns the fact that combustion of fossil fuels in transportation release large quantities of greenhouse gases to the air, however with widespread use of Diesel buses still in Europe ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;CIVITASb;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;151;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(CIVITASb 2016);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;151;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″;151;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;CIVITASb,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;Netherlands;/pub-location;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(CIVITASb 2016) it is important to assess this option.
DieselTechnology
The technology selected was a conventional diesel bus using a combustion engine, operating on regular diesel fuel and adhering to EURO VI emissions regulations has been set as the base case for this report in which most alternative options can be compared against. The diesel engine is the primary mover globally for heavy duty vehicles including buses ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;CIVITASb;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;151;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(CIVITASb 2016);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;151;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″;151;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;CIVITASb,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;Netherlands;/pub-location;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(CIVITASb 2016). Due to acceptable fuel efficiency and reliability this has been achieved.

Fuel
Conventional diesel fuel is set as the fuel of study. Presently diesel fuel in use in Europe needs to contain a fraction of biofuel such as FAME. The fraction differs per nation, but the blending requirement is explicitly stated in the Renewable energy directive ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Howes;/Author;;Year;2010;/Year;;RecNum;157;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Howes 2010);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;157;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529936643″;157;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Journal Article”;17;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Howes, Tom;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;The EU’s new renewable energy Directive (2009/28/EC)</title><secondary-title>The new climate policies of the European Union: internal legislation and climate diplomacy</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>The new climate policies of the European Union: internal legislation and climate diplomacy</full-title></periodical><pages>3</pages><volume>15</volume><number>117</number><dates><year>2010</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Howes 2010), as such the data referred to as ‘Diesel’ may contain small values of biofuel in this report.
BiofuelsBiogasBiogas is the raw gas that is produced through anaerobic digestion (biodegradation) of things such as sewage, food waste, manure and other organic matter. Before it is utilised in vehicles biogas requires upgrading/purifying to biomethane wherein impurities are removed, and the concentration of methane is increased for the purposes of fuel. Biomethane from biogas can be used as a transport fuel, other uses of biogas are to produce heat and power or use as a raw material in chemical products ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a). Primarily in Europe biogas is used for electricity production without the upgrading to biomethane. Biomethane can be used in an Otto engine but is conventionally used in a spark ignition engine due to the high ignition temperature of methane ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016). Biomethane for vehicles can be stored in two ways, as; compressed biogas (CBG) at roughly 200bars with an ambient temperature or as liquefied biogas (LBG )at roughly 10 bars and -125°C ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a). CNG is much more common in the current market despite LNG being useful for heavy vehicles carrying large loads over long distances (such as buses), so in this instance compressed biogas was selected as the biogas route to assess in this report ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a).
Fuel Process and specific feedstock
Biogas when generalised has several properties (Table 3) and has been noted to contain 60% methane and 40% carbon dioxide ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a). It is accumulated via the anaerobic digestion process of breaking down biomass such as sugar, fatty acids and proteins. Biogas is produced from organic materials, these are broken down by microbial activity or gasification. Biogas is then upgraded for vehicle use by eliminating, siloxanes, hydrogen sulphide, carbon dioxide and moisture and converted to having approximately 97% methane; at this stage the biogas is known as biomethane ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a). This fuel can be created in anaerobic digestor facilities using sources such as agricultural waste or animal waste, and sewage. It can also be selected from landfill sites where gas is collected on site. The specific feedstock selected for the category of biogas was derived from both data availability as well as the current composition of biogas feedstocks in Sweden. With Municipal Sewage sludge being the dominant source of biogas in Sweden this feedstock was selected as the specific biogas feedstock for assessment (Figure 9).

Chemical Formula
CH4
Higher Heating Value
50.02 MJ/kg, 13.9kWh/kg
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 3. Basic Properties of Biogas ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a)

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 9. Sources of Biogas used on the Swedish Market in 2015 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Statens energimyndighet</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>169</RecNum><DisplayText>(Statens energimyndighet 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>169</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943761″>169</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Statens energimyndighet ,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Hållbara biodrivmedel och flytande biobränslen under 2014</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Statens energimyndighet 2015)
Technology
Gaseous fuels like methane are clean burning meaning they have relatively soot free combustion under the correct conditions in comparison to fossil fuels. Methane is most suited for spark ignition engines that can be made by converting existing gasoline engines ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Nylund</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>168</RecNum><DisplayText>(Nylund &amp; Koponen 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>168</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943250″>168</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Book”>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Nylund, Nils-Olof</author><author>Koponen, Kati</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Fuel and technology alternatives for buses: Overall energy efficiency and emission performance</title></titles><dates><year>2012</year></dates><publisher>VTT</publisher><isbn>9513878686</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Nylund & Koponen 2012). Presently most heavy-duty vehicles such as buses use diesel engines that are converted to spark ignition engines by the manufacturers. The manufacturers often carry this out themselves as adapting thermal loads and durability can be challenging. The efficiency of this engine type is marginally lower than the diesel alternative ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a).

FAMEFatty acid methyl ester (FAME) is a form of biodiesel that is produced from vegetable oils and fats. It has properties that involve being both nontoxic and biodegradable ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>170</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>170</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943952″>170</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: FAME, Fatty Acid Methyl Esters</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowlege centre for renewable transportaion fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017b). It can be used to limit the environmental impact of conventional diesel in the form of blending or as a neat fuel. In this study it will be focused on as a neat fuel. The neat fuel that will be assessed in this study is also known as B100. B100 is used in conventional diesel engines and must firstly be approved by the vehicle manufacturer before use ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>170</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>170</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943952″>170</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: FAME, Fatty Acid Methyl Esters</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowlege centre for renewable transportaion fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017b). In Sweden the use of B100 is increasing significantly in recent years but is still not a dominant nationally or globally ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>171</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>171</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944147″>171</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>B100 (Biodiesel)</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, no.7</volume><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017a). The European standard governing biofuel use (EN14214) ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>EN14214</Author><Year>2003</Year><RecNum>172</RecNum><DisplayText>(EN14214 2003)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>172</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944239″>172</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>EN14214, DIN</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Automotive fuels-fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) for diesel engines, requirements and test methods</title><secondary-title>European Standards</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>European Standards</full-title></periodical><dates><year>2003</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(EN14214 2003) depicts climate specifications for fuels in Sweden, the biofuel grades allow operation in temperature as low as -20°C ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>171</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>171</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944147″>171</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>B100 (Biodiesel)</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, no.7</volume><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017a). A positive trait of this fuel is its biodegradable nature however this trait is also a negative component meaning that the fuel itself has a n expiration date once stored. B100 should ideally be used within 6 months to avoid issues such as oxidation and polymerization that could clog filters in the vehicle and run up costly repair bills ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>171</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>171</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944147″>171</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>B100 (Biodiesel)</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, no.7</volume><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017a).
Fuel Process and Specific Feedstock
B100 is developed through the process of transesterification of fatty acids and bioethanol (refb100). Oils and fats that contain triglycerides are divided resulting in FAME and glycerine by use of typically methanol and a catalyst (sodium hydroxide) ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>171</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>171</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944147″>171</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>B100 (Biodiesel)</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, no.7</volume><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017a). FAME is derived from natural vegetable oils from oil seed rape, soybeans and sunflowers with varying properties (Table 4). It has traditionally been a first-generation biofuel however it can also use waste oil as feedstock which is currently not widespread. In Sweden the source location of FAME feedstock is very one sided. It has been reported that it exclusively uses Rapeseed with no other alternative ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>170</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>170</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943952″>170</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: FAME, Fatty Acid Methyl Esters</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowlege centre for renewable transportaion fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017b) justifying why this has been selected for this report.
Chemical Formula
CH3(CH2)nCOOCH3
(General formula of methyl esters)
Higher Heating Value
RME: 38 MJ/kg
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 4. Basic RME properties ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>170</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>170</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943952″>170</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: FAME, Fatty Acid Methyl Esters</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowlege centre for renewable transportaion fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017b)
Technology
Diesel powertrains are used for biofuels where no alterations are required for using blends lower than 30% biofuels ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>171</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>171</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944147″>171</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>B100 (Biodiesel)</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, no.7</volume><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017a). However, exceeding this limit minor adaptations may be necessary and communication between the manufacturers are required regarding the specific fuel type to be used in the vehicle.
HVOHydro processed Esters and Fatty Acids (HEFA) or the commonly used Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO) is developed using vegetable oils or fats ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>173</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>173</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944808″>173</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: HEFO/HVO, Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.5</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016b). HVO is used as the abbreviation in this report as it is a more extensively known terminology, despite the exclusion of non-vegetable oil derived feedstocks in the acronym. HVO is a convenient fuel for substituting diesel as it is equal to conventional diesel in many ways. It can be utilised in conventional diesel engines with no required blend walls or vehicle modifications ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>173</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>173</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944808″>173</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: HEFO/HVO, Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.5</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016b). The neat form selected in this study (i.e. 100% HVO) requires manufacture permissions for use in vehicles. Also, cold properties associated with HVO have been documented to clog engine and exhaust components, so some issues may still need resolving.
Fuel Process and Specific Feedstock
HVO can be utilised by multiple sources of vegetable oils and fats. This commonly includes feedstocks such as vegetable oils sourced from rapeseed, soybean or tall oil source from the paper industry ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>173</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>173</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944808″>173</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: HEFO/HVO, Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.5</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016b) to produce a fuel with specific properties (Table 5). Also, the use of Waste animal fat/oils can also be used to generate this fuel type.
Chemical Formula
 CnH2n+2 (General formula of straight chain paraffinic hydrocarbons)
Higher Heating Value
44 MJ/kg
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 5. Basic HVO Properties ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>173</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>173</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944808″>173</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: HEFO/HVO, Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.5</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016b)
HVO is developed by the hydrotreating of oils (triglycerides) meaning they are made to react with hydrogen under pressure to remove any oxygen. The resulting hydrocarbon chains are equal to diesel. Production costs of HVO are believed to be somewhat higher than FAME and larger plants are required to be economically viable in order to afford certain economies of scale ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>173</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>173</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944808″>173</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: HEFO/HVO, Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.5</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016b). HVO (Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil) is a renewable diesel fuel. HVO is free of aromatics and sulphur with a high cetane number ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>173</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>173</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944808″>173</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: HEFO/HVO, Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.5</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016b). It has been referred to as a drop-in fuel as it is chemically equal to conventional diesel and can be used in existing technology without blend walls ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016). The composition of Swedish feedstocks is sourced exclusively from second generation sources (Figure 10). A large component of HVO is sourced from Slaughterhouse waste and animal fat which has been quoted in many studies as the feedstock waste animal fat/ oils which from the graph below is evidently a large proportion of Sweden’s HVO fuel.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 10. Sources of HVO on the Swedish Market in 2015 ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Statens energimyndighet;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;169;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Statens energimyndighet 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;169;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943761″;169;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Statens energimyndighet ,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Hållbara biodrivmedel och flytande biobränslen under 2014;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Statens energimyndighet 2015)
Technology
HVO does not require modifications to the conventional diesel powertrain. However, the use of 100% HVO must be approved by the vehicle manufacturer before use due to potential breaches of warranty or vehicle longevity.
BioethanolBioethanol has been used extensively around the world in low blending as an agent to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Heavy vehicles using one of the highest concentrations of ethanol (ED95) comprise of Bioethanol fuel, 5% water and additives to improve ignition ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;F3;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;174;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(F3 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;174;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529945673″;174;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;F3;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;F3 Fact sheet: Bioethanol;/title;;/titles;;volume;Category: Fuels, No.6;/volume;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;publisher;The Swedish Knowlege Centre for Renewable Transportation fuels;/publisher;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(F3 2015).

Fuel Process and specific Feedstock
Bioethanol can be developed from many biomass sources, but present production use starch dense biomass such as sugar beet, corn, wheat etc ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;F3;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;174;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(F3 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;174;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529945673″;174;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;F3;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;F3 Fact sheet: Bioethanol;/title;;/titles;;volume;Category: Fuels, No.6;/volume;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;publisher;The Swedish Knowlege Centre for Renewable Transportation fuels;/publisher;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(F3 2015). The process involves the fermentation of sugars or when grain is used an enzyme hydrolysis of starch is conducted ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;F3;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;174;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(F3 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;174;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529945673″;174;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;F3;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;F3 Fact sheet: Bioethanol;/title;;/titles;;volume;Category: Fuels, No.6;/volume;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;publisher;The Swedish Knowlege Centre for Renewable Transportation fuels;/publisher;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(F3 2015). Gasification can also be used to convert to carbon dioxide and hydrogen where this gas is then catalytically reformed to Bioethanol, however this is not the most common process of production ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;F3;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;174;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(F3 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;174;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529945673″;174;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;F3;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;F3 Fact sheet: Bioethanol;/title;;/titles;;volume;Category: Fuels, No.6;/volume;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;publisher;The Swedish Knowlege Centre for Renewable Transportation fuels;/publisher;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(F3 2015). The properties of this fuel vary but can be generalised (Table 6).
Chemical Formula
 C2H5OH
Higher Heating Value
26.8 MJ/kg
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 6. Basic Properties of Bioethanol ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;F3;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;174;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(F3 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;174;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529945673″;174;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;F3;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;F3 Fact sheet: Bioethanol;/title;;/titles;;volume;Category: Fuels, No.6;/volume;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;publisher;The Swedish Knowlege Centre for Renewable Transportation fuels;/publisher;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(F3 2015)
It is typically a first-generation biofuel however recent projects have been developed in Sweden to produce second generation or advanced Bioethanol that uses lignocellulosic biomass from forestry waste and agriculture to produce a similar product ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Statens energimyndighet;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;169;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Statens energimyndighet 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;169;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943761″;169;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Statens energimyndighet ,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Hållbara biodrivmedel och flytande biobränslen under 2014;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Statens energimyndighet 2015). However, the breakdown composition of Swedish Bioethanol shows that the primary source is wheat and thus, this has been selected as the feedstock in this study (Figure 11). Also due to the developing nature of advanced Bioethanol (Second generation) it was deemed that sufficient information was not readily available.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 11. Sources of Bioethanol on the Swedish Market for 2015 ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Statens energimyndighet;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;169;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Statens energimyndighet 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;169;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943761″;169;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Statens energimyndighet ,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Hållbara biodrivmedel och flytande biobränslen under 2014;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Statens energimyndighet 2015)
Technology
In the case of using Bioethanol in a compression ignition engine either the engine or fuel will often require modification possibly even both ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Larsen;/Author;;Year;2009;/Year;;RecNum;175;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Larsen, Johansen ;amp; Schramm 2009b);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;175;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529946019″;175;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Generic”;13;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Larsen, Ulrik;/author;;author;Johansen, Troels;/author;;author;Schramm, Jesper;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Ethanol as a future fuel for road transportation;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2009;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Larsen, Johansen ; Schramm 2009b). Bioethanol fuel with 5% ignition improver (ED95) can be used in a convention diesel engine with these modifications. There are several alterations to the vehicles including an elevated compression ratio (28:1) to aid ignition, higher fuel flow to make up for lower fuel density, alongside other alterations ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Larsen;/Author;;Year;2009;/Year;;RecNum;175;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Larsen, Johansen ;amp; Schramm 2009b);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;175;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529946019″;175;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Generic”;13;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Larsen, Ulrik;/author;;author;Johansen, Troels;/author;;author;Schramm, Jesper;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Ethanol as a future fuel for road transportation;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2009;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Larsen, Johansen ; Schramm 2009b).
ElectricityBattery ElectricElectricity is a growing energy carrier for vehicles. Electric buses usually use a rechargeable battery and recharge in a stationary position. Electric vehicles are considered clean alternatives due to their low tailpipe emissions ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Ge;/Author;;Year;2017;/Year;;RecNum;223;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Ge et al. 2017);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;223;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532012808″;223;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Generic”;13;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Ge, Ying-En;/author;;author;Long, Jiancheng;/author;;author;Xiao, Feng;/author;;author;Shi, Qin;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Traffic modeling for low-emission transport;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2017;/year;;/dates;;publisher;Elsevier;/publisher;;isbn;1361-9209;/isbn;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Ge et al. 2017) and have the quickest improvement on local air quality when selected. However, the lifecycle emissions of an electric vehicle are very much dependent on the electricity supply to the grid in the country of origin.
Energy Process and specific feedstock
Each country has its own electricity mix that will affect the overall impact/ performance of an electric vehicle. Sweden is predominantly sourced by a combination of Nuclear and Hydro power with some wind power and other energy sources making up the rest (Figure 12). This energy mix needs to be considered as the fuel in this context to give an accurate representation. The battery electric charging types should only deviate regarding technical performance data as the fuel source is the same.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 12. Sources of Electricity on the Swedish Market for 2015 ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;IVA;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;176;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(IVA 2016b);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;176;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529947121″;176;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;IVA;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Electricity Production in Sweden: IVA;apos;s Elelctricity Crossroads project;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(IVA 2016b)
Technology
This is a bus that is powered by an electric motor where the energy comes from a battery pack on board. Battery Electric vehicles differ from trolley buses that are constantly connected to electricity however there are different types within this subset.
Opportunity Charging: This option minimizes the weight of the battery by having a 20-60 kWh capacity onboard and charging more frequently on route
Overnight Charging: refers to buses that are recharged slowly overnight during large intervals often at the depot. These typically have a larger heavier battery with a greater charge capacity of approximately 200-350 kWh.
Defining ‘ Efficiency’Efficiency in Transport PolicyThe political rhetoric on a global level has share concerns regarding environmental, social and economic issues. These issues fall under the wide umbrella of sustainability and have been translated into targets and policy on both a European and a National level. On the regional level, several EU policies express that municipalities should aim toward ‘cleaner’ and ‘efficient’ bus services ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;CIVITASb;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;151;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(CIVITASb 2016);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;151;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″;151;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;CIVITASb,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;Netherlands;/pub-location;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(CIVITASb 2016). Within the pre-discussed sustainability concerns this section will outline and summarize EU policy regarding efficiency in relation to greenhouse gases, air quality, vehicle regulations, Energy security, noise, and procurement standards.
Greenhouse gas emissions
European Union policy ensures that member states are committed to reducing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions by 60% of 1990 levels by the year 2050 ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Mobility;/Author;;Year;2011;/Year;;RecNum;152;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Mobility ;amp; Transport 2011);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;152;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529934101″;152;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Book”;6;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;European Comission. Directorate-General for Mobility;/author;;author;Transport;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;White Paper on Transport: Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area: Towards a Competitive and Resource-efficient Transport System;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2011;/year;;/dates;;publisher;Publications Office of the European Union;/publisher;;isbn;9279182706;/isbn;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Mobility ; Transport 2011). Approximately 70% of the transport sectors Greenhous Gas emissions come from the growing road transport area ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;CIVITASb;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;151;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(CIVITASb 2016);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;151;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″;151;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;CIVITASb,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;Netherlands;/pub-location;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(CIVITASb 2016). The Transport White paper ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Mobility;/Author;;Year;2011;/Year;;RecNum;152;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Mobility ;amp; Transport 2011);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;152;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529934101″;152;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Book”;6;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;European Comission. Directorate-General for Mobility;/author;;author;Transport;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;White Paper on Transport: Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area: Towards a Competitive and Resource-efficient Transport System;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2011;/year;;/dates;;publisher;Publications Office of the European Union;/publisher;;isbn;9279182706;/isbn;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Mobility ; Transport 2011) also states that aims to reduce the use of conventionally fuelled vehicles by 50% by 2030, replacing them entirely by 2050 and optimistically accomplishing CO2-free urban mobility by 2030.
Air quality
Public health concerns regarding Air Quality are also apparent in a European and Swedish context. The European commission compiled the ‘clean air quality package’ ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;European Commission;/Author;;Year;2014;/Year;;RecNum;153;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(European Commission 2014);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;153;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529935295″;153;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;European Commission,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Life and Air Quality;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2014;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;Luxembourg;/pub-location;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(European Commission 2014) wherein reduction of key pollutants such as; Particulate matter ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite ExcludeYear=”1″;;Author;Kampman;/Author;;Year;2013;/Year;;RecNum;142;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Kampman et al.);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;142;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1525285144″;142;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Book”;6;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Kampman, BE;/author;;author;Verbeek, Ruud;/author;;author;Grinsven, AH;/author;;author;van Mensch, Pim;/author;;author;Croezen, HJ;/author;;author;Patuleia, Artur;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Bringing biofuels on the market: options to increase EU biofuels volumes beyond the current blending limits;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2013;/year;;/dates;;publisher;CE Delft;/publisher;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Kampman et al.), Sulphur dioxide (SO2), Nitrogen Oxide (NOx), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), Ammonia NH4 and methane CH4 up until 2030. The policy behind this includes the National Emission Ceilings directive (NECD) and the Ambient Air Quality Directive (AAQD).

Vehicle Air Quality Regulations
Air quality regulations are specified above, however as road vehicles affect air quality directly they are subject to standards of their own through emission limits. For road vehicles Euro standards apply that focus on tailpipe emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Jerksjö;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;154;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Jerksjö ;amp; Hallquist 2016);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;154;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529936055″;154;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Journal Article”;17;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Jerksjö, Martin;/author;;author;Hallquist, Åsa;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Measurements of bus emissions 2010-2015;/title;;secondary-title;IVL rapport B;/secondary-title;;/titles;;periodical;;full-title;IVL rapport B;/full-title;;/periodical;;number;2254;/number;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;isbn;9188319067;/isbn;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Jerksjö ; Hallquist 2016). These standards are enforced through extensive testing. New Euro standards are regularly implemented every couple of years with more strict regulations coming into effect. Heavy Vehicles (this includes buses) registered in the European Union after the end of 2013 require approval of EURO VI standards ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;ICCT;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;155;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(ICCT 2016);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;155;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529936446″;155;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;ICCT,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;A technical summary of EURO 6/VI vehicel emission standards;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;San Francisco;/pub-location;;publisher;International Council on Clean Transportation;/publisher;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(ICCT 2016).

Energy security
Concerns regarding energy security deemed as the “uninterrupted availability of energy sources at an affordable price” ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Cherp;/Author;;Year;2014;/Year;;RecNum;156;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Cherp ;amp; Jewell 2014);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;156;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529936572″;156;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Journal Article”;17;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Cherp, Aleh;/author;;author;Jewell, Jessica;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;The concept of energy security: Beyond the four As;/title;;secondary-title;Energy Policy;/secondary-title;;/titles;;periodical;;full-title;Energy Policy;/full-title;;/periodical;;pages;415-421;/pages;;volume;75;/volume;;dates;;year;2014;/year;;/dates;;isbn;0301-4215;/isbn;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Cherp ; Jewell 2014) have increased with increased initiatives to limit nation’s dependence on oil and incentivizing and motivating renewable alternatives than can be controlled locally. As such the Renewable Energy Directive aims to have all EU members to accomplish a 20% share of renewable energy pathways by 2020 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Howes</Author><Year>2010</Year><RecNum>157</RecNum><DisplayText>(Howes 2010)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>157</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529936643″>157</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Howes, Tom</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The EU’s new renewable energy Directive (2009/28/EC);/title;;secondary-title;The new climate policies of the European Union: internal legislation and climate diplomacy;/secondary-title;;/titles;;periodical;;full-title;The new climate policies of the European Union: internal legislation and climate diplomacy;/full-title;;/periodical;;pages;3;/pages;;volume;15;/volume;;number;117;/number;;dates;;year;2010;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Howes 2010). This target also emphasizes promotion of renewables in the transport sector.
Noise
EU law has addressed noise levels in urban areas in an EU noise policy ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Directive;/Author;;Year;2002;/Year;;RecNum;158;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Directive 2002);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;158;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529936743″;158;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Journal Article”;17;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Directive, EU;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Directive 2002/49/EC of the European parliament and the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise;/title;;secondary-title;Official Journal of the European Communities, L;/secondary-title;;/titles;;periodical;;full-title;Official Journal of the European Communities, L;/full-title;;/periodical;;pages;2002;/pages;;volume;189;/volume;;number;18.07;/number;;dates;;year;2002;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Directive 2002) and has aimed to move closer to recommended noise levels identified by the World health organisation by 2020 ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Jarosi?ska;/Author;;Year;2018;/Year;;RecNum;159;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Jarosi?ska et al. 2018);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;159;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529937142″;159;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Journal Article”;17;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Jarosi?ska, Dorota;/author;;author;Héroux, Marie-Ève;/author;;author;Wilkhu, Poonum;/author;;author;Creswick, James;/author;;author;Verbeek, Jos;/author;;author;Wothge, Jördis;/author;;author;Paunovi?, Elizabet;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Development of the WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: An Introduction;/title;;secondary-title;International journal of environmental research and public health;/secondary-title;;/titles;;periodical;;full-title;International journal of environmental research and public health;/full-title;;/periodical;;pages;813;/pages;;volume;15;/volume;;number;4;/number;;dates;;year;2018;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Jarosi?ska et al. 2018). This will require enforcing policy and design innovation. Presently, Eu Directive 2002/49/EC enforces noise level requirements ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Directive;/Author;;Year;2002;/Year;;RecNum;158;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Directive 2002);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;158;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529936743″;158;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Journal Article”;17;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Directive, EU;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Directive 2002/49/EC of the European parliament and the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise;/title;;secondary-title;Official Journal of the European Communities, L;/secondary-title;;/titles;;periodical;;full-title;Official Journal of the European Communities, L;/full-title;;/periodical;;pages;2002;/pages;;volume;189;/volume;;number;18.07;/number;;dates;;year;2002;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Directive 2002).
Procurement Policy
The European commission currently gives suggestions regarding incentivising clean and energy efficient buses. Regarding Directive 2009/33/EC about the promotion of efficient transport options a broad approach is applied for a diverse market of options ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;European Parliament;/Author;;Year;2009;/Year;;RecNum;160;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(European Parliament 2009);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;160;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529937560″;160;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;European Parliament,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Directive 2009/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2009;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;Europe;/pub-location;;publisher;European Parliament, Council of the European Union;/publisher;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(European Parliament 2009). The directive also covers public procurement requirements which requires officiaries to consider the lifetime energy and environmental impacts of an option. This includes greenhouse gas levels as local pollutants of NOx and particulate matter emissions.

Key Areas of EfficiencyRegarding ‘efficiency’ when selecting a transport option for procurement of a bus fleet it was determined through participatory dialogue with partners of the Biogas Research Centre that the term ‘efficiency’ involved multiple dimensions that were not all covered by established policy. As such these key areas of efficiency were broken into sections named; Economy, Vehicle Performance, Delivery Reliability, Infrastructure, Environment, and Social. Each key area and associated question was then answered by establishing criteria known as indicators to reach an adequate conclusion (Table 7).

Economy
One aspect of efficiency is whether a transport option is financially efficient, whether costs are at an acceptable level to meet an organisations budget and whether the investment is safe. As such the key area Economy is established which aims to address the question; Is an option economically viable for the business and the region? (Table 7).

Vehicle performance
Assessing whether the vehicle itself performs efficiently in its day to day operations is also another area of importance. In this sense it is important to note whether a; vehicles performance characteristics are reasonable? (Table 7)
Delivery Reliability
The efficiency of delivery is also important regarding a transport option wherein the reliability of the service can be assessed by the stability of things like fuel, policy and technical versatility. This area is assessed asking the question; Does the option provide a stable delivery of service? (Table 7)
Infrastructure
When assessing the efficiency of a transport option it is also important to assess the associated infrastructure and whether it requires much current change or if the option is flexible for future change. This area is assessed asking the question; Is associated infrastructure flexible and does it require much change? (Table xxx)
Environment
This key area of assessing a transport options efficiency is most in line with the established policy in the previous section. It focuses on issues that are mostly regulated such as greenhouse gas emissions, local air pollutants, noise, as well as unenforced issues such as nutrient availability. This section poses the question; Is the transport option reasonable from an environmental and resource use perspective? (Table 7)
Social
Whether a transport option was efficient for society was also deemed an aspect of the decision context as if users and the wider public are unhappy with the selection of a fleet or associated effect then usage may decline. As such it was deemed important to answer the question; Is the transport option supported by its users and the wider public? (Table 7)

Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 7. Overview of the Strategic Questions, perspective, key areas, key questions and indicators.

Strategic Question Perspective Key Area Key Question Indicators Analysis and Interpretation Decision Support
Is it suitable for a region to use this combination of powertrain and fuel feedstock for public buses? Is it suitable from a financial perspective?
Is it suitable from a social and environmental perspective? Economy Is the option economically viable for businesses and the region? Cost of Ownership The indicator performance in each area can be aggregated and overviewed to indicate their performance in the methodology
-Is it suitable from a financial
Perspective?
-Is it suitable from a social and environmental perspective? Should this transport option be selected by the decision maker?
Market Share Vehicle Performance Are the vehicle performance characteristics reasonable? Range/Refuel time Delivery Reliability Does the option provide a stable delivery of service? National Energy Security Current Policy Future Policy Short-term back up Infrastructure Is associated infrastructure flexible and does it require much change? Required Change Environment Is the transport option reasonable from an environmental and resource use perspective? Well to wheel greenhouse gas reductions Air Pollution Noise levels Nutrient Availability Resource constraints Social Is the transport option supported by its users and the wider public? Social acceptance Job creation Performance Indicators and ScalesIn this report ‘efficient’ procurement of public buses has been broken down into a multi-dimensional problem. Each dimension is addressed in the form of a key area which is linked with a key question. In order to answer a key question certain criterion, need to be set to fulfil this. The criteria in this case are referred to as indicators and are justified in relation to their selection in answering the question and also have scales allowing a qualitative assessment to be conducted using both qualitative or quantitative information.
EconomyCost of ownershipThis Indicator is part of the key area Economy and addresses the question; Is the option economically viable for businesses and the region? Economic traits were addressed by the establishment of a cost of ownership indicator for the vehicle itself. As other costs such as taxes, driver costs and residual value are specific to a location this indicator simplifies these costs. This indicator takes on board three components of a buses lifetime costs, including;
The initial cost of the vehicle.

Fuel cost over a 600 000 km lifetime equating to the average lifespan of a bus approximately 10 years ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Ecotraffic;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;177;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Ecotraffic 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;177;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″;177;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Ecotraffic;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Ecotraffic 2015)
Maintenance cost over that lifetime for repairs to battery replacement for electric vehicles.
As there is no quantifiable scale deriving what is an acceptable level of cost for a transport vehicle Diesel has been stated as the base case. Diesel has been a component of public transit for many years in Europe and Sweden and this option has been selected as the cost of ownership benchmark for a very good level due to its long-standing usage and assumed cost effectiveness over this period. Diesels cost of ownership using this methodology is approximately 5.3MSEK ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Ecotraffic;/Author;;Year;2015;/Year;;RecNum;177;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Ecotraffic 2015);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;177;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″;177;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Ecotraffic;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2015;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Ecotraffic 2015). As the values in this scale are generic in nature it is not effective to make small increments for the grading. Instead a wide range of 1 MSEK has been selected with ?5.5 MSEK set as the best performing metric (i.e. Diesel). The scale outlines large price brackets for encompassing the three cost of ownership components mentioned (Table 8).
Scale Cost of Ownership (MSEK)
Very good (5) ;5.5
Good (4) 5.5- 6.49
Satisfactory (3) 6.5 – 7.49
Bad (2) 7.5- 8.5
Very bad (1) ;8.5
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 8. Cost of Ownership Indicator; Performance Scale
Market ShareThis indicator is part of the key area Economy and addresses the question; Is the option economically viable for businesses and the region? It does this in the respect that it assesses the viability of an option by looking at the market and assessing current levels of investment from other similar actors. By looking at current market share by fuel type of buses for the year the status can be measured. A higher market share highlights that many of these buses are currently in use in the nation/ region and can help validate an option. National statistics were used in this case. Market share in a business context is often broken in to five phases, this is used for this scale (Table 9). The greatest economies of scale and security are had when a ;40% share is achieved ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;Buzzell;/Author;;Year;1975;/Year;;RecNum;179;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(Buzzell, Gale ;amp; Sultan 1975);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;179;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530568161″;179;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Journal Article”;17;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;Buzzell, Robert D;/author;;author;Gale, Bradley T;/author;;author;Sultan, Ralph GM;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Market share-a key to profitability;/title;;secondary-title;Harvard business review;/secondary-title;;/titles;;periodical;;full-title;Harvard business review;/full-title;;/periodical;;pages;97-106;/pages;;volume;53;/volume;;number;1;/number;;dates;;year;1975;/year;;/dates;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(Buzzell, Gale ; Sultan 1975). Also, by this logic a technology with a high portion of the national market is unlikely to be a risky or unlucrative.
Scale Market Share (%)
Very good (5) ?40%
Good (4) 30-39%
Satisfactory (3) 20-29%
Bad (2) 10-19%
Very bad (1) ?10%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 9. Market Share Indicator; Performance Scale
Vehicle PerformanceRange/Refuel timeThis indicator is part of the key area Vehicle Performance and addresses the question; are the vehicle performance characteristics reasonable? In this respect it is important to assess whether a vehicle can perform its operational duties and for how long, with how much preparation is required to return the vehicle back on the road. This indicator does this by focusing primarily on the range and required time constraints of a transportation option. This is defined as the distance that a vehicle can perform its operational duties before typical recharging or refueling stops. Vehicle range was calculated using a data sources for fuel economy and the usable amount of energy per tank/battery. The scale has been determined by the fact that a 300km range is required for operations in a medium sized European city ADDIN EN.CITE ;EndNote;;Cite;;Author;CIVITASb;/Author;;Year;2016;/Year;;RecNum;151;/RecNum;;DisplayText;(CIVITASb 2016);/DisplayText;;record;;rec-number;151;/rec-number;;foreign-keys;;key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″;151;/key;;/foreign-keys;;ref-type name=”Report”;27;/ref-type;;contributors;;authors;;author;CIVITASb,;/author;;/authors;;/contributors;;titles;;title;Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses;/title;;/titles;;dates;;year;2016;/year;;/dates;;pub-location;Netherlands;/pub-location;;urls;;/urls;;/record;;/Cite;;/EndNote;(CIVITASb 2016). 300km-500km was thus set as the satisfactory level. The length of time typical for refueling a 12-meter bus running on diesel is 5-10 minutes, by considering this as the norm it has been set as the satisfactory time frame for refueling. This was defined as a three-option scale with refueling times exceeding or bettering the 5-10 minutes refuel time being graded accordingly. These two aspects were then combined due being strongly interconnected and a grading matrix was created to assess both simultaneously (Table 10).
Refuel time in Minutes ;5 Satisfactory (3) Good (4) Very Good (5)
5-10 Bad (2) Satisfactory (3) Good (4)
;10 Very Bad (1) Bad (2) Satisfactory (3)
;299 300-500 ;500
Vehicle Range in kilometers
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 10. Combined Refuel time and Range Indicator Performance Scale
Delivery ReliabilityNational Energy SecurityThis indicator is part of the key area Delivery Reliability related to the question; Does the option provide safe delivery of energy? Issues regarding Energy Security were deemed important to maintain reliable delivery of energy. The International Energy Agency (IEA) defines Energy Security as; the uninterrupted availability of energy sources at an affordable price” ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Jewell</Author><Year>2011</Year><RecNum>180</RecNum><DisplayText>(Jewell 2011)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>180</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530725946″>180</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Jewell, Jessica</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The IEA model of short-term energy security (MOSES)</title></titles><dates><year>2011</year></dates><isbn>2079-2581</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Jewell 2011). Energy security, in this case in the short term energy security the resilience of an energy source to sudden changes assesses its stability as an option for procurement. A lack of energy security is linked with potential negative economic or social impacts in the future due to an energy source being physically unavailable or overly expensive. Many energy security concerns center around oil supply security which is still important, but in an evolving energy market is not inclusive of other energy supplies. To assess these energy sources the IEA has developed a tool. For the indicator National energy security, the dynamics of nations internal and external risks are assessed according to this pre-existing tool named; The IEA Model of Short-term Energy Security (MOSES) Primary Energy Sources and Secondary Fuels ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Jewell</Author><Year>2011</Year><RecNum>180</RecNum><DisplayText>(Jewell 2011)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>180</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530725946″>180</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Jewell, Jessica</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The IEA model of short-term energy security (MOSES)</title></titles><dates><year>2011</year></dates><isbn>2079-2581</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Jewell 2011). This tool aims to assess a vast number of risks such as natural, economic and political concerns for different energy sources. This MOSES tool was deemed the most tangible means of assessing several primary energy sources and secondary fuels for a national rather than regional context.
MOSES focuses on short term energy security by identifying resilience and risks both internally and externally. Each energy source category is assessed by different criteria ( Table 11, 12, 13 and 14). The oil products model is used to assess the security of Diesel, the Biomass and waste model is used for biogas, the biofuels model is used for HVO and FAME . The Electricity in Swedish is not derived from one solitary source so as the MOSES model has steps to assess both nuclear power and hydropower (Hydropower is determined purely by the volatility of production) these have been used. A 50:50% combination of nuclear and hydropower is used in this methodology to represent the Swedish electricity mix which is in fact closer to 41:41% with the remainder made up by wind power and thermal energy ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IVA</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>181</RecNum><DisplayText>(IVA 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>181</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530726228″>181</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IVA</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity production in Sweden: IVA&apos;s Electricity project</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Stockholm</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(IVA 2016a). Independently sourced data was combined with data within the MOSES tool to generate more up to date assessment results. Once the assessment is completed for each energy source an overall energy grade for the nation is specified in an A-E grading system which corresponds with the ‘Very Good (5)-Very Bad (1)’ range in this report (Table 15).
Model for Oil products (i.e. Diesel).

Dimensions MOSES Indicator Low Medium High
External Risk Import Deficit <5% 5-25% 25-45% ?45%
Domestic Risk Crude oil security profile Evaluated in MOSES ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Jewell</Author><Year>2011</Year><RecNum>180</RecNum><DisplayText>(Jewell 2011)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>180</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530725946″>180</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Jewell, Jessica</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The IEA model of short-term energy security (MOSES)</title></titles><dates><year>2011</year></dates><isbn>2079-2581</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Jewell 2011)
Number of Refineries 1 Indicator is only considered for countries with only 1 refinery
External Resilience Diversity of Suppliers ?0.58 0.18-0.54 ?0.18
Import Infrastructure Ports 0 2-4 ?5
Rivers 1-2 No countries have more than 2 pipeline s or river ports without at least 5 maritime ports
Pipelines 1-2 Domestic Resilience Flexibility of refining infrastructure (Nelson complexity Index) <6.0 6.0-9.0 ?9.0
Average storage levels measured in weeks of forward demand ?3 3-6 6-9 ?9
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 11. MOSES Framework for Oil Products (Jewell 2011)
Model for Biomass and waste (i.e. Biogas)
Dimension MOSES Indicator Low Medium High
External Risk Import Dependence <15% 15-25% No country imports more than 25% of this source
Domestic Resilience Source Diversity >0.5 0.3-0.5 <0.3
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 12. MOSES Framework for Biomass and Waste Fuels (Jewell 2011)
Model for Biofuels (i.e. FAME, HVO and Bioethanol)
Dimensions MOSES Indicator Low Medium High
External Risk Import dependence <20% 40-70% >80%
External Resilience Import Infrastructure (entry points) Sea Ports 0 2-4 ?5
River Ports 1-2 No countries have more than 2 river entry points without at least 5 maritime ports
Domestic Risk Volatility of Agricultural Output 0%-5% 5%-10% >10%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 13. MOSES Framework for Biofuels (Jewell 2011)
Model for Nuclear power (41% of Swedish Electricity mix)
Dimensions MOSES Indicator Low Medium High
Domestic Risk Unplanned capability Loss factor <3% 3%-6% 6-9% >15%
Average age of reactors <20 20-30 >30
Domestic Resilience Number of nuclear power reactors 1 4-10 ?15
Diversity of reactor models >0.6 0.3-0.6 <0.3
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 14. MOSES Framework for Nuclear Power (Jewell 2011)
Scale MOSES fuel type rating (Sweden)
Very good (5) A
Good (4) B
Satisfactory (3) C
Bad (2) D
Very bad (1) E
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 15. National Energy Security Indicator; Performance Scale
Short-term backup fuelThis indicator is part of the key area Delivery Reliability related to the question; Does the option provide safe delivery of energy? Regarding delivery reliability it was deemed somewhat important to consider a transport vehicles capability to adapt or adjust to another fuel source in times of need if supply is somewhat compromised. In this indicator it is assessed whether a vehicle can switch fuel supply quickly and easily without modifications. Essentially determining whether there is a functional alternative in times of need with additional value being placed on the availability of another renewable source. Accessible as well as renewable backup alternatives were deemed to be best suited with accessible and non-accessible alternatives performing worse in the indicator scaling (Table 16).

Scale Backup potential
Very good (5) Accessible Renewable backup energy source
Satisfactory (3) Accessible non-renewable backup energy source
Very bad (1) No accessible backup energy source
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 16. Short-term backup fuel Indicator; Performance Scale
Current PolicyThis indicator is part of the key area Delivery Reliability related to the question; Does the option provide safe delivery of energy? Delivery reliability is not only affected by physical supply but also by the barriers closely linked to the key area of Economy. One such economic barrier affecting reliability of an energy source is government imposed taxes and tariffs of an energy source. In this sense the governmental attitude toward a transportation option; particularly the fuel source is assessed by the level of support or the lack of it. Many conventional energy sources are required to pay both carbon taxes and an energy tax within Sweden ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>OECD</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>182</RecNum><DisplayText>(OECD 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>182</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530726492″>182</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>OECD</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Taxing Energy Use 2018- Companion to the taxing energy use database</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year></dates><pub-location>Paris</pub-location><publisher>OECD Publishing</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(OECD 2018) and some fuels are more favored by the current government. To differentiate between these the options; complete energy and carbon tax exemption, reduced taxes and complete taxes were selected as performance traits for this scale (Table 17). Where exemption of both tax types is regarded as being ‘Very Good (5)’ regarding current policy support. Meaning this contributes to a better delivery reliability with the opposite applying when both tax types are required. The scale is derived as three tiered due to lack of alternative criteria.
Scale Current taxation policy
Very good (5) Complete Energy and Carbon tax exemption
Satisfactory (3) Reduced Taxes (Either Carbon or Energy Tax)
Very bad (1) Both Energy and Carbon Taxes required
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 17. Current Policy Indicator; Performance Scale
Future PolicyThis indicator is part of the key area Delivery Reliability related to the question; Does the option provide safe delivery of energy? This indicator assesses not the current policy but the transport options alignment with long term objectives of the nation. The long term trajectory focus allows for seeing whether a transportation option is in line with long term targets in a bid to foresee future policy that could be implemented. Sweden has set a goal of acquiring a fossil fuel independent transport sector ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Xylia</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>162</RecNum><DisplayText>(Xylia &amp; Silveira 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>162</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529938986″>162</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Xylia, Maria</author><author>Silveira, Semida</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>On the road to fossil-free public transport: The case of Swedish bus fleets</title><secondary-title>Energy Policy</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Energy Policy</full-title></periodical><pages>397-412</pages><volume>100</volume><dates><year>2017</year></dates><isbn>0301-4215</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Xylia & Silveira 2017). This step is in line with the country’s aim to achieve CO2-emissions neutrality by 2050 recently revised to 2045 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Johansson</Author><Year>2013</Year><RecNum>183</RecNum><DisplayText>(Johansson 2013)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>183</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530726720″>183</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Johansson, Thomas B</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Fossilfrihet på väg</title><secondary-title>Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Enterprise, SOU</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Enterprise, SOU</full-title></periodical><pages>84</pages><volume>2013</volume><dates><year>2013</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Johansson 2013). This indicator focuses on whether a transport option is carbon neutral; zero carbon footprint refers to a net zero carbon emission by balancing the carbon released with an equivalent amount sequestered or offset and fossil fuel free (Table 18). However, the ‘net zero’ emission does not mean that by 2045 Sweden will not emit any GHG, rather the absolute emissions must be reduced by 85% of 1990 levels with the remaining 15% offset by investments in things like carbon capture technology and emission reductions in other nations .

Scale Future policy alignment
Very good (5) In line with fossil fuel free (2030) and carbon neutrality (2045) targets
Satisfactory (3) In line with fossil fuel free (2030) OR carbon neutrality (2045) targets
Very bad (1) Not in line with fossil fuel free (2030) OR carbon neutrality (2045) targets
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 18. Future Policy Indicator; Performance Scale
InfrastructureRequired ChangeThis indicator is linked to the key area of Infrastructure and the key question; Is associated infrastructure flexible and does it require much change? These aspects are important as although a vehicle may be efficient the infrastructural requirements may not be. This indicator assesses the level of change required to existing infrastructure regarding the daily procedure and the impact on aesthetical nature of the region. The current procedure for Swedish buses has been defined as delivery of fuel, followed by operation, followed by depot refueling. Similarly, the urban planning impact has been limited by buses due to the infrastructure required consisting of fueling pumps at designated depots. This this has been selected as the benchmark i.e. very good with changes to one or more of these traits seen as requiring greater Required Change (Table 19).

Scale  Required Change
Very good (5) Unchanged procedure and unchanged urban planning impact
Satisfactory (3) Unchanged procedure or unchanged urban planning impact
Very bad (1) Change in procedure and change in urban planning impact
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 19. Required Change Indicator; Performance Scale
Environment and EnergyWell to wheel greenhouse gas reductionsThis indicator is focused on the are of Environment answering the question; Is the transport option reasonable from an environmental and resource use perspective? With a focus on greenhouse gas emission reduction in relation to policy this indicator should identify an efficient option in relation to this dimension. Also, this indicator focuses on the total emissions produced during the production, distribution and use phase of a transport option. These values are typically displayed as Full Life-cycle Emissions (gC02-eq./MJ). However, procurement standards in accordance with the RED methodology ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>European Parliament</Author><Year>2009</Year><RecNum>160</RecNum><DisplayText>(European Parliament 2009)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>160</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529937560″>160</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>European Parliament,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Directive 2009/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles</title></titles><dates><year>2009</year></dates><pub-location>Europe</pub-location><publisher>European Parliament, Council of the European Union</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(European Parliament 2009) stipulates that new vehicle procurements should equate to reductions of greenhouse gas emissions measured against fossil fuel Diesel; this has been the focal point of the scale (Table 20). By combining data used following the Renewable Energy Directive methodology for assessing full life cycle emissions data alongside the combustion emissions; then a carbon intensity value can be obtained. The carbon intensity value can then be utilized to determine the WTW emissions of vehicles with a selected energy efficiency. The RED directive states that for 2018 the minimum reduction on Diesel GHG emissions should be 60% thus this has been selected as the satisfactory value in the scale with increments of 10% increase and decrease set as the other values in the scale to determine better or worse performing options.
Scale WTW GHG Reductions on Diesel
Very good (5) ? 80 %
Good (4) 70 -79 %
Satisfactory (3) 60-69 %
Bad (2) 50- 59 %
Very bad (1) <50 %
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 20. Well to Wheel Greenhouse Emission Reduction Indicator; Performance Scale
Air PollutionThis indicator also focuses on the key area of Environment with an aim to determine ; Is the transport option reasonable from an environmental and resource use perspective? This indicator focuses on European emission standards (Table 21) that detail levels of nitrogen oxides (NOx), total hydrocarbon (THC), non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC), carbon monoxide (CO) and particulate matter  ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite ExcludeYear=”1″><Author>Kampman</Author><Year>2013</Year><RecNum>142</RecNum><DisplayText>(Kampman et al.)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>142</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1525285144″>142</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Book”>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Kampman, BE</author><author>Verbeek, Ruud</author><author>Grinsven, AH</author><author>van Mensch, Pim</author><author>Croezen, HJ</author><author>Patuleia, Artur</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Bringing biofuels on the market: options to increase EU biofuels volumes beyond the current blending limits</title></titles><dates><year>2013</year></dates><publisher>CE Delft</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Kampman et al.) . These emissions can have adverse effects on the environment and human health. Newly procured vehicles should ideally fall within the EURO VI category, but older previously registered vehicles may not meet this EURO standard. The scale for satisfactory emissions with a focus on nitrogen and particulate matter emissions are set at fulfilling EURO VI standards as if this criterion is not met procurement is unviable with zero emission technologies performing better (Table 22). Zero emission technologies refer to engine types that emit no waste product from the use phase.
Stage Date Tests CO HC NOx PM
g/kWh
Euro I 1992, ? 85 kW ECE R-49 4.5 1.1 8.0 0.612
1992, > 85 kW 4.5 1.1 8.0 0.36
Euro II 1996.10 4.0 1.1 7.0 0.25
1998.10 4.0 1.1 7.0 0.15
Euro III 1999.10 EEV only ESC & ELR 1.5 0.25 2.0 0.02
2000.10 2.1 0.66 5.0 0.10a
Euro IV 2005.10 1.5 0.46 3.5 0.02
Euro V 2008.10 1.5 0.46 2.0 0.02
Euro VI 2013.01 WHSC 1.5 0.13 0.40 0.01
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 21. EURO Regulations by Emission levels (Jerksjö & Hallquist 2016)
Scale EURO standard fulfilment
Very good (5) Zero Emission Technology
Satisfactory (3) Fulfils EURO VI regulations
Very bad (1) Does not fulfil EURO VI regulations
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 22. Air Pollution Indicator; Performance Scale
Noise levelsThis indicator again focuses on the area of Environment with in a bid to determine; Is the transport option reasonable from an environmental and resource use perspective? This focuses on the impact of noise on the environment. This indicator is described as the decibel level emanating from a vehicle passing by. Pass-by noise does not document only the engine noise but characterizes the acoustic signature of the vehicle. The vehicle passes by stationary microphones and aims to mimic the noise associated with the real life use of the vehicle ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Braun</Author><Year>2013</Year><RecNum>221</RecNum><DisplayText>(Braun et al. 2013)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>221</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531937858″>221</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Braun, Michael E</author><author>Walsh, Stephen J</author><author>Horner, Jane L</author><author>Chuter, R</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Noise source characteristics in the ISO 362 vehicle pass-by noise test: Literature review</title><secondary-title>Applied Acoustics</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Applied Acoustics</full-title></periodical><pages>1241-1265</pages><volume>74</volume><number>11</number><dates><year>2013</year></dates><isbn>0003-682X</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Braun et al. 2013). The methods for buses specify precise positioning, acceleration and coasting procedures to accurately and consistently measure noise ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Braun</Author><Year>2013</Year><RecNum>221</RecNum><DisplayText>(Braun et al. 2013)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>221</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531937858″>221</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Braun, Michael E</author><author>Walsh, Stephen J</author><author>Horner, Jane L</author><author>Chuter, R</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Noise source characteristics in the ISO 362 vehicle pass-by noise test: Literature review</title><secondary-title>Applied Acoustics</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Applied Acoustics</full-title></periodical><pages>1241-1265</pages><volume>74</volume><number>11</number><dates><year>2013</year></dates><isbn>0003-682X</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Braun et al. 2013). The noise level requirements of the motor vehicle are established by EU regulation No 540/2014 (Table 23). The requirements for a vehicle type (M3) that holds passengers exceeding 8 persons with an engine power greater than 250kw had a maximum decibel (dba) level of 80 set for the years 2016-2020 with improvements expected beyond 2020. Thus, the satisfactory noise levels for this indicator was set as the 2016-2020 requirements with 2020-2024 set as a greater performer on the scale with the same increments followed in the lower performing areas (Table 24).

Vehicle type Requirements
2016 – 2020 Requirements
2020 -2024 Requirements
> 2024
> 250 kW 80 78 77
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 23. Noise Level Procurement levels ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>kollektivtrafik</Author><Year>2014</Year><RecNum>178</RecNum><DisplayText>(Partnersamverkan för en förbättrad kollektivtrafik 2014)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>178</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530567578″>178</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Partnersamverkan för en förbättrad kollektivtrafik,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Miljökrav vid Trafikupphandling: Buss</title></titles><dates><year>2014</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Partnersamverkan för en förbättrad kollektivtrafik 2014)
Scale Noise levels standing (dba)
Very good (5) ?77
Good (4) 77.01-77.99
Satisfactory (3) 78-80
Bad (2) 80.01-80.99
Very bad (1) ?81
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 24. Noise Level Indicator; Performance Scale
Nutrient availabilityThis indicator is a part of the key area of Environment aiming to answer the question; Is the transport option reasonable from an environmental and resource use perspective? Nutrients cycling is a vital component of any ecosystem. Important nutrients involved include carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, phosphorus and nitrogen that all require cycling for the functionality of organisms. These cycles also include biological, geological and chemical processes. As the level of nutrient interaction is very complex the focus for this indicator will be on Nitrogen and Phosphorus. The recycling of these nutrients gives the opportunity to reduce mineral fertilisers and improve plant availability. The fuels selected in this study shall thus be assessed on whether they recycle the two key nutrients, do not significantly interact with key nutrients or interact and do not recycle nutrients (Table 25).
Scale Nutrient Availability
Very good (5) Key nutrients recycled
Satisfactory (3) Key nutrients are not majorly interacted with
Very bad (1) Key nutrients interacted with and not recycled
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 25. Nutrient Availability Indicator; Performance Scale
Resource constraintsThis indicator with a focus on the Environment, aims to determine; Is the transport option reasonable from an environmental and resource use perspective? It does this by focuses on the key materials involved in the fuel and powertrain production phase. This indicator focuses on the use of natural resources that are believed to be declining at a detrimental rate. Focusing on both the fuel itself and the powertrain where aspects of the transport option may contribute to the unsustainable use of natural resources. As such the vehicle including structure, wheels, windows etc. for each transport option will be assumed to be the same with the fuel source and powertrain being the only components affecting resource interaction. Resources are categorized as abundant, finite (limited but little concern for over 100 years), and depleting where concern is expressed within the next 99 years (Table 26).
Scale Resource scarcity
Very good (5) Uses abundant resources
Satisfactory (3) Uses a finite resource (>100 year reserve)
Very bad (1) Uses depleting resource (<99 year reserve)
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 26. Resource Constraints Indicator; Performance Scale
SocialPublic OpinionThis indicator with a Social focus aims at identifying; Is the transport option supported by its users and the wider public? For social acceptance, gauging public reaction to a specific transport option is challenging as opinions are different from study to study. In this case a short summary of relevant sources was utilised to summarise public perception on an option and social acceptance was scaled from; Public are in favour, public are contested, and public are not in favour (Table 27).
Scale  Public Opinion trajectory
Very good (5) Public opinion is positive
Satisfactory (3) Public opinion is contested
Very bad (1) Public opinion is negative
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 27. Public Opinion Indicator; Performance Scale
Job creationThis indicator is tied in with the Social area to answer the question; Is the transport option supported by its users and the wider public? Job creation is often closely linked with social support or acceptance. This indicator focuses specifically on the socio-economic benefits of a transport option. As such this indicator could fall in the category of either social or economic and has been selected in the social category due to the focus on job creation for members of society in Sweden and Europe. Job creation is assessed by noting whether studies suggest that jobs will increase if the view is contested or if jobs will decrease for a transport option (Table 28).

Scale  Job creation
Very good (5) Net Job creation will increase
Satisfactory (3) Net Job creation is contested
Very bad (1) Net Job creation will decrease
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 28. Job Creation Indicator; Performance Scale
Assessment ResultsEconomyCost of ownershipThe cost of ownership as stated previously comprises of the initial cost of the vehicle, the maintenance costs (repairs and battery replacement) and the total cost of energy over its 600 000km or 10-year lifespan .A recent report regarding buses in Sweden ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ecotraffic</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>177</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ecotraffic 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>177</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″>177</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ecotraffic</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ecotraffic 2015) was used as it was deemed contextually relevant and reliable. Independent calculations were done however for battery electric vehicles where initial costs were sourced and where it was required to simulate the cost of energy. Similar values regarding initial cost, maintenance and fuel cost were found ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016; Traffic 21 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite><Cite><Author>21</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>197</RecNum><record><rec-number>197</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530736607″>197</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Traffic 21,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policymaker Guide: Which alternative fuel technology is best for transit buses?</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>Carnegie Mellon University: Scott Institute of Energy Innovation</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016; Traffic 21 2016) identifying similar cost range however, this Ecotraffic source was specific to Sweden. The cost per kilometer were identified (Table 29) and expanded to cover the 10 year lifespan (Figure 13).

Transport option Initial vehicle cost (Sek/km) Maintenance cost (Sek/km) Fuel cost (Sek/km) Source
Diesel 4.17 1.08 3.72 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ecotraffic</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>177</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ecotraffic 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>177</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″>177</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ecotraffic</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ecotraffic 2015)
Biogas 4.92 1.17 4.46 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ecotraffic</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>177</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ecotraffic 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>177</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″>177</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ecotraffic</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ecotraffic 2015)
FAME 4.17 1.19 3.38 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ecotraffic</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>177</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ecotraffic 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>177</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″>177</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ecotraffic</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ecotraffic 2015)
HVO 4.17 1.19 3.38 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ecotraffic</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>177</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ecotraffic 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>177</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″>177</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ecotraffic</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ecotraffic 2015)
Bioethanol 4.38 1.40 4.94 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ecotraffic</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>177</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ecotraffic 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>177</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″>177</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ecotraffic</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ecotraffic 2015)
Opportunity charging BEV 6.84 3.3 2.8 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016), ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Laiz?ns</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>184</RecNum><DisplayText>(Laiz?ns et al. 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>184</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530728133″>184</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Laiz?ns, Aigars</author><author>Graurs, Igors</author><author>Rubenis, Aivars</author><author>Utehin, George</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Economic Viability of Electric Public Busses: Regional Perspective</title><secondary-title>Procedia Engineering</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Procedia Engineering</full-title></periodical><pages>316-321</pages><volume>134</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><isbn>1877-7058</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Laiz?ns et al. 2016), ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Statista</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>185</RecNum><DisplayText>(Statista 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>185</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530728413″>185</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Statista</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity prices for households in Sweden from 2010 to 2017, semi-annually (in euro cents per kilowatt-hour)</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>4th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Statista</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.statista.com/statistics/418124/electricity-prices-for-households-in-sweden/</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Statista 2018)
Overnight charging BEV 6.84 3.3 3.2 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016), ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Laiz?ns</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>184</RecNum><DisplayText>(Laiz?ns et al. 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>184</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530728133″>184</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Laiz?ns, Aigars</author><author>Graurs, Igors</author><author>Rubenis, Aivars</author><author>Utehin, George</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Economic Viability of Electric Public Busses: Regional Perspective</title><secondary-title>Procedia Engineering</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Procedia Engineering</full-title></periodical><pages>316-321</pages><volume>134</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><isbn>1877-7058</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Laiz?ns et al. 2016), ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Statista</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>185</RecNum><DisplayText>(Statista 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>185</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530728413″>185</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Statista</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity prices for households in Sweden from 2010 to 2017, semi-annually (in euro cents per kilowatt-hour)</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>4th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Statista</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.statista.com/statistics/418124/electricity-prices-for-households-in-sweden/</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Statista 2018)
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 29. Cost of Ownership Data table

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 13. Total Cost of Ownership by Fuel typeDiesel, FAME and HVO
It is evident (Figure 13) that as the reference case in this indicator diesel has a low initial cost presumably due to its maturity on the market. Similarly, as FAME and HVO vehicles are essentially the same then the initial cost follows this logic. Diesel has the lowest maintenance costs with a slightly higher values for FAME and HVO ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ecotraffic</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>177</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ecotraffic 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>177</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″>177</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ecotraffic</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ecotraffic 2015). However, the fuel cost for diesel over its 10-year lifetime is notably higher than biofuels FAME and HVO presumably due to carbon and energy taxes on the fuel impacting the consumer pricing.
Biogas
Biogas vehicles have a higher initial cost for the spark ignition vehicles over conventional diesel combustion with a comparable maintenance cost to other biofuels. However, the fuel cost over its lifetime (600 000km) is more expensive ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ecotraffic</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>177</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ecotraffic 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>177</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530565096″>177</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ecotraffic</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ecotraffic 2015). This value could relate to the lower energy efficiency value for biogas meaning more fuel is required to travel each kilometre.
Bioethanol
Bioethanol performed the most poorly out of the biofuels as the initial cost, the maintenance costs and the fuel costs were all deemed to be fractionally higher for this bus option.
Battery Electric
Independent calculations were conducted to model this option due it’s exclusion in many relevant (Swedish) reports. This was taken as 0.1936 Euro cents per kWh (the average price of electricity in Sweden 2017) ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Statista</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>185</RecNum><DisplayText>(Statista 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>185</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530728413″>185</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Statista</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity prices for households in Sweden from 2010 to 2017, semi-annually (in euro cents per kilowatt-hour)</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>4th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Statista</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.statista.com/statistics/418124/electricity-prices-for-households-in-sweden/</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Statista 2018) and corresponded with the quoted engine efficiencies for both Opportunity charging BEV and Overnight charging BEV vehicles i.e. 1.4 and 1.6 kWh/km ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016). Resulting in metrics of 2.8 Sek/km and 3.2 sek/km. Also, in this scenario it was determined that one battery replacement for the battery electric vehicles would be required with some other studies suggesting more replacements would be needed ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Laiz?ns</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>184</RecNum><DisplayText>(Laiz?ns et al. 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>184</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530728133″>184</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Laiz?ns, Aigars</author><author>Graurs, Igors</author><author>Rubenis, Aivars</author><author>Utehin, George</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Economic Viability of Electric Public Busses: Regional Perspective</title><secondary-title>Procedia Engineering</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Procedia Engineering</full-title></periodical><pages>316-321</pages><volume>134</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><isbn>1877-7058</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Laiz?ns et al. 2016) over 10 years. The value of this battery was estimated as 194 000 Euro for a 12-meter public bus ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Laiz?ns</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>184</RecNum><DisplayText>(Laiz?ns et al. 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>184</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530728133″>184</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Laiz?ns, Aigars</author><author>Graurs, Igors</author><author>Rubenis, Aivars</author><author>Utehin, George</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Economic Viability of Electric Public Busses: Regional Perspective</title><secondary-title>Procedia Engineering</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Procedia Engineering</full-title></periodical><pages>316-321</pages><volume>134</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><isbn>1877-7058</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Laiz?ns et al. 2016) . Data was formulated in sek/km for each phase of ownership for each transport option (Table 329). The Values were then extrapolated over a 600 000km distance to simulate the average life of a public bus which is approximately 10 years (Figure 13)
These battery vehicles had the highest initial cost presumably since it is still a relatively emerging technology. Similarly, the maintenance costs were deemed to be rather large with the main component requiring replacement being the battery over the vehicles life time. The actual energy cost was deemed to be the lowest cost in this comparison with Opportunity charging vehicles having the lowest energy cost due to the better energy efficiency.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Good (5) ** Diesel has performed as very well in this scale as it is the conventional option that has been deemed cost effective in Europe for a long time.
TCO: 5.39 MSEK
Biogas Good (4) ** Biogas has performed lower due to its larger initial purchase costs and slightly more expensive fuel costs (potentially due to its less efficient vehicle performance per kilometre).

TCO: 6.33 MSEK
FAME Very Good (5) ** FAME has performed very well in this scale as it has very similar vehicle, maintenance and fuel costs to conventional diesel.
TCO: 5.24 MSEK
HVO Very Good (5) ** HVO has performed very well in this scale as it has very similar vehicle, maintenance and fuel costs to conventional diesel.
TCO: 5.24 MSEK
Bioethanol (E95) Good (4) ** Bioethanol (ED95) performed lower due to the slightly larger initial cost possibly due to modifications necessary as well as its higher maintenance cost and the highest fuel cost per km in this assessment.
TCO: 6.43MSEK
Opportunity charging BEV Bad (2) ** Electric vehicles performed poorly due to a high initial purchase cost, and high maintenance cost that factored in one battery replacement cost over the 10-year period (this could be frequent). Savings were made in the energy input category but are higher than some studies where electricity is cheaper. This study factored in Swedish energy prices and the energy efficiency of the vehicle to differentiate between the cost per km for both Opportunity charging BEV and Overnight charging BEV. Opportunity has the lower cost of ownership due to a higher engine efficiency using the same priced Swedish electricity mix.
Opportunity charging BEV TCO: 7.76 MSEK
Overnight charging BEV TCO: 8 MSEK
Overnight charging BEV Bad (2) ** Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 30. Summary of Cost of Ownership Indicator Performance
Market shareIn terms of the present market share of a transport option; within the Swedish Market the date of data was vital as this is a constantly changing indicator. Recent data from 2018 was thus sourced to determine these values accurately (Figure 14).

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 14. Share of vehicle kilometres for Swedish public buses by fuel type for 2017 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sveriges Bussföretag</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>163</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sveriges Bussföretag 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>163</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529939760″>163</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sveriges Bussföretag,</author></authors><tertiary-authors><author>Sveriges Bussföretag</author></tertiary-authors></contributors><titles><title>Statistik om bussbranschen: Mars 2018</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year><pub-dates><date>28/03/2018</date></pub-dates></dates><pub-location>Stockholm</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sveriges Bussföretag 2018)
Diesel
For Diesel due to current taxation levels and climate targets the usage of this fossil fuel in recent years has declined which now only represents a 14% share of the Swedish public bus market, meaning it is no longer a viable transport option from a market share perspective. As such the low market share highlights questions with rather obvious answers as to why is this share so low?
Biogas
The use of biogas as a vehicle fuel is small compared to other on a global scale ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a) but in Sweden Biogas holds a considerable share of the public bus fleet and with a 20% value has a greater feasibility than conventional Diesel in this market penetration indicator.
FAME
FAME in has had a declining share of the market mainly due the perceived lower GHG emission savings alongside debated problems associated with first generation crops ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>f3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>141</RecNum><DisplayText>(f3, TSKcfrtf 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>141</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1525279832″>141</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>f3, The Swedish Knowledge centre for renewable transport fuels</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>FAME, Fatty Acid Methyl Esters</title><secondary-title>F3 Fact sheet Category: Fuels, No.4 </secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>F3 Fact sheet Category: Fuels, No.4</full-title></periodical><edition>June 2017</edition><dates><year>2017</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(f3, TSKcfrtf 2017). However, the passenger kilometers travelled by FAME on public transport is only slightly lower than biogas at 19%.
HVO
The sold amounts of HVO in Sweden has increased rapidly due to perceived GHG reduction alongside the production of approximately 160 million litres in Sweden by Preem ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>173</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>173</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529944808″>173</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: HEFO/HVO, Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.5</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016b). The share of the passenger kilometres of Public buses that travel on HVO is the largest for this fuel at 44% meaning that it is viewed by many in the industry as a presently viable option for transit operations.
Bioethanol
Bioethanol was once a very popular alternative fuel and is still rather popular globally but within Sweden due to better alternatives it has declined drastically and is presently mainly used as a blending fuel ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>174</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>174</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529945673″>174</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: Bioethanol</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.6</volume><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowlege Centre for Renewable Transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2015). The current public bus fleets in Sweden use very little Ethanol per passenger kilometre with a value of 3% being the representative portion of the market.
Battery Electric
Electric buses have been thoroughly researched in recent years and are becoming a very viable option for procurement. However, at this current stage data on electric vehicles relies mostly on data from pilot studies. Full fleet procurement in Sweden has not happened and until certain issues such as cost, and battery lifetime are adequately researched the market share is likely to remain low. It is expected however that despite this market share value being lower than that of ethanol, this value will increase at a fast rate on a yearly basis. However, this highlights that from a market perspective there are still issues to address with electric vehicles and that is why others have not invested heavily in fleet procurement just yet.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Bad (2) *** 14% of the Swedish public bus market
Biogas Satisfactory (3) *** 20% of the Swedish public bus market
FAME Bad (2) *** 19% of the Swedish public bus market
HVO Very Good (5) *** 44% of the Swedish public bus market
Bioethanol Very Bad (1) *** 3% of the Swedish public bus market
Opportunity charging BEV Very Bad (1) *** 0.2% of the Swedish public bus market
Overnight charging BEV Very Bad (1) *** Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 31. Summary of Market Share Indicator Performance
Vehicle PerformanceRange/Refuel timeThe average range of transport options and the average refueling duration were collected separately and combined in this assessment. Vehicle Ranges (Figure 15) and Vehicle refuel times (Table 32) highlight the positive and negative traits of each transport options refueling frequency and longevity. Other values were studied with similar ranges noted ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>21</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>197</RecNum><DisplayText>(Traffic 21 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>197</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530736607″>197</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Traffic 21,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policymaker Guide: Which alternative fuel technology is best for transit buses?</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>Carnegie Mellon University: Scott Institute of Energy Innovation</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Traffic 21 2016). For the range result it was noted that despite the engine efficiency regarding kWh per km remaining the same for most diesel engines the calorific value and density can impact range.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 15. Range by Vehicle Type (Civitas 2016b, Traffic 21 2016)Fuel Type Time required to refuel (Minutes) Reference
Diesel 5-10 min ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016)
FAME 5-10 min ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016)
HVO 5-10 min ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016)
Biogas 8-10 hours (Slow Filling System) ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sweco</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>187</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sweco 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>187</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530731796″>187</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sweco</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Innovative biogas fuelling system alternatives for buses</title></titles><dates><year>2012</year></dates><pub-location>Stockholm</pub-location><publisher>Baltic Biogas Bus</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sweco 2012)
Bioethanol 5-10 min ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016)
Opportunity charging BEV 5-10 mins ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016)
Overnight charging BEV 3-8 hours ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016)
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 32. Refuel tome by Vehicle Type
Diesel, FAME, HVO
The diesel engine options utilizing diesel a biodiesel component performed the best in this indicator due to their long range, as well as short refuel times. These traits can be beneficial to transport companies by determining the routes that a vehicle can perform and how long it is required to be out of service. Thus, these options were deemed ‘Good (4)’.

Biogas
Biogas had a lower range in this performance due to a lower engine efficiency and the fact that biogas is not as energy dense as other fuels meaning refueling is required more frequently. Similarly, slow filling systems are used for most buses where gas is pumped into the vehicle at a slow rate typically over night at the depot. This process has been known to last approximately 8-10 hours ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sweco</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>187</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sweco 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>187</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530731796″>187</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sweco</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Innovative biogas fuelling system alternatives for buses</title></titles><dates><year>2012</year></dates><pub-location>Stockholm</pub-location><publisher>Baltic Biogas Bus</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sweco 2012) . As such Biogas was deemed ‘Bad (2)’ as although it meets the required range for most medium sized European cities (300km) and with a planned schedule long refueling can be accommodated but not optimal.
Bioethanol
Bioethanol had a recorded similar range to biogas with the added benefit of requiring approximately 5-10 minutes to refuel, thus scoring satisfactory in this indicator. As such this option was deemed ‘Satisfactory (3)’.

Battery Electric
Both electric vehicles performed poorly in the range section of this indicator scoring 187km and 59.2 (overnight and opportunity charging) which is below the average needed range for buses. However, as Opportunity charging requires less time to charge thus deemed ‘Bad (2)’. For Overnight charging electric vehicles there are two negatives traits that include a short range and long recharging time that gives it the worst score in this indicator ‘Very Bad (1)’.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Good (4) ** Long range (+700km) with short refuel time (5-10 mins)
Biogas Bad (2) ** Medium range (400km) with long refuel time (8-10 hours) with slow filling gas system.
FAME Good (4) ** Long range (+700km) with short refuel time (5-10 mins)
HVO Good (4) ** Bioethanol Satisfactory (3) ** Medium range (500km) with short refuel time (5-10 mins)
Opportunity charging BEV Bad (2) ** Short range (59.2km) with a short refuel time (5-10 mins)
Overnight charging BEV Very Bad (1) ** Short range (187km) with long refuel time (3-8 hours)
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 33. Range/Refuel time indicator Performance
Delivery ReliabilityNational Energy SecurityDiesel (Oil Products: middle distillates)
In accordance with the MOSES model outlined in the methodology, the fuel type diesel has had its national energy security performance assessed within the Oil products framework where Sweden is represented in the figures as; SE. Regarding Diesels vulnerability from domestically refined oil products; crude oil supply and refinery Infrastructure is assessed. The MOSES methodology determines Sweden is graded a C for crude oil supply. To produce diesel, the raw material of crude oil is used. As Sweden has little to no indigenous oil production it relies entirely on importation (Table 34). However, despite Sweden having no oil as a raw material; Sweden exports large amounts of refined oil products. In 2011 Sweden imported approximately 18.8 mt of crude Oil predominately from Russia, Norway and Denmark ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IEA</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>188</RecNum><DisplayText>(IEA 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>188</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530732411″>188</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IEA</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Oil &amp; Gas Security: Emergency Response of IEA Countries</title></titles><dates><year>2012</year></dates><publisher>International Energy Agency</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(IEA 2012).

Country of Origin Percentage of total supply
Russia 50%
Norway 20%
Denmark 15%
Other 15%
Sweden:0% EU:35% Non-EU: 50% Other:15%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 34. Location of Sweden’s Oil Products for 2012 (IEA 2012)
Furthermore, Sweden is given a medium (6-9) grade for refinery Infrastructure determined by the Nelson complexity index which is a measure to compare the secondary conversion capacity of a petroleum refinery with the primary distillation capacity. This is an established means to measure the complexity of refineries (Table 35). The next stage involved the number of refineries, wherein the emphasis is on whether a nation has more than one refinery with one being particularly vulnerable. In this area Sweden has more than 2 refineries so performs well (Table 35). The following stage involved the assessment on the vulnerability of imported product by assessing the infrastructure and diversity to depict external resilience. In this area Sweden performs well again with >5 ports and a medium diversity of suppliers (Table 35). This external resilience is then coupled with the import deficit for oil products middle distillates for Sweden where there is no import deficit (Table 35). This step of the MOSES framework uses the previous results to assess the flow vulnerability of domestic and imported stocks. With Diesel in Sweden having a medium vulnerability for domestically refined stocks and a high vulnerability for imported stocks (Table 35).
Dimensions MOSES Indicator Low Medium High
External Risk Import Deficit <5% 5-25% 25-45% ?45%
Domestic Risk Crude oil security profile Evaluated in MOSES (REF)
Number of Refineries 1 Indicator is only considered for countries with only 1 refinery
External Resilience Diversity of Suppliers ?0.58 0.18-0.54 ?0.18
Import Infrastructure Ports 0 2-4 ?5
Rivers 1-2 No countries have more than 2 pipeline s or river ports without at least 5 maritime ports
Pipelines 1-2 Domestic Resilience Flexibility of refining infrastructure (Nelson complexity Index) <6.0 6.0-9.0 ?9.0
Average storage levels measured in weeks of forward demand ?3 3-6 6-9 ?9
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 35. MOSES Framework for assessing energy security of oil products within a nation (Jewell 2011)
The MOSES methodology also assigns a grading matrix for the energy security of fuels within a nation (Table 36). Diesel in this framework is known as Oil products middle distillates. By applying the grading matrix where Sweden has a very low import deficit with a moderate supplier diversity with more than 3-6 weeks of stocks (6-9 weeks) and is categorized in Crude oil group C (Jewell 2011). Within this framework for energy security Diesel supply within Sweden receives a grade ‘A’ which corresponds as a rating of ‘Very Good (5)’ in accordance with this report.
MOSES Grade Countries that:
A Import deficit ?45%
?9 weeks of stocks and are either
Crude Oil groups A-C or Crude oil Group D with highly flexible refining portfolio and more than one refinery.

B1 Has an import deficit ?45%
Crude oil profile A-C with ?3 weeks of stocks
B2 Import deficit ?45%
Crude oil groups D-E with moderate-highly flexible refining portfolio and ?6 weeks of stocks.

OR
Import deficit >45%
?9 weeks of stocks
Moderate supplier diversity or ?5 ports
C ?45% Import deficit
Crude oil group E
1 highly flexible refinery
?6 weeks of stocks
D >45% Import deficit
Moderate supplier diversity
3-6 weeks of stocks
E Import deficit 100% through one pipeline with low supplier diversity and ?3 weeks of stocks
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 36. MOSES Grading Matrix for a countries oil product security level (Jewell 2011)
Biogas (Biomass and Waste)
For biogas the security framework is the most concise. Categorized as Biomass and waste in the MOSES methodology framework biogas is not assessed according to external resilience as solid biomass can be imported easily by sea, land and rail so have less vulnerability. It is instead assessed according to diversity of sources and import dependence. Regarding the diversity of sources in Sweden the majority of biogas production comes from sewage sludge according to 2013 data ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>BIOENERGY</Author><Year>2014</Year><RecNum>189</RecNum><DisplayText>(Bioenergy 2014)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>189</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530732694″>189</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IEA Bioenergy</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Task 37 Biogas Country Overview</title></titles><dates><year>2014</year></dates><publisher>Inernational Energy Agency Bioenergy</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Bioenergy 2014). It is apparent that there are several sources of biogas in Sweden meaning that the diversity is very high (Table 37).

Plant type Number of Plants Percentage
Sewage sludge 135 55.79%
Biowaste 21 8.68%
Agriculture 26 10.74%
Industrial 5 2.07%
Landfills 55 22.73%
Sum 242 Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 37. Diversity of Sources for Biogas for 2014 (Statens energimyndighet 2015)
Similarly, Sweden’s import dependency for Biogas is extremely low (Table 38). Biogas on the Swedish market is predominately produced in Sweden with Swedish materials; however, some amounts are believed to be imported from Germany by a natural gas pipeline. With a quoted 94% domestic production rate (Table 38) it is apparent that import dependence for this energy source is very low in Sweden.
Country of Origin Percentage of total supply
Sweden 94%
Germany 3%
Norway 3%
Sweden:94% EU: 6% Non-EU: 0% Other:0%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 38. Import dependence for Biogas (Statens energimyndighet 2015)
With this data it is apparent that Sweden has a low external risk and high domestic resilience for biogas in accordance with the MOSES framework (Table 39).

Dimension MOSES Indicator Low Medium High
External Risk Import Dependence <15% 15-25% No country imports more than 25% of this source
Domestic Resilience Source Diversity >0.5 0.3-0.5 <0.3
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 39. MOSES Framework for the energy security of a biomass or waste derived fuel for a nation (Jewell 2011)
In accordance with the MOSES grading matrix (Table 40) for this energy type Sweden attains a grade ‘A’ which corresponds to a ‘Very Good (5)’ rating in accordance with this report.
MOSES Grade Countries that have:
A High Diversity of Sources (with concentration <0.3) and very low import dependency (?8%)
B High Diversity of Sources (with concentration <0.3) and low import dependency (16%-24%)
C Low diversity of supply (>0.5) with low import dependency (16%-24%)
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 40. MOSES Grading matrix for a nations Biomass and waste fuels (Jewell 2011)
Biofuels
For FAME, HVO, and Bioethanol under the category of Biofuels in the MOSES methodology firstly assesses; external resilience for imports. For this category the infrastructure rating is based on the number of ports available with Sweden having a high performing infrastructure and external resilience due to having more than 5 ports (Table 44). Exposure to disruptions of external supply was the next stage in the framework where import dependence is categorized as Low (<20%), medium (40-70%), or high (>70%). As FAME, HVO and Bioethanol are assessed separately in this thesis this step was conducted independently using the most recent data (Tables 41, 42 and 43). However, all three fuel types relied on importation of above 70% falling into the high exposure to external disruptions category (Energy Agency 2015).
FAME
The countries of origin for the raw material for FAME originated predominantly from Denmark and Australia (Table 41). Most of Sweden’s supply of FAME however originates from nations within the European Union.
Country of Origin Percentage of total supply
Denmark 20%
Australia 17%
Germany 15%
Lithuania 15%
Ukraine 8%
Russian Federation 7%
Sweden 7%
Latvia 6%
Other 6%
Sweden: 7% EU: 56% Non-EU: 16% Other:10%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 41. Swedish Import Dependency for FAME in 2014 (Statens energimyndighet 2015)
HVO
For HVO Sweden is the individual nation that supplies the most amount of HVO predominantly from crude tall oil, however the combination of other European nations to Sweden supply means that most of the total flow of HVO originates from nations within the European Union (Table 42).
Country of Origin Percentage of total supply
Sweden 19%
Germany 17%
Netherlands 13%
UK 12%
Indonesia 12%
Belgium 5%
Finland 4%
France 4%
Malaysia 4%
Ireland 3%
Other 6%
Sweden: 19% EU: 58% Non-EU: 16% Other:10%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 42. Swedish Import Dependency for HVO in 2014 (Statens energimyndighet 2015)
Bioethanol
In the past Sweden was the predominate country supplying the raw materials for Bioethanol, however since 2014 the United Kingdom has usurped Sweden on that front. The raw materials for Bioethanol however still come predominantly from nations within the European Union (Table 43).
Country of Origin Percentage of total supply
UK 26%
Sweden 19%
France 16%
Ukraine 16%
Lithuania 6%
Belgium 3%
Poland 2%
Hungary 2%
Other 10%
Sweden: 19% EU: 55% Non-EU: 16% Other: 10%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 43. Swedish Import Dependency for Bioethanol in 2014 (Statens energimyndighet 2015)
The next step after addressing the external issues for biofuels was addressing the vulnerability domestically. This step focused on the volatility of agricultural production in different nations to determine the stability of domestically produced fuels. Sweden was assessed as having a very low domestic vulnerability due to less extreme weather conditions or crop failures (Table 44) and this applied to all fuels.
Dimensions MOSES Indicator Low Medium High
External Risk Import dependence <20% 40-70% >80%
External Resilience Import Infrastructure (entry points) Sea Ports 0 2-4 ?5
River Ports 1-2 No countries have more than 2 river entry points without at least 5 maritime ports
Domestic Risk Volatility of Agricultural Output 0%-5% 5%-10% >10%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 44. MOSES Framework for assessing energy security of biofuels within a nation (Jewell 2011)
Once all aspects were addressed; MOSES determined that all three biofuels, FAME, HVO and Bioethanol had a medium import dependency with a high number of ports and low volatility of domestic agricultural production (Table 45). Meaning it received a grade ‘B’ in the MOSES methodology which corresponds to a ‘Good (4)’ rating in this report.
MOSES Grade Countries that have:
A Low or Medium import dependency (<70%) with ?5 sea ports with a low volatility of agricultural production.
B High import dependency (>80%) with ?2 sea ports
OR
Medium import dependency (40-70% with 1-2 river ports and low volatility of agricultural production
C High import dependency (>80%) with 1-2 river ports
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 45. MOSES Grading Matrix for a nations biofuel Supply (Jewell 2011)
Electricity (Hydro and Nuclear)
For the short-term energy security for Sweden’s electricity a few generalizations were made to replicate the Swedish energy mix. The Swedish mix was represented by 50% Hydro power and 50% nuclear when in fact it is closer to 41% for each with wind and other sources making up the rest ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IVA</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>181</RecNum><DisplayText>(IVA 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>181</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530726228″>181</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IVA</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity production in Sweden: IVA&apos;s Electricity project</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Stockholm</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(IVA 2016a). In the MOSES methodology the importation or locally sourced nature of electricity was not included. For the supply of Electricity in Sweden things are rather different. Sweden’s total electricity production in 2016 equated to approximately 152.5 TWh (including transmission and distribution losses), however Swedish use equated to 130.1 TWh ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sweden</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>190</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sweden Statistics 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>190</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530733032″>190</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sweden Statistics,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity supply, district heating and supply of natural gas 2015</title><secondary-title>Statistics Sweden</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Statistics Sweden</full-title></periodical><dates><year>2016</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sweden Statistics 2016). This means that Sweden produced more electricity than it required and then exported the surplus energy mostly to Finland ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sweden</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>190</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sweden Statistics 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>190</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530733032″>190</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sweden Statistics,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity supply, district heating and supply of natural gas 2015</title><secondary-title>Statistics Sweden</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Statistics Sweden</full-title></periodical><dates><year>2016</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sweden Statistics 2016). Sweden has an electricity exchange with several countries such as; Denmark, Finland, Lithuania, Norway, Poland and Germany ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IVA</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>181</RecNum><DisplayText>(IVA 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>181</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530726228″>181</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IVA</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity production in Sweden: IVA&apos;s Electricity project</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Stockholm</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(IVA 2016a). In periods of high grid usage Sweden requires energy from these exchange nations and often gets it from Norway (96% hydropower) or Denmark (43% Wind power, 55% thermal power) ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sweden</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>190</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sweden Statistics 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>190</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530733032″>190</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sweden Statistics,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity supply, district heating and supply of natural gas 2015</title><secondary-title>Statistics Sweden</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Statistics Sweden</full-title></periodical><dates><year>2016</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sweden Statistics 2016) but in annual context and relation to this report Sweden thus has zero import dependence (Table 46).
Country of Origin Percentage of total supply
Sweden 100%
Sweden: 100% EU: 0% Non-EU: 0% Other: 0%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 46. Swedish Import dependency for Electricity ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sweden</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>190</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sweden Statistics 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>190</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530733032″>190</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sweden Statistics,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity supply, district heating and supply of natural gas 2015</title><secondary-title>Statistics Sweden</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Statistics Sweden</full-title></periodical><dates><year>2016</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sweden Statistics 2016)
Hydropower
For hydropower MOSES assesses little characteristics beyond the volatility of hydropower production (Table 47). Sweden is one of six IEA countries with a large hydropower production with a volatility <11% potentially due to having the best operating systems ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sweden</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>190</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sweden Statistics 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>190</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530733032″>190</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sweden Statistics,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity supply, district heating and supply of natural gas 2015</title><secondary-title>Statistics Sweden</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Statistics Sweden</full-title></periodical><dates><year>2016</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sweden Statistics 2016) ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Jewell</Author><Year>2011</Year><RecNum>180</RecNum><DisplayText>(Jewell 2011)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>180</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530725946″>180</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Jewell, Jessica</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The IEA model of short-term energy security (MOSES)</title></titles><dates><year>2011</year></dates><isbn>2079-2581</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Jewell 2011).

Grade Countries with:
A Volatility of Hydropower production ?11%
B Volatility of Hydropower production 12-21%
C Volatility of Hydropower production ?22%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 47. MOSES grading matrix for Hydropower (Jewell 2011)
Nuclear
For short term energy security within the nuclear sector unplanned outage rates, the age of reactors of power plants, as well as the diversity and number of reactors are deemed significant. In this context, Sweden has a high unplanned outage rate in this framework. Unplanned outage rates have been recorded as high as 15% (2015), 16% (2016), and 7% (2017) with an average unplanned outage rate of 13% over these years ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IAEA</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>220</RecNum><DisplayText>(IAEA 2018b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>220</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531750422″>220</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IAEA</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Unplanned Capability Loss Factor: Includes all reactors that were in commercial operation within 2015 and 2017</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>15th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>The international Atomic Energy Agency</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.iaea.org/PRIS/WorldStatistics/ThreeYrsUnplannedCapabilityLossFactor.aspx</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(IAEA 2018b). Sweden also has a medium average age of reactors ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Jewell</Author><Year>2011</Year><RecNum>180</RecNum><DisplayText>(Jewell 2011)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>180</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530725946″>180</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Jewell, Jessica</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The IEA model of short-term energy security (MOSES)</title></titles><dates><year>2011</year></dates><isbn>2079-2581</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Jewell 2011), this is important as when reactors get older outages tend to increase. This section does not focus on safety concerns but rather energy availability due to older plants. In this context then Sweden has a high unplanned outage rate and high average age of reactors ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IAEA</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>220</RecNum><DisplayText>(IAEA 2018b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>220</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531750422″>220</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IAEA</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Unplanned Capability Loss Factor: Includes all reactors that were in commercial operation within 2015 and 2017</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>15th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>The international Atomic Energy Agency</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.iaea.org/PRIS/WorldStatistics/ThreeYrsUnplannedCapabilityLossFactor.aspx</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(IAEA 2018b). Similarly Sweden has 8 operational nuclear reactors ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IAEA</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>191</RecNum><DisplayText>(IAEA 2018a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>191</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530733396″>191</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IAEA</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Nuclear Reactors in the World</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>International Atomic Energy Agency</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(IAEA 2018a) with a high diversity of reactor models ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Jewell</Author><Year>2011</Year><RecNum>180</RecNum><DisplayText>(Jewell 2011)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>180</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530725946″>180</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Jewell, Jessica</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The IEA model of short-term energy security (MOSES)</title></titles><dates><year>2011</year></dates><isbn>2079-2581</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Jewell 2011) in this framework (Table 48). When the data for Swedish nuclear power is assessed according to the MOSES grading matrix (Table 48) it is apparent that nuclear power receives a grade C according to the MOSES system primarily due to the high level of unplanned outages for the nation.

Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 48. Grading Matrix for a nation’s Nuclear energy security (Jewell 2011)
With Hydropower receiving a security grading A and Nuclear receiving a C within Sweden and with a 50:50 allocation assigned. The Swedish electricity mix has been assigned a short-term energy security rating of a ‘B’ which corresponds to a ‘Good (4)’ rating in relation to this MCA.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Good (5) ** Due to no trade deficit, a high diversity of suppliers, a lot of refineries and high stock levels.

GRADE: A
Biogas Very Good (5) ** Due to a high diversity of sources and a very low import dependence energy security was very good
GRADE: A
FAME Good (4) ** Importation infrastructure and domestic agricultural volatility were very good but a high level of importation which was assessed independently for each fuel (>70%) resulted in a lower rating.
GRADE: B
HVO Good (4) ** Bioethanol Good (4) ** Opportunity charging BEV Good (4) ** Hydropower performed well on the defining metric of volatility of production. Nuclear power performed worse predominantly due to the high number of unplanned outages in nuclear plants despite the number, age, and model diversity of reactors being good.
GRADE: B
Overnight charging BEV Good (4) ** Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 49. National Energy Security Indicator Performance
Short-term backup fuelThis section is assessed by whether an alternative fuel can be used by a technology in a time of crisis. This is therefore scenario based and purely hypothetical in nature. Basically, the results focus on whether another means of fuel use could be used for an assessed technology if the initial fuel supply is compromised. For this assessment a feedstock specific approach will not be adopted as with fuels with multiple feedstocks it is apparent that a transition to a different source of the same fuel could be obtained. This is eliminated as an option in this result to essentially assess the flexibility of a technology.
Diesel (Biofuels; FAME, HVO)
In the case of Diesel, many biodiesel advocates suggest that forms of biodiesel can be used in existing diesel engines without modifications. It is true that some biofuels i.e. FAME and HVO can function in a conventional diesel engine. Typically, certain engines warranties are breached if fuel not meeting the specifications of the manufacturer are used. Issues that arise without modification and with long term use involve material incompatibility, damage to fuel injectors and fitted catalytic convertors ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Jääskeläinen</Author><Year>2010</Year><RecNum>194</RecNum><DisplayText>(Jääskeläinen 2010)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>194</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530734834″>194</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Generic”>13</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Jääskeläinen, Hannu</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Compatibility of Biodiesel With Petroleum Diesel Engines</title></titles><dates><year>2010</year></dates><publisher>Revision</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Jääskeläinen 2010). HVO is closer in chemical composition to diesel and when blended can reach higher levels without modifications. HVO 100 however can in some cases be used in diesel vehicles without modification but approval from manufacturers is required for legal and warranty reasons. In the case of fuel supply issues, it can be stated that Diesel, FAME, and HVO could in theory be used interchangeably with informing the manufacturers. As such a renewable backup is available for Diesel, FAME, and HVO by using a different feedstock or even fuel.
Biogas
For biogas vehicles the quality is like that of natural gas and is described as a “drop in” substitute for fossil natural gas ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>IRENA</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>195</RecNum><DisplayText>(IRENA 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>195</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530735099″>195</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>IRENA</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Biogas for road vehicles: Rechnology Brief</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>International Renewable Energy Agency</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(IRENA 2017). As such biogas buses are typically natural gas vehicles that have had the fuel switched. In this case the use of biogas as a fuel option would mean that a natural substitute in a time of crisis would be the use of natural gas which is not a renewable fuel. However, due to the multiple origins of biogas from sewage, food waste etc. Renewable options are also available.
Bioethanol
In the case of Bioethanol this fuel source can be used in typical diesel engines, however more extensive requirements are necessary. The modifications include increasing the compression ratio, use of a special fuel injection system and use of special catalyst to control aldehyde emissions ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Larsen</Author><Year>2009</Year><RecNum>196</RecNum><DisplayText>(Larsen, Johansen &amp; Schramm 2009a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>196</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530735183″>196</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Larsen, Ulrik</author><author>Johansen, Troels</author><author>Schramm, Jesper</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Ethanol as a fuel for road transportation</title><secondary-title>Main Report. IEA-AMF report</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Main Report. IEA-AMF report</full-title></periodical><pages>1-87</pages><volume>100</volume><dates><year>2009</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Larsen, Johansen & Schramm 2009a). Companies such as Scania have created an extensive line of these heavy-duty vehicles. In a time of crisis however, converting a Bioethanol vehicle to use another fuel is theoretically possible but it is not possible for the vehicles to function if fuel is simply switched. However, as bioethanol (not referring to ED95) also has multiple feedstocks such as sugarcane that be used.
Battery Electric
For battery electric vehicles the energy source comes from the grid. Although electric vehicles can in fact operate on different sources of electricity such as; nuclear, hydro, and wind derived energy, if the grid is compromised there is no discernible alternative. That is why in this case in a time of crisis battery electric vehicles have no feasible alternative.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Good (5) ** Biofuels such as FAME or HVO could be used either directly or with minor modifications to the engine.

Biogas Very Good (5) ** Compressed Natural Gas could be used with little or no modifications required but this source non-renewable however biogas has multiple feedstocks that could be used.

FAME Very Good (5) ** Diesel or HVO could be used either directly or with minor modifications with multiple feedstocks within the original fuel type.

HVO Very Good (5) ** Diesel or FAME could be used either directly or with minor modifications with multiple feedstocks within the original fuel type.

Bioethanol Very Good (5) ** The technology could be retrofitted to use Diesel; however, this would be complex, and an alternative source of bioethanol could be used.

Opportunity charging BEV Very Bad (1) ** No alternative energy source is available.
Overnight charging BEV Very Bad (1) ** No alternative energy source is available.

Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 50. Short-term Backup Indicator Performance
Current PolicyEnergy and carbon taxes in Sweden are defined within the framework of the 2003 EU energy tax directive which defines minimum taxation policy for member states ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>OECD</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>182</RecNum><DisplayText>(OECD 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>182</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530726492″>182</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>OECD</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Taxing Energy Use 2018- Companion to the taxing energy use database</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year></dates><pub-location>Paris</pub-location><publisher>OECD Publishing</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(OECD 2018). According to this framework the energy taxes are directed towards oil products, natural gas and coal products (fluctuating depending on the energy content). A carbon tax then applies to the same fossil fuels (dependent on the carbon content). Under this framework biofuels (i.e. Biogas, FAME, HVO and Bioethanol) do not explicitly require taxation and in recent years Sweden has adopted a means to reduce fossil fuel use and promote renewable fuels. This means that these fuels are exempt from carbon taxes and benefit from reduced energy taxes ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Skatteverket</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>192</RecNum><DisplayText>(Skatteverket 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>192</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530734216″>192</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Skatteverket</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Tax exemption for biofuels</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>4th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Skatteverket</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.skatteverket.se/foretagochorganisationer/skatter/punktskatter/energiskatter/energiskatterpabranslen/skattebefrielseforbiodrivmedel.4.2b543913a42158acf800021393.html?q=import</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Skatteverket 2018). However, these policies are limited to the end of 2018 with Biogas extended to the end of 2020.
In a practical sense when tax returns are due companies can deduct energy tax and carbon tax on biofuels consumed. The amount of which varies dependent on fuel. Prerequisites include that 98% volume must be from biomass and sustainability message must be attached for biofuels and as of 2016 a specific plant message is required from the Swedish Energy Agency ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Skatteverket</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>192</RecNum><DisplayText>(Skatteverket 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>192</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530734216″>192</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Skatteverket</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Tax exemption for biofuels</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>4th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Skatteverket</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.skatteverket.se/foretagochorganisationer/skatter/punktskatter/energiskatter/energiskatterpabranslen/skattebefrielseforbiodrivmedel.4.2b543913a42158acf800021393.html?q=import</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Skatteverket 2018). Also blends of fuel can only receive tax deductions from the biomass component.
Diesel
Carbon and Energy taxes are required amounting to approximately 140sek per GJ ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>OECD</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>182</RecNum><DisplayText>(OECD 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>182</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530726492″>182</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>OECD</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Taxing Energy Use 2018- Companion to the taxing energy use database</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year></dates><pub-location>Paris</pub-location><publisher>OECD Publishing</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(OECD 2018).

Biogas
Biogas receives 100% energy tax deduction and 100% carbon tax deductions for used or sold biogas.

FAME
RME/FAME produced from biomass which are either sold or consumed as a high-level mix fuel for transport Energy taxes have varied in recent years but now currently benefit from 100% energy tax deductions and 100% carbon tax deductions (Table 51).
From Energy tax carbon tax
2015-01-01 44% 100%
2016-01-01 50% 100%
2016-08-01 63% 100%
2018-01-01 100% 100%
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 51. Swedish Energy and Carbon tax breakdown for FAME (Skatteverket 2018)
HVO
For HVO and other biofuels classified as diesel energy and carbon tax deductions are 100% if it is produced by biomass ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Skatteverket</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>192</RecNum><DisplayText>(Skatteverket 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>192</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530734216″>192</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Skatteverket</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Tax exemption for biofuels</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>4th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Skatteverket</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.skatteverket.se/foretagochorganisationer/skatter/punktskatter/energiskatter/energiskatterpabranslen/skattebefrielseforbiodrivmedel.4.2b543913a42158acf800021393.html?q=import</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Skatteverket 2018).
Bioethanol
For ethanol different tax deductions are available but for the use of ethanol at its highest mix level (ED95), 100% energy and carbon tax deductions are available. This applies to the proportion of fuel produced by biomass ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Skatteverket</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>192</RecNum><DisplayText>(Skatteverket 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>192</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530734216″>192</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Skatteverket</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Tax exemption for biofuels</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>4th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Skatteverket</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.skatteverket.se/foretagochorganisationer/skatter/punktskatter/energiskatter/energiskatterpabranslen/skattebefrielseforbiodrivmedel.4.2b543913a42158acf800021393.html?q=import</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Skatteverket 2018).

Electricity
Electricity as a source enters a different field and in fact Electricity output is taxed per MWh. Industrial users pay higher taxes than commercial users such as bus company. However due to the Swedish grid comprising of approximately 41% Hydropower, 41% Nuclear with the rest Wind power and other means, this results in electric vehicles not incurring a carbon tax.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Bad (1) ** Carbon and Energy taxes are required amounting to approximately 140sek per GJ.
Biogas Very Good (5) ** 100% carbon tax and 100% energy tax exemption are applicable to the biomass component of these biofuels.
FAME Very Good (5) ** HVO Very Good (5) ** Bioethanol Very Good (5)) ** Opportunity charging BEV Satisfactory (3) ** Electricity is exempt from carbon tax due to the use of renewable energy to power the grid however energy taxes do apply to this energy/fuel input with no notable reductions for electric vehicle use.
Overnight charging BEV Satisfactory (3) ** Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 52. Current Policy Indicator Performance
Future PolicyRegarding future policy a transport options alignment with the long term objectives of fossil fuel free transport (2030) or carbon neutral Sweden (2045) targets are rather clear cut in nature.
Diesel
Fossil fuel is a fossil fuel with notoriously high GHG emissions that results in this transport option not aligning with either long term future policy.

Biofuels (Biogas, FAME, HVO, Bioethanol)
Biofuels are not derived from fossil reserves and have quoted reductions in GHG emissions aligning with the current future policies
Battery Electric
Swedish electricity is derived primarily from non-fossil energy (i.e. Hydropower, nuclear power, wind power, thermal power from biomass) with quoted lower GHG emissions in line with both future policies.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Bad (1) *** Does not align with fossil fuel free transport (2030) or carbon neutral Sweden (2045) targets
Biogas Very Good (5) *** Aligns with fossil fuel free transport (2030) and carbon neutral Sweden (2045) targets
FAME Very Good (5) *** HVO Very Good (5) *** Bioethanol Very Good (5) *** Opportunity charging BEV Very Good (5) *** Aligns with fossil fuel free transport (2030) and carbon neutral Sweden (2045) targets
Overnight charging BEV Very Good (5) *** Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 53. Future Policy Indicator Performance.
InfrastructureRequired ChangeThe level of required change for the implementation of a transport option is assessed rather qualitatively here wherein both physical infrastructure and planning can require alterations.

Diesel
Diesel requires no infrastructural change as it performs basically as the benchmark regarding infrastructure normality in Sweden. Fuel is delivered by road transport, buses operate shift patterns and when energy is low they refuel at the depot. Refueling takes place via fuel pumps at the depot that do not require much space or impact urban planning.
Biogas
Biomethane can be delivered from production site to the required fuel station via road transport like conventional Diesel. Compressed biogas can also be injected into a natural gas grid which can supply fuel locations, however this is very unfamiliar in Sweden and not regarded as an infrastructural change that is relevant. The procedure requirements do not differ in any significant manner to conventional diesel ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>167</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2016a)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>167</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943088″>167</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.3</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2016a). Similarly, biogas refueling work is conducting using facilities at the depot like Diesel so the impact on urban planning aesthetics is unchanged.
FAME
FAME is a liquid fuel very similar to diesel in both properties and infrastructure. The distribution network and filling stations required are growing however in bus procurement filling is typically conducted in the depot ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>170</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2017b)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>170</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943952″>170</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: FAME, Fatty Acid Methyl Esters</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The swedish knowlege centre for renewable transportaion fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2017b) meaning little to no difference would be observed from this procedural perspective and the space used is like other liquid fuels and will not make any changes to urban planning aesthetics.
HVO
Like FAME, HVO is very similar to Diesel in properties and infrastructure. Regarding the delivery network and filling stations little to no changes would be required as HVO is considered a drop-in fuel. Similarly, the refueling procedures take place in the depot and require fueling pumps this would not affect aesthetics and infrastructural changes regarding practicalities
Bioethanol
The distribution of Bioethanol from E5.E85 is normally handled by the normal fossil fuel companies ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>F3</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>174</RecNum><DisplayText>(F3 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>174</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529945673″>174</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>F3</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>F3 Fact sheet: Bioethanol</title></titles><volume>Category: Fuels, No.6</volume><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowlege Centre for Renewable Transportation fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(F3 2015). The risks and handling of Ethanol are like Diesel. For ED95 the distribution of fuel is specific to the customer as this fuel is normally only delivered to the owners of fleets of lorries or buses. The transportation is similarly done in tankers and offers no discernably large changes to the network or filling procedures. The space requirements involved in using and refueling the transport option are virtually the same.
Battery Electric
Opportunity charging BEV
Opportunity charging vehicles require the greatest amount of infrastructural change than any option assessed here. Charging technology is required in multiple locations along a popular bus route. At these points the bus driver will be required to stop for approximately 6 mins ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Volvo</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>198</RecNum><DisplayText>(Volvo 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>198</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530737299″>198</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Volvo</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Volvo Opportunity Charging Systems for electric and electric hybrid buses</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>Volvo</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Volvo 2015) in order for the vehicle to charge sufficiently to reach the next charging unit. This infrastructural development deviates the most from conventional space requirements, depot charging and distribution however it can offer constantly operational without a need to return to the depot if the infrastructure is adequately developed. The fast charging times and full time delivery of services can have certain positive cost effects as the driver can be operating during an entire shift, this is significant as the driver costs are one of the highest expensive ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Olsson</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>199</RecNum><DisplayText>(Olsson, Grauers &amp; Pettersson 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>199</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530737361″>199</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Conference Proceedings”>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Olsson, Oscar</author><author>Grauers, Anders</author><author>Pettersson, Stefan</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Method to analyze cost effectiveness of different electric bus systems</title><secondary-title>EVS29 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium. Montreal</secondary-title></titles><pages>1-12</pages><dates><year>2016</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Olsson, Grauers & Pettersson 2016) and may prove even more beneficial once autonomous vehicles are realized. The number of charging units is largely dependent on the number of routes and number of vehicles procured with an estimated cost of 97 632 SEK per charging unit ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Kuthut</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>200</RecNum><DisplayText>(Kuthut 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>200</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530737659″>200</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Nasser Kuthut</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Fast Charging Facts: Enhancing use of electric lift trucks, AGVs, and other motive electric vehicles</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>Power Designers</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Kuthut 2015).

Overnight charging BEV
This form of electrical vehicle deviates little regarding infrastructure for the fleet owner. The delivery of energy is simple as it is powered by the Swedish grid and the charging is conducted at the depot. Charging units will be required for the depot to charge the fleet but the space requirements are similar with no drastic changes in cost for the charging units in comparison to fuel pumps. The overall routine involved in fleet management is relatively unchanged.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Good (5) * Procedural and Urban planning impacts are unchanged
Biogas Very Good (5) * Procedural and Urban planning impacts are unchanged. Minor changes to the refuelling equipment is necessary.

FAME Very Good (5) * Procedural and Urban planning impacts are unchanged
HVO Very Good (5) * Procedural and Urban planning impacts are unchanged
Bioethanol Very Good (5) * Procedural and Urban planning impacts are unchanged. Minor changes to the refuelling equipment is necessary.

Opportunity charging BEV Very Bad (1) * Procedural changes are made as refuelling is conducted on the route meaning depot stops are not necessary. Similarly, the refuelling infrastructure is along the route meaning a greater impact on urban planning is evident.
Overnight charging BEV Very Good (5) * Procedural and Urban planning impacts are unchanged. Minor changes to the refuelling equipment is necessary.

Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 54. Required Change Indicator Performance

Environment and EnergyWell to wheel greenhouse gas reductionsAs mentioned before, the RED states that emissions of greenhouse gases for vehicles should have certain reductions on the fossil fuel counterpart previously used i.e. diesel ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Howes</Author><Year>2010</Year><RecNum>157</RecNum><DisplayText>(Howes 2010)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>157</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529936643″>157</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Howes, Tom</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>The EU’s new renewable energy Directive (2009/28/EC)</title><secondary-title>The new climate policies of the European Union: internal legislation and climate diplomacy</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>The new climate policies of the European Union: internal legislation and climate diplomacy</full-title></periodical><pages>3</pages><volume>15</volume><number>117</number><dates><year>2010</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Howes 2010). So, in this section of the indicator WTW emissions for diesel are taken as the benchmark in which reductions are compared.
WTW GHG emissions (WTW; gCO2e/km) were calculated using the values for the ‘Bus’ depicted as the energy use of a given bus type (kWh/km), and fuel carbon intensity (gCO2e/kWh) ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Dallmann</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>201</RecNum><DisplayText>(Dallmann, Du &amp; Minjares 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>201</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531230870″>201</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Dallmann, Tim</author><author>Du, Li</author><author>Minjares, Ray</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Low-Carbon Technology Pathways for Soot-Free Urban Bus Fleets in 20 Megacities</title><secondary-title>Working Paper</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Working Paper</full-title></periodical><number>2017-11</number><dates><year>2017</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Dallmann, Du & Minjares 2017). Energy use is the required energy to move a bus a certain distance. The carbon intensity is the value of GHG emissions from the combustion of fuels and earlier steps in the process such as production and transport. Both energy use and carbon intensity were used to derive the WTW emissions for a specific bus and fuel type (Equation 2).
Equation SEQ Equation * ARABIC 2. Well to Wheel Emissions Formula
WTW(gCO2e/km)= Bus Energy Use (kWh/km) x Fuel Carbon Intensity (gCO2e/kWh)
Energy Use
Energy use of fuel types is determined by many factors, of which distance is a vital aspect. The use of a bus in an urban or suburban operation can vary the results. However, this report does not separate two operations and a medium energy use value constituting urban and suburban use has been selected. Energy use values used were (Table 55);
Technology Energy use for suburban /urban operation KWh/km
Diesel (and biofuels) 4.1
Biogas 4.4
BEV Opportunity charging BEV 1.4
BEV Overnight charging BEV 1.6
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 55. Data table for selected engine efficiencies (Dallmann, Du & Minjares 2017), (CIVITASb 2016)
There are currently procurement requirements in place for SORT 2 buses (both Urban and Rural) discussed here, which are identified as vehicles travelling 17 km/h. These requirements specify the need for a basic engine efficiency of 4.4 kWh/km (Table 56) which all these selected engine types meet ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>kollektivtrafik</Author><Year>2014</Year><RecNum>178</RecNum><DisplayText>(Partnersamverkan för en förbättrad kollektivtrafik 2014)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>178</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530567578″>178</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Partnersamverkan för en förbättrad kollektivtrafik,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Miljökrav vid Trafikupphandling: Buss</title></titles><dates><year>2014</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Partnersamverkan för en förbättrad kollektivtrafik 2014).
SORT 2 klass I bus kWh/km
Type of bus Minimum req. Basic req. Extended req.

Two axels 5.8 4.4 3.2
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 56. Procurement Standards for SORT 2 (Uban/suburban) buses (Partnersamverkan för en förbättrad kollektivtrafik 2014)
Fuel Carbon Intensities
Carbon intensities have been calculated using information from the RED guidelines using fuel production, and combustion values (Table 57). When combined these values can be depicted in their raw form excluding the vehicle the type (Figure 16).

Energy Source Total in (gC02/KWh) Reference
Diesel 318.96 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Edwards</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>225</RecNum><DisplayText>(Edwards et al. 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>225</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532119589″>225</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Edwards, R</author><author>Larivé, JF</author><author>Rickeard, D</author><author>Weindorf, W</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Well-to-Wheel Analysis of future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context, Well-to-Tank Appendix 2-Version 4a, Summary of energy and GHG balance of individual pathways</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>JEC Technical Reports, 2014, DOI: http://10.2790/95629, available online at: http://iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu/about-jec/sites/iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu. about-jec/files/documents/report_2014/wtt_appendix_2_v4a. pdf, accessed Jul</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Edwards et al. 2015)
Biogas: Municipal Waste 53.28 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Edwards</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>225</RecNum><DisplayText>(Edwards et al. 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>225</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532119589″>225</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Edwards, R</author><author>Larivé, JF</author><author>Rickeard, D</author><author>Weindorf, W</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Well-to-Wheel Analysis of future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context, Well-to-Tank Appendix 2-Version 4a, Summary of energy and GHG balance of individual pathways</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>JEC Technical Reports, 2014, DOI: http://10.2790/95629, available online at: http://iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu/about-jec/sites/iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu. about-jec/files/documents/report_2014/wtt_appendix_2_v4a. pdf, accessed Jul</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Edwards et al. 2015)
FAME: Rapeseed 194.04 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Edwards</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>225</RecNum><DisplayText>(Edwards et al. 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>225</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532119589″>225</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Edwards, R</author><author>Larivé, JF</author><author>Rickeard, D</author><author>Weindorf, W</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Well-to-Wheel Analysis of future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context, Well-to-Tank Appendix 2-Version 4a, Summary of energy and GHG balance of individual pathways</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>JEC Technical Reports, 2014, DOI: http://10.2790/95629, available online at: http://iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu/about-jec/sites/iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu. about-jec/files/documents/report_2014/wtt_appendix_2_v4a. pdf, accessed Jul</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Edwards et al. 2015)
HVO: Waste animal fat/oil 94.68 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Edwards</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>225</RecNum><DisplayText>(Edwards et al. 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>225</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532119589″>225</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Edwards, R</author><author>Larivé, JF</author><author>Rickeard, D</author><author>Weindorf, W</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Well-to-Wheel Analysis of future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context, Well-to-Tank Appendix 2-Version 4a, Summary of energy and GHG balance of individual pathways</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>JEC Technical Reports, 2014, DOI: http://10.2790/95629, available online at: http://iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu/about-jec/sites/iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu. about-jec/files/documents/report_2014/wtt_appendix_2_v4a. pdf, accessed Jul</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Edwards et al. 2015)
Bioethanol: Wheat (NG as process fuel) 211.32 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Edwards</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>225</RecNum><DisplayText>(Edwards et al. 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>225</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532119589″>225</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Edwards, R</author><author>Larivé, JF</author><author>Rickeard, D</author><author>Weindorf, W</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Well-to-Wheel Analysis of future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context, Well-to-Tank Appendix 2-Version 4a, Summary of energy and GHG balance of individual pathways</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><publisher>JEC Technical Reports, 2014, DOI: http://10.2790/95629, available online at: http://iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu/about-jec/sites/iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu. about-jec/files/documents/report_2014/wtt_appendix_2_v4a. pdf, accessed Jul</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Edwards et al. 2015)
Swedish Electricity 25 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Dallmann</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>201</RecNum><DisplayText>(Dallmann, Du &amp; Minjares 2017; Moro &amp; Lonza 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>201</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531230870″>201</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Dallmann, Tim</author><author>Du, Li</author><author>Minjares, Ray</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Low-Carbon Technology Pathways for Soot-Free Urban Bus Fleets in 20 Megacities</title><secondary-title>Working Paper</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Working Paper</full-title></periodical><number>2017-11</number><dates><year>2017</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite><Cite><Author>Moro</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>224</RecNum><record><rec-number>224</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532117782″>224</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Moro, Alberto</author><author>Lonza, Laura</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Electricity carbon intensity in European Member States: Impacts on GHG emissions of electric vehicles</title><secondary-title>Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment</full-title></periodical><dates><year>2017</year></dates><isbn>1361-9209</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Dallmann, Du & Minjares 2017; Moro & Lonza 2017)
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 57. Carbon Emissions of fuels by Life cycle stage

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 16. Carbon Intensity by fuel8113693259204Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 17. Well to Wheel emissions of specific fuels0Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 17. Well to Wheel emissions of specific fuels-508093478300Carbon Intensities of each fuel type could then be combined with the vehicle efficiencies of the selected transport options. This allowed well to tank values and tank to wheel values to be combined to obtain well to wheel values specific to the vehicles being assessed and expressed in emissions per kilometer travelled (Figure 17).
When looking at this data from a reduction perspective in line with the assessment methodology it is neceeessary to compare th results with the baseline fuel (Diese). It is thus evident that certain fuels significantly reduce WTW emissions in this context (Figure 18).

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 18. Well to Wheel Emission savings for specific fuelsDiesel
In this indicator it is apparent that Diesel has the highest carbon intensity 318.96 gCO2e/kWh. However, this indicator is framed in tandum with the Renewbale Energy Directive stipulations in which an alternative fuel source is to be compared against it’s fossil fuel counterpart. This means that reductions of emissions are not recorded as Diesel is the fossil fuel used. So Diesel in this regard perfroms poorly in the MCA scale with a result of ‘Very Bad (1)’.

Biogas
In this indicator biogas derived from sewage has one of the lowest carbon intensities, however certain increases in the WTW impact are recorded due to the less efficienct engine values selected in this study. Biogas still perfroms well with an 82% reduction on Diesel buses meaning in this MCA it scores ‘Very Good (5)’ regarding its greenhouse gas reduction ability.
FAME
FAME derived from rapeseed was recorded as having the same engine efficiency as Diesel and other biofuel powertrains. It similalry had no emissions allocated to the combusiton phase of the lifecycle. Meaning that the lowered reduction potential for this fuel is mostly down to the production phase. As rapeseed is deemed a first generation crop wherin the energy input for cultivating the biomass actually directly impacts its ability to reduce overall emissions and this is apparent with it’s ‘Very Bad (1)’ rating.

HVO
HVO derived from waste animal fat/oil had similar data to FAME and bioethanol with the engine efficiency the same with no combusiton emission assigned. However, as waste animal fat/oil is a by-product and not explicitly cultivated for energy purposes the greenhosue gas emission associated are lowered. This resulted in HVO having ‘Good (4)’ greenhouse gas reductions.

Bioethanol
Bioethanol derived from Wheat was influenced the same as FAME from rapeseed in the sense that the engine efficiecny was the same as Diesel with the additive that zero emissions were assigned to the combustion process but with a large impact orginating from the cultivation step. As this data set included wheat produced for bioethanol , associated emissions from cultivation have impacted the overall reduction potential of this specific fuel.
Battery Electric
Carbon Intensities vary significantly depending on the electricity supply in different countries, the Carbon Intensity of Sweden’s Grid is; 25 gC02/kWh (Table 58).

Generation Technology Carbon Intensity of Electricity including upstream emissions (gC02/kWh)
Sweden 25
United Kingdom 584
Republic of Ireland 555
EU Average 407
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 58. Data table for calculating the carbon intensity of Swedish Electricity (Dallmann, Du & Minjares 2017)
In this indicator the Battery electric options performed the best. When calculating the carbon intensities of electricity supply (Table 58), the Swedish electricity supply seemed to have very low intensity. Combining this with an energy efficient powertrain provided both Battery Electric options as the best greenhouse reducing technology assessed with a grading of ‘Very Good (5)’. Opportunity charging vehicles performed slightly better due to the mildly better energy efficiency cited in this report.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Bad (1) ** 0% reductions as it is the fuel being compared against
Biogas Very Good (5) ** 82% reductions on Diesel
FAME Very Bad (1) ** 37.95% reductions on Diesel
HVO Good (4) ** 70% reductions on Diesel
Bioethanol Very Bad (1) ** 33.75% reductions on Diesel
Opportunity charging BEV Very Good (5) ** 96.94% reductions on Diesel
Overnight charging BEV Very Good (5) ** 97.32% reductions on Diesel
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 59. Well to Wheel Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Indicator Performance
Air PollutionTail pipe toxins in this case focused on NOx and Particulate matter quantities regarding EURO vehicle standard regulations was challenging to produce specific information for. If a company used this methodology model specific emission could be used in this category, however, this was not an option. Instead it was assessed from several sources that all options meet EURO VI standards due to the strict nature of this regulation, however several options performed better than the current standard (Figure 19).

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 19. Associated NOx and PM emissions by fuel type (IVL 2017, CIVITAS 2016)Diesel, Biogas, FAME, HVO, Bioethanol
It was determined that all of these transport options fulfilled the criteria of EURO VI as if they did not they would not be viable options for selection ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016). Noted emission values are displayed in the graph with the primary focus of these results detailing that EURO VI standards are meet with all five transport options.
Battery Electric
This technology fulfils and exceeds the criteria set for EURO VI buses in that it is known as a zero emission technology ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>CIVITASb</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>151</RecNum><DisplayText>(CIVITASb 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>151</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529933186″>151</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>CIVITASb,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><pub-location>Netherlands</pub-location><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(CIVITASb 2016). Not to say that no emission is caused by this technology but that the primary emissions associated with conventional combustible fuel tailpipe are not present. The NOx, PM and HC pollutants associated with EURO VI regulations are not emitted during the driving phase.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Satisfactory (3) *** EURO VI Criteria fulfilled
Biogas Satisfactory (3) *** FAME Satisfactory (3) *** HVO Satisfactory (3) *** Bioethanol Satisfactory (3) *** Opportunity charging BEV Very Good (5) *** Zero Emission Technology
Overnight charging BEV Very Good (5) *** Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 60 .Air Pollution Indicator Performance
Noise levelsNoise levels from passing by vehicles is a complex issue that has been somewhat generalized in this indicator. Noise levels from public buses in this case have been simplified to cover noise from the vehicle itself in a test cycle not including urban background noise, passengers, terrain or an attenuation enabling environment. The general noise values of these fuel types and powertrains vary somewhat (Figure 20).

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 20. Noise Levels by fuel type (CIVITAS 2016)Diesel, Biogas, FAME, HVO, Bioethanol
Buses with diesel powertrains are associated with noises from the sound of fuel combustion within the engine itself. Improvements have been made with regard to fuel injection and noise isolation however these improvements are applicable to Diesel, FAME, and Bioethanol options (AEA 2014). Biogas has similar associated noises due to combustion however as the combustion process for gas is different it has been noted as emitting slightly less noise (AEA 2014). In this case all the biofuels as well as diesel performed as ‘Satisfactory (3)’ for this indicator.
Battery electric
Battery electric buses have lower noise levels due to no combustion process in the powertrain operation and with this lower level of noise in relation to current requirements for heavy duty passenger vehicles, both battery electric options performed as ‘Very Good (5)’ in this indicator.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Satisfactory (3) ** 80 dB: Meeting current minimum requirements for heavy duty passenger vehicles 2016-2020.

Biogas Satisfactory (3) ** 78 dB: Meeting current minimum requirements for heavy duty passenger vehicles 2016-2020.

FAME Satisfactory (3) ** 80 dB: Meeting current minimum requirements for heavy duty passenger vehicles 2016-2020.

HVO Satisfactory (3) ** 80 dB: Meeting current minimum requirements for heavy duty passenger vehicles 2016-2020.

Bioethanol Satisfactory (3) ** 80 dB: Meeting current minimum requirements for heavy duty passenger vehicles 2016-2020.

Opportunity charging BEV Very Good (5) ** 63dB: Meets and exceeds minimum
Overnight charging BEV Very Good (5) ** 63 dB
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 61. Noise Levels Indicator Performance
Nutrient AvailabilityThe production of biofuels from energy crops has a notably large impact on key nutrients such as potassium, phosphorus and nitrogen. The use of these three nutrients is vital for crop production and in increasing crop yields. Similarly, other organic matter has varying levels of nutrients and increasing the level of these nutrients that are available in soil is important. Each transport option has fuel derived from different areas but in this indicator will be assessed by its delivery of nutrients back into the ecosystem.
Diesel
Diesel as a fossil fuel derived fuel does not directly require large inputs of key nutrients but exists from ancient organic matter compressed over time. The Diesel pathway does not recycle any components of this organic matter through the production or use phase and burning diesel lead to Nitrogen emissions.
Biogas
Biogas from Municipal waste organically breaks down material to produce energy rich biogas in the form of methane and carbon dioxide as well as a nutrient rich digestate with more soluble nitrogen. This second product produced from biogas can be used as a fertiliser or composted to deliver nutrients back into the ecosystem after fuel is obtained.
FAME, HVO, Bioethanol
These three biofuels either directly or indirectly rely on large quantities of nutrients in the form of fertilisers in the production phase of FAME (rapeseed) or Bioethanol (wheat) or have a large nutrient impact through the feeding of livestock (HVO Waste animal oils/fat): As such these three fuels contribute to nutrient use and do not cycle nutrients in the production or use phase thus having a negative impact on the nutrient cycle.
Electricity
As electricity in Sweden is derived primarily form hydropower, nuclear power and wind power the impact on the nutrient cycle is very low. The use of organic material in the fuel supply is not directly noted and has little impact on nutrient circularity.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Bad (1) * The fuel is derived from ancient organic material and recycling of nutrients is not implemented in this pathway.
Biogas Very Good (5) * The Biogas production pathway breaks down organic matter to produce biogas and digestate that can be used as a fertiliser to recycle nutrients.
FAME Very Bad (1) * These fuels are derived from organic material and require large nutrient inputs from the agriculture sector either directly or indirectly and do not recycle nutrients.
HVO Very Bad (1) * Bioethanol Very Bad (1) * Opportunity charging BEV Satisfactory (3) * The Swedish Electricity grid relies primarily on renewable energy such as; nuclear, hydro and wind having little impact on nutrient use or recycling.
Overnight charging BEV Satisfactory (3) * Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 62. Nutrient Availability Indicator Performance
Resource ConstraintsDiesel
For Diesel the most notable resource that is affected is the use of Oil that is used for the development of transport fuels such as Diesel. Oil has been utilized globally in high rates and the consensus is that it is on the decline ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sorrell</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>202</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sorrell, S et al. 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>202</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531425711″>202</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Generic”>13</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sorrell, S</author><author>Speirs, J</author><author>Bentley, R</author><author>Brandt, A</author><author>Miller, R</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Global oil depletion—an assessment of the evidence for a near-term peak in global oil production. A report produced by the Technology and Policy Assessment function of the UK Energy Research Centre</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sorrell, S et al. 2015). Although production rates have remained relatively similar; studies highlight that in the exploration for new reserves of Oil the returns have been declining significantly in recent years highlighting a declining natural resource ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sorrell</Author><Year>2010</Year><RecNum>203</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sorrell, Steve et al. 2010)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>203</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531425791″>203</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sorrell, Steve</author><author>Speirs, Jamie</author><author>Bentley, Roger</author><author>Brandt, Adam</author><author>Miller, Richard</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Global oil depletion: A review of the evidence</title><secondary-title>Energy Policy</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Energy Policy</full-title></periodical><pages>5290-5295</pages><volume>38</volume><number>9</number><dates><year>2010</year></dates><isbn>0301-4215</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sorrell, Steve et al. 2010). Concern regarding Oil reserves is estimated to be more apparent by 2050 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sorrell</Author><Year>2015</Year><RecNum>202</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sorrell, S et al. 2015)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>202</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531425711″>202</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Generic”>13</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sorrell, S</author><author>Speirs, J</author><author>Bentley, R</author><author>Brandt, A</author><author>Miller, R</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Global oil depletion—an assessment of the evidence for a near-term peak in global oil production. A report produced by the Technology and Policy Assessment function of the UK Energy Research Centre</title></titles><dates><year>2015</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sorrell, S et al. 2015).
FAME (Rapeseed), Ethanol (Wheat)
These biofuel options differ from the other options as they utilize energy crops for their production. As such the crops require large amounts of fertilizer to produce the yield that are desired for harvest. The use of such fertilizers requires large amounts of phosphorus ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Van Kauwenbergh</Author><Year>2010</Year><RecNum>204</RecNum><DisplayText>(Van Kauwenbergh 2010)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>204</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531426152″>204</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Book”>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Van Kauwenbergh, Steven J</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>World phosphate rock reserves and resources</title></titles><dates><year>2010</year></dates><publisher>IFDC Muscle Shoals</publisher><isbn>0880901675</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Van Kauwenbergh 2010). Peak phosphorus is a concept that refers to humanities maximum production of phosphorus ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Cordell</Author><Year>2011</Year><RecNum>205</RecNum><DisplayText>(Cordell &amp; White 2011)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>205</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531426204″>205</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Cordell, Dana</author><author>White, Stuart</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Peak phosphorus: clarifying the key issues of a vigorous debate about long-term phosphorus security</title><secondary-title>Sustainability</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Sustainability</full-title></periodical><pages>2027-2049</pages><volume>3</volume><number>10</number><dates><year>2011</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Cordell & White 2011). Phosphorus is a limited resource that is found in the earth’s crust primarily in the form of phosphate rock . The mining of this rock is mainly conducted in Morocco, China, Algeria and Syria ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ober</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>206</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ober 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>206</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531426373″>206</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ober, Joyce A</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Mineral commodity summaries 2018</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>US Geological Survey</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ober 2018). One thing can be noted and that is that as a finite resource, production remains very high. However the US geological survey ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Ober</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>206</RecNum><DisplayText>(Ober 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>206</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531426373″>206</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Ober, Joyce A</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Mineral commodity summaries 2018</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>US Geological Survey</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Ober 2018) states the more than 300 billion tons of phosphate rock are in known reserves with no imminent (100 year: current use) shortage expected. This resource is a vital component of the energy crop sector and thus affects both FAME (Rapeseed) and Ethanol (Wheat) transport options regarding resource constraints.
Biogas (Sewage sludge), HVO (waste animal oils/fat)
For the biofuels Biogas and HVO using these waste streams no direct resource constraints were noted for the powertrains as conventional engines were used like the other options. Also, as these biofuels utilize feedstocks in a second generation manner then no significant impacts can be noted.
Battery Electric
Regarding electric buses the fuel source utilizing Swedish electricity was not deemed to be affecting resources in a considerable way. As Sweden’s grid is largely renewable this option was deemed ideal. However, in the powertrain dimension of battery electric vehicles the actual battery component of this option was noted as affecting resources in decline such as; cobalt and lithium. Cobalt and lithium are key components of rechargeable batteries. Known reserves (not including undiscovered reserves) of lithium would meet current demand for 350 years meaning the resource is finite but not imminent ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>W</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>207</RecNum><DisplayText>(W 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>207</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531427717″>207</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Jaskula B W</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Mineral Commodity Summaries</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>US Geological Survey</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(W 2016). However, with cobalt peak cobalt extraction has been modelled between the years 2025-2030. Also cobalt under several modelling scenarios has been projected to decline by 3-5% per year after 250 with a business as usual (current demand) expected to have run out of cobalt by 2170 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Sverdrup</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>208</RecNum><DisplayText>(Sverdrup, Ragnarsdottir &amp; Koca 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>208</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531427792″>208</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Sverdrup, Harald Ulrik</author><author>Ragnarsdottir, Kristin Vala</author><author>Koca, Deniz</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Integrated Modelling of the Global Cobalt Extraction, Supply, Price and Depletion of Extractable Resources Using the WORLD6 Model</title><secondary-title>BioPhysical Economics and Resource Quality</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>BioPhysical Economics and Resource Quality</full-title></periodical><pages>4</pages><volume>2</volume><number>1</number><dates><year>2017</year></dates><isbn>2366-0112</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Sverdrup, Ragnarsdottir & Koca 2017).

Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Bad (1) * Estimates on resource scarcity of Oil as early as 2050
Biogas (Municipal waste) Very Good (5) * No apparent use of scarce resources
FAME (Rapeseed) Satisfactory (3) * Phosphorus use is a finite, but resources are not critical (100 years)
HVO (Tallow) Very Good (5) * No apparent use of scarce resources
Bioethanol Wheat) Satisfactory (3) * Phosphorus use is a finite, but resources are not critical (100 years)
Opportunity charging BEV Satisfactory (3) * Cobalt and lithium are finite resources, but estimates suggest that cobalt will last at least 150 years and lithium 300years with current use and recycling patterns.
Overnight charging BEV Satisfactory (3) * Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 63. Resource Constraints Indicator Performance
SocialPublic OpinionRegarding the indicator public opinion toward a transport option, empirical research in the form of a targeted survey could be implemented but was deemed cumbersome to require such a task for this methodology. In this case specific opinions were not available so more generic attitudes towards transport options were selected by reviewing available sources (Table 64).
Fuel Statement Reference
Diesel 84% of participants state that we should stop using fossil fuels. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Debate.org</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>212</RecNum><DisplayText>(Debate.org 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>212</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531430414″>212</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Debate.org</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Should the world stop using fossil fuels?</title></titles><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Debate.org</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-the-world-stop-using-fossil-fuels</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Debate.org 2018)
66% of participants are in favour of alternative fuels rather than fossil fuels. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>B</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>213</RecNum><DisplayText>(Kennedy 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>213</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531430572″>213</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Kennedy, B</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Two-thirds of Americans give priority to developing alternative energy over fossil fuels</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>PEW Research</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/23/two-thirds-of-americans-give-priority-to-developing-alternative-energy-over-fossil-fuels/</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Kennedy 2017)
Biofuels 57.8% of people would pay additional charges for biofuels if it helps the environment. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Mariasiu</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>214</RecNum><DisplayText>(Mariasiu 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>214</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531430607″>214</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Mariasiu, Florin</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Consumers’ attitudes related to biofuel use in transportation</title><secondary-title>International Review of Management and Marketing</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>International Review of Management and Marketing</full-title></periodical><pages>1-9</pages><volume>3</volume><number>1</number><dates><year>2012</year></dates><isbn>2146-4405</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Mariasiu 2012)
71% of surveyed swedes strongly support the use of sustainable biofuels. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Eurobarometer</Author><Year>2014</Year><RecNum>215</RecNum><DisplayText>(Eurobarometer 2014)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>215</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531430702″>215</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Generic”>13</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Eurobarometer, Special</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>341, 2010. Biotechnology</title></titles><dates><year>2014</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Eurobarometer 2014)
Electric vehicles Electric vehicles had an overall positive public review due to their perceived environmental friendliness and lowered cost per/km. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Lebeau</Author><Year>2013</Year><RecNum>217</RecNum><DisplayText>(Lebeau et al. 2013)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>217</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531430749″>217</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Lebeau, Kenneth</author><author>Van Mierlo, Joeri</author><author>Lebeau, Philippe</author><author>Mairesse, Olivier</author><author>Macharis, Cathy</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey</title><secondary-title>International Journal of Electric and Hybrid Vehicles</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>International Journal of Electric and Hybrid Vehicles</full-title></periodical><pages>28-41</pages><volume>5</volume><number>1</number><dates><year>2013</year></dates><isbn>1751-4096</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Lebeau et al. 2013)
Electric vehicles are an emerging and socially accepted technology with one main barrier being cost. ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Park</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>218</RecNum><DisplayText>(Park, Lim &amp; Cho 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>218</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531430774″>218</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Park, Eunil</author><author>Lim, Jooyoung</author><author>Cho, Yongwoo</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Understanding the Emergence and Social Acceptance of Electric Vehicles as Next-Generation Models for the Automobile Industry</title><secondary-title>Sustainability</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Sustainability</full-title></periodical><pages>662</pages><volume>10</volume><number>3</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Park, Lim & Cho 2018)
54% of participants were in favour of electric vehicles with one third interested in electric vehicle for personal use.

ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>European Comission</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>219</RecNum><DisplayText>(European Comission 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>219</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531430914″>219</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>European Comission,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Alternative fuels and infrastructure in seven non-EU markets-Final report</title></titles><dates><year>2016</year></dates><publisher>European Commission </publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(European Comission 2016)
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 64. Summary of Public Opinions on Fuels
Diesel
Public opinion regarding Diesel and other fossil fuels was overall negative with a majority in most surveys having a more positive attitude toward alternative fuel sources for powering vehicles. In this indicator the fuel Diesel then scored ‘Very Bad (1)’.
Biofuels
For biofuels, the sources collected suggest a positive attitude toward this option with some wiling to pay more for sustainable fuel and others showing general support for such fuels. In this case fuels; Biogas, FAME, HVO and Bioethanol receive the same grading of ‘Very Good (5)’ due to positive support.
Battery Electric
The public appear to have positive opinion toward electric vehicles with most studies suggesting this alongside a growing interest in also selecting this powertrain and energy option for their own personal vehicles once costs lower in the coming years. In this case battery electric was also received an MCA grading of ‘Very Good (5)’.
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Bad (1) * Most members of the public were in favour of any alternative that was not fossil fuel derived.
Biogas Very Good (5) * Public opinion on Biofuels in general was positive
FAME Very Good (5) * HVO Very Good (5) * Bioethanol Very Good (5) * Opportunity charging BEV Very Good (5) * Public opinion on electric vehicles was positive but price was discussed often.
Overnight charging BEV Very Good (5) * Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 65. Public Opinion Indicator Performance
Job creationJob creation is a very complex issue thus it is difficult to merely assess as a minor feature in this report. Studies assessing job creation in a larger scale in the form of a European and National level is the focus here.
Diesel
Diesel employment sector figures are challenging to acquire; however, a more generalized view of the oil and gas industry shows that employment has dropped in 2015, 2016 and 2017 (Figure 21) in the Norwegian market with similar trends in other parts of Europe.

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 21. Employment figures in the Norwegian Petroleum Industry (Norwegian Petroleum 2018)Indirect and direct employment in the industry are hard to separate but correlations can be made regarding the decreased demand affecting the decreased employment rates ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Norwegian Petroleum</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>209</RecNum><DisplayText>(Norwegian Petroleum 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>209</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531428376″>209</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Norwegian Petroleum,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Employment in the Petroleum Industry</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>1st July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/economy/employment/</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Norwegian Petroleum 2018). It is noted that the Norwegian market differs quite considerably from the Swedish market due to Norway’s extraction figures however other trends can be observed from the graph below such as the decline in related services and total jobs over recent years.
Biofuels (Biogas, FAME, HVO, Bioethanol)
From a study documenting the effects on jobs in Sweden due to biofuel production; values suggest a positive effect on employment ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Martin M</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>210</RecNum><DisplayText>(Martin M 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>210</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531429026″>210</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Martin M, Wetterlund E , Peck P, Hackl R , Holmgren K,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Environmental and Socioeconomic benefits of Swedish Biofuel Production</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Martin M 2017). For employment a figure of approximately 1 Full Time Job (FTE) along a biofuel production chain is applicable per GWh of fuel produced ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Martin M</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>210</RecNum><DisplayText>(Martin M 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>210</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531429026″>210</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Martin M, Wetterlund E , Peck P, Hackl R , Holmgren K,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Environmental and Socioeconomic benefits of Swedish Biofuel Production</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Martin M 2017). This general value is derived from the total employment figure (Table 66). This employment is categorized on a national level rather than regional however regional domestic product gains are averaged to equate to approximately 1MSEK/GWh of fuel produced.
Direct Employment Effects
(FTE/TWh) Total Employment Effects
(FTE/TWh) Regional Domestic Product Stimulation (MSEK/GWh)
Ethanol 40-80 450-1100 0.75-1.5
Biodiesel 10-380 1000-1200 2.3
Biogas 200-850 300-1400 0.5-2
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 66. Data table for Employment and economic stimulation for biofuels (Martin M 2017)
Battery Electric
In terms of electric vehicles, one key benefit of Sweden shifting to this form of transport would be reducing any dependence on oil (Diesel). By reducing Oil consumption figures in favor of electric vehicles an estimated 1% increase in EU GDP is achievable with the creation of up to 2 million European jobs ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Transport &amp; Environment</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>211</RecNum><DisplayText>(Transport &amp; Environment 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>211</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531429704″>211</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Transport &amp; Environment,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>How will electric vehicle transition impact EU jobs?</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>Transport &amp; Environment</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Transport & Environment 2017). It has been stated that the net effect of electrification within the EU is largely good. Even in nations with automotive industries job creation is expected to increase as extra technology in the sector requires more skilled employment and jobs in R&D, additional infrastructure maintenance ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Transport &amp; Environment</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>211</RecNum><DisplayText>(Transport &amp; Environment 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>211</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531429704″>211</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Transport &amp; Environment,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>How will electric vehicle transition impact EU jobs?</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>Transport &amp; Environment</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Transport & Environment 2017). However, specifically the car manufacturing industry is expected to decline in jobs despite a net increase in European jobs. This decrease in manufacturing is expected resulting in ¼ jobs being lost. This is due to vehicle manufacturing occurring in china and increased automation in the sector. It is important that Europe produce at least 10% of the EV market in Europe rather than exclusively in China as this will result in 72% of current employment figures in this sector with a larger share helping this value increase ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Transport &amp; Environment</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>211</RecNum><DisplayText>(Transport &amp; Environment 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>211</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531429704″>211</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Report”>27</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Transport &amp; Environment,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>How will electric vehicle transition impact EU jobs?</title></titles><dates><year>2017</year></dates><publisher>Transport &amp; Environment</publisher><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Transport & Environment 2017).
Transport Option Assessment Certainty Comments
Diesel Very Bad (1) * Jobs are declining and expected to decline due to lowered demand
Biogas Very Good (5) * Biofuel production and the stimulation associated jobs from this industry approximate that 1 Full time job is observed for every 1GWh of fuel produced.
FAME Very Good (5) * HVO Very Good (5) * Bioethanol Very Good (5) * Opportunity charging BEV Very Good (5) * Electric vehicles are expected to increase jobs in the research and development sector, as well as through increased infrastructure.
Overnight charging BEV Very Good (5) * Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 67. Job Creation Indicator Performance
Weighting Factor from Survey
With all indicators assessed according to the Very Bad-Very Good assessment scale it was important to refer to the scoring of these grades. Where Very Bad scored 1 and Very Good scored 5. The prioritization of these results where then conducted by means of the survey. This survey (see appendix) resulted in a weighting factor for each indicator (Table 69). This survey was completed by actors from the Biogas Research Center meaning results obtained are priority specific for the region of Östergötland. In this case the main priorities regarding procurement involved cost of ownership, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions with other issues important but prioritized less.
Key Area Indicator Weighting factor
Economic 1 Cost of Ownership 0.9
2 Market Share 0.5
Vehicle Performance 3 Range/Refuel Time 0.7
Delivery Reliability 4 National Energy Security 0.5
5 Short-term Backup 0.4
6 Current Policy 0.6
7 Future Policy 0.6
Infrastructure 8 Required Change 0.5
Environment 9 WTW GHG Reductions 0.9
10 Air Pollution 0.9
11 Noise Levels 0.7
12 Nutrient Availability 0.4
13 Resource Constraints 0.3
Social 14 Social Acceptance 0.4
15 Job Creation 0.4
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 69. Weighting of indicators according to stakeholder survey (scored 0-1)
Concluding Discussion
Compiled Results- Strategic Overview
This section of the report presents the results in a more aggregated level to show how this method can be used to give a strategic overview. Having assessed all 6 key areas and 15 indicators for 6 transportation options strengths and weaknesses can be visualized more clearly in this section. Also, patterns similarities, and opportunities can be discussed. The qualitative grading of each transport option according to the criteria is compiled (table 68) alongside a the weighted scoring overview (figure 22)
Unweighted Overview
Key Area Key Question Indicators Diesel Biogas FAME HVO Bioethanol BEV: Opp BEV: Over
Economy Economically viable? Cost of Ownership ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Market Share *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Vehicle Performance Vehicle performance characteristics reasonable? Range/Refuel time ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Delivery Reliability Stable delivery of energy? National Energy Security ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Short-term Backup ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Current Policy ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Future Policy *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Infrastructure Procedural or external change? Required Change * * * * * * *
Environment Environmentally reasonable? WTW GHG reductions ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Air pollution *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
Noise levels ** ** ** ** ** ** **
Nutrient Availability * * * * * * *
Resource constraints * * * * * * *
Social Supported by users and the wider public? Social acceptance * * * * * * *
Job creation * * * * * * *
Table SEQ Table * ARABIC 68. Compiled Overview of Indicator Performances
It was apparent that each transport option performed differently in each key area (table 68). The transport options that performed the best in the qualitative scaling was Biogas buses with an emphasis on a Municipal waste feedstock, followed closely by HVO from animal fat/oil/tallow (refer back to table 68). The key areas that negatively affected Biogas were Technical performance; with a long refuel time and lowered range for the vehicle. Otherwise this transport option performed satisfactorily in every other category key area and indicator. The second best performing transport option was then HVO with ‘Satisfactory to ‘Very Good’ gradings for every key area with the Environmental key area having a negative grading for nutrient availability due to the combustion and use of nitrogen and phosphorus in the lifecycle with no recycling performed. The worst performing option in this MCA was unsurprisingly Diesel which was neither in line with current or future policy, had no WTW GHG emission reductions, no nutrient recyclability, impacted limited resources, was not socially accepted and in the current climate was not expected to create any jobs.
When considering an overview of this type it is vital to be aware that some of these indicator performances are very stable and unlikely to change however some are also very dynamic and dependent larger on the date, source, and methodology used in the data input. For example, current policy in this report focuses on taxation law in Sweden, however these laws are due to be adjusted as early as July 2018-2020 Skatteverket, 2018 #192. Also as a condensed overview this information does not show the comprehensive understanding detailed in the result.
Weighted Overview

Figure SEQ Figure * ARABIC 22. Weighted Indicator Score using Indicator ratings from Survey
When taking into consideration the indicator priorities of the BRC members who completed the BRC survey it can be suggested from this research that the most suited transport options for the region awas HVO (Figure 22). Followed by Biogas followed by the Battery Electric buses that charge overnight. The weighted results in this report are not comprehensive due to a small sample size, however the unweighted and weighted results depict Biogas, HVO, and battery electric vehicles with overnight charging as key performers in each ‘efficiency’ criteria, suggesting a combination of these three buses would be well suited for some regions.
Reflections
Indicator Scales
For the Cost of Ownership indicator, it is apparent in this indicator that certain costs that may influence the purchasing of a bus are not included, similarly the ‘Very Good (5)’ score has been determined by using costs associated with an established option (Diesel fuel and powertrain). These values could be potentially replaced with the budget for an organization for future use and the scale could be calibrated in this manner.

For the Market Share indicator this indicator focuses on the viability of a technology by looking at the current market share. However, this approach may be too reactive rather than proactive as in a technology may be fully implemented on the Swedish transport market before it is deemed viable according to this methodology. Dependent on data availability it may be possible to use data from previous calendar years and distinguishing trends and importantly trajectory of market share would allow technologies to be assessed according to basic product lifecycle stages known as; introduction, growth, maturity and decline.
For t Range/refuel time it is apparent that vehicle range is largely dependent on specific technologies and is influenced by terrain among many other driving conditions. In this respect data empirically collected under the same driving conditions is best suited to assess the actual range of a bus as well as the refuel time. As data collected generically from multiple sources will have different conditions and technologies.
For National Energy Security this indicator focuses on the national stability and security of an energy source within a specific nation. However, the interest of most organizations would be a more regional application. In this regard this indicator underperforms, and certain aspects could be taken from this assessment to create a more tailored assessment of regional energy security dependent on data availability.
For Current Policy this indicator assesses governmental imposed taxation at present essentially gauging the political attitude toward transport fuels today. However, many policies are not imposed for long periods of time, if the lifespan of a newly procured public bus equates to approximately 10 years/9.4 years ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>European Environment Agency</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>222</RecNum><DisplayText>(European Environment Agency 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>222</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532007765″>222</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>European Environment Agency,</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Average age of the vehicle fleet</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>19th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>European Environment Agency</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/average-age-of-the-vehicle-fleet/average-age-of-the-vehicle-8</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(European Environment Agency 2018) then policy change is likely to occur within this period. Meaning this indicator is very dynamic in nature and requires more forward thinking approaches in the form of the next indicator Future Policy.

For Required Change this indicator is presently focused on establishing a norm, meaning that changes would be needed to this if it were implemented in another location. Also, this assessment is very qualitative in nature and could be improved to focus on new infrastructure costs and be combined with the Cost of ownership indicator.

For Resource Constraints this indicator aims at identifying abundant and depleting resources. Due to the numerical approach separating finite and depleting it is evident that the grading as such will depend on the sources cited and estimations regarding reserves that are a very dynamic area.
Indicator Assessments
For Cost of Ownership the assessment of this indicator for these transport options suggest that fuels with the qualities of conventional diesel are the most cost effective. However, certain aspects of this can vary from study to study. Assumptions have been made regarding the replacement rate and cost of batteries for both BEVs, the used engine efficiencies for these calculations can also influence the results. It has been noted that this result cannot be taken as absolute and is dependent on many assumptions as well as this pricing is very dynamic. For the indicator Market Share it can be noted that in these results that the option FAME has only a slightly lower market share but due to the scale it has received a worse grade meaning yet the differences here are not large.
For the indicator Range/refuel time Opportunity charging BEVs do not perform well, this may be an unfair assessment as technically a bus can operate indefinitely if it is along an adequately facilitated bus route. For the indicator National Energy Security, it is noted that despite the fuel assessing the importation of materials, electricity is considered Swedish and the importation of things such as uranium for nuclear power is not included. For the indicator Short-term Backup many fuel types benefited from alternative sources and feedstocks within the same fuel type however electric vehicles run on the Swedish Grid which has no alternative despite having multiple feedstocks in the form of nuclear, hydro, and wind power. For the indicator Current Policy presently companies supplying, importing and producing fossil fuels are required to pay energy and carbon taxes whereas biofuels are either exempt or have reductions for these. However, these tax laws expire this July (2018) with some extensions for biofuels granted until 2020 ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Skatteverket</Author><Year>2018</Year><RecNum>192</RecNum><DisplayText>(Skatteverket 2018)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>192</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1530734216″>192</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Web Page”>12</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Skatteverket</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Tax exemption for biofuels</title></titles><volume>2018</volume><number>4th July</number><dates><year>2018</year></dates><publisher>Skatteverket</publisher><urls><related-urls><url>https://www.skatteverket.se/foretagochorganisationer/skatter/punktskatter/energiskatter/energiskatterpabranslen/skattebefrielseforbiodrivmedel.4.2b543913a42158acf800021393.html?q=import</url></related-urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Skatteverket 2018). Speculation could be made as to how the future policies may be implemented and may share some similarities to the bonus malus system that will be implemented for personal vehicles in Sweden.
For the indicator Required Change this indicator is somewhat challenging as it assesses the change to the current system presently in place. Basically, meaning that the indicator should be altered if the ‘norm’ is different when the methodology is used elsewhere or at a different time. This style does evaluate the level of change required from an infrastructure perspective, but it does not assess whether the change is good or bad. As discussed in the opportunity charging assessment; the level of change is higher but the reward in the future could be great due to constant delivery of services and combined with autonomous vehicles could bring potential long term financial and performance benefits in the future.

For the indicator Well to Wheel Greenhouse Gas Reductions results differ depending on feedstocks for example life cycle emissions for ethanol wheat equate to 46 gCO2-eq./MJ would produce a different result than ethanol from Sugarcane 24 gCO2-eq./MJ ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Nylund</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>168</RecNum><DisplayText>(Nylund &amp; Koponen 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>168</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943250″>168</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Book”>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Nylund, Nils-Olof</author><author>Koponen, Kati</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Fuel and technology alternatives for buses: Overall energy efficiency and emission performance</title></titles><dates><year>2012</year></dates><publisher>VTT</publisher><isbn>9513878686</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Nylund & Koponen 2012). Similarly, Biogas produced from organic waste 23 gCO2-eq./MJ is has less reductions than Biogas from wet manure 16 gCO2-eq./MJ ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Nylund</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>168</RecNum><DisplayText>(Nylund &amp; Koponen 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>168</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943250″>168</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Book”>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Nylund, Nils-Olof</author><author>Koponen, Kati</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Fuel and technology alternatives for buses: Overall energy efficiency and emission performance</title></titles><dates><year>2012</year></dates><publisher>VTT</publisher><isbn>9513878686</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Nylund & Koponen 2012). These results may also vary due to the assumptions on the carbon intensity of the electricity grid in Sweden ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Dallmann</Author><Year>2017</Year><RecNum>201</RecNum><DisplayText>(Dallmann, Du &amp; Minjares 2017)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>201</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1531230870″>201</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Dallmann, Tim</author><author>Du, Li</author><author>Minjares, Ray</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Low-Carbon Technology Pathways for Soot-Free Urban Bus Fleets in 20 Megacities</title><secondary-title>Working Paper</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Working Paper</full-title></periodical><number>2017-11</number><dates><year>2017</year></dates><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Dallmann, Du & Minjares 2017) . Alongside the quoted engine efficiencies, higher efficiencies exist and defining an average value may exclude better performing newer improvements. Similar methodologies to RED calculate the lifecycle emission of fuels, some of these include GHGenius and GREET modelling ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Nylund</Author><Year>2012</Year><RecNum>168</RecNum><DisplayText>(Nylund &amp; Koponen 2012)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>168</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1529943250″>168</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Book”>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Nylund, Nils-Olof</author><author>Koponen, Kati</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Fuel and technology alternatives for buses: Overall energy efficiency and emission performance</title></titles><dates><year>2012</year></dates><publisher>VTT</publisher><isbn>9513878686</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Nylund & Koponen 2012).

For the indicator Noise Levels, it can be stated that five if not more types of noise can be recorded ADDIN EN.CITE <EndNote><Cite><Author>Morel</Author><Year>2016</Year><RecNum>227</RecNum><DisplayText>(Morel, Marquis-Favre &amp; Gille 2016)</DisplayText><record><rec-number>227</rec-number><foreign-keys><key app=”EN” db-id=”ffpsav0ptxawpfesrrpv2zp4zvw5w9t5rx9p” timestamp=”1532205385″>227</key></foreign-keys><ref-type name=”Journal Article”>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author>Morel, Julien</author><author>Marquis-Favre, Catherine</author><author>Gille, L-A</author></authors></contributors><titles><title>Noise annoyance assessment of various urban road vehicle pass-by noises in isolation and combined with industrial noise: A laboratory study</title><secondary-title>Applied Acoustics</secondary-title></titles><periodical><full-title>Applied Acoustics</full-title></periodical><pages>47-57</pages><volume>101</volume><dates><year>2016</year></dates><isbn>0003-682X</isbn><urls></urls></record></Cite></EndNote>(Morel, Marquis-Favre & Gille 2016). These include Exterior noises such as; Pass-by noise which is what is documented here, this is used for certification. However, cruise-by noise which is the noise of vehicle that has reached a constant speed can be recorded alongside take-off noise which is what would be heard if a bus is to take off from the depot or stop. Interior noises include the noise level inside when the bus is idling as well as the noise level at a constant speed when on the road for example. All these noise types are important but depend on the focus of the party interested.
For the indicator ‘Resource Constraints’ better farming practices to circulate phosphorus can have a lesser impact on the use of phosphorus (REF) similarly the recycling of metals can reduce the need to mine virgin metals for electric vehicles (REF) .
marginal perspective on Electricity
Other
It is a challenge to assess such multi-facetted systems that encompass many positive and negative traits. This report covers many areas, but it is no fully comprehensive in covering all areas of interest or relevance. It does however cover the areas deemed most relevant by the project participants (members/experts of the BRC), as well as a literature review on similar work. Different researchers and participants would likely establish a different tool. However, much of the content would remain virtually the same with perhaps a few exceptions or improvements.
This report focused on increasing knowledge about the suitability of public bus types according to definitions of ‘efficiency’. This has been achieved; in accordance with the aim the key criterion for ‘efficient’ bus solutions have been justified, logical scales for assessment have been created and assessments have been conducted to increase knowledge of the area. This report may not be fully comprehensive of every issue regarding efficient bus solutions however it addresses many key issues and provides a knowledge overview to facilitate decision making
RecommendationsReferences ADDIN EN.REFLIST Bioenergy, I 2014, Task 37 Biogas Country Overview, Inernational Energy Agency Bioenergy.

Braun, ME, Walsh, SJ, Horner, JL & Chuter, R 2013, ‘Noise source characteristics in the ISO 362 vehicle pass-by noise test: Literature review’, Applied Acoustics, vol. 74, no. 11, pp. 1241-65.

Buzzell, RD, Gale, BT & Sultan, RG 1975, ‘Market share-a key to profitability’, Harvard business review, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 97-106.

Cherp, A & Jewell, J 2014, ‘The concept of energy security: Beyond the four As’, Energy Policy, vol. 75, pp. 415-21.

CIVITASb 2016, Policy Note: Smart choices for cities alternative fuel buses, Netherlands.

Clean Fleets 2014, Procuring clean and efficient road vehicles: Clean fleets guide, www.clean-fleets.eu.

Cordell, D & White, S 2011, ‘Peak phosphorus: clarifying the key issues of a vigorous debate about long-term phosphorus security’, Sustainability, vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 2027-49.

Dallmann, T, Du, L & Minjares, R 2017, ‘Low-Carbon Technology Pathways for Soot-Free Urban Bus Fleets in 20 Megacities’, Working Paper, no. 2017-11.

Debate.org 2018, Should the world stop using fossil fuels?, Debate.org, <http://www.debate.org/opinions/should-the-world-stop-using-fossil-fuels>.

Directive, E 2002, ‘Directive 2002/49/EC of the European parliament and the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise’, Official Journal of the European Communities, L, vol. 189, no. 18.07, p. 2002.

Ecotraffic 2015, Kunskapssammanställning – EURO VI stadsbussar.

Edwards, R, Larivé, J, Rickeard, D & Weindorf, W 2015, Well-to-Wheel Analysis of future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context, Well-to-Tank Appendix 2-Version 4a, Summary of energy and GHG balance of individual pathways, JEC Technical Reports, 2014, DOI: http://10.2790/95629, available online at: http://iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu/about-jec/sites/iet. jrc. ec. europa. eu. about-jec/files/documents/report_2014/wtt_appendix_2_v4a. pdf, accessed Jul.

EN14214, D 2003, ‘Automotive fuels-fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) for diesel engines, requirements and test methods’, European Standards.

Energimyndigheten 2015, Energy in Sweden Facts and Figures 2015.

Eurobarometer, S 2014, 341, 2010. Biotechnology.

European Comission 2016, Alternative fuels and infrastructure in seven non-EU markets-Final report, European Commission
European Commission 2014, Life and Air Quality, Luxembourg.

European Environment Agency 2018, Average age of the vehicle fleet, European Environment Agency, viewed 19th July 2018, <https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/average-age-of-the-vehicle-fleet/average-age-of-the-vehicle-8>.

European Parliament 2009, Directive 2009/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles, European Parliament, Council of the European Union, Europe.

F3 2015, F3 Fact sheet: Bioethanol, The Swedish Knowlege Centre for Renewable Transportation fuels.

—— 2016a, F3 Fact Sheet: Biogas/Biomethane/SNG, The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels.

—— 2016b, F3 Fact sheet: HEFO/HVO, Hydroprocessed Esters and Fatty Acids, The swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels.

—— 2017a, B100 (Biodiesel), The Swedish Knowledge Centre for renewable transportation fuels.

—— 2017b, F3 Fact sheet: FAME, Fatty Acid Methyl Esters, The swedish knowlege centre for renewable transportaion fuels.

f3, TSKcfrtf 2017, ‘FAME, Fatty Acid Methyl Esters’, F3 Fact sheet Category: Fuels, No.4.

Ge, Y-E, Long, J, Xiao, F & Shi, Q 2017, Traffic modeling for low-emission transport, Elsevier, 1361-9209.

Greco, S, Figueira, J & Ehrgott, M 2016, Multiple criteria decision analysis, Springer.

Höök, M & Tang, X 2013, ‘Depletion of fossil fuels and anthropogenic climate change—A review’, Energy Policy, vol. 52, pp. 797-809.

Howes, T 2010, ‘The EU’s new renewable energy Directive (2009/28/EC)’, The new climate policies of the European Union: internal legislation and climate diplomacy, vol. 15, no. 117, p. 3.

IAEA 2018a, Nuclear Reactors in the World, International Atomic Energy Agency.

—— 2018b, Unplanned Capability Loss Factor: Includes all reactors that were in commercial operation within 2015 and 2017, The international Atomic Energy Agency, viewed 15th July 2018, <https://www.iaea.org/PRIS/WorldStatistics/ThreeYrsUnplannedCapabilityLossFactor.aspx>.

ICCT 2016, A technical summary of EURO 6/VI vehicel emission standards, International Council on Clean Transportation, San Francisco.

IEA 2012, Oil & Gas Security: Emergency Response of IEA Countries, International Energy Agency.

IRENA 2017, Biogas for road vehicles: Rechnology Brief, International Renewable Energy Agency.

IVA 2016a, Electricity production in Sweden: IVA’s Electricity project, Stockholm.

—— 2016b, Electricity Production in Sweden: IVA’s Elelctricity Crossroads project.

Jääskeläinen, H 2010, Compatibility of Biodiesel With Petroleum Diesel Engines, Revision.

Jarosi?ska, D, Héroux, M-È, Wilkhu, P, Creswick, J, Verbeek, J, Wothge, J & Paunovi?, E 2018, ‘Development of the WHO Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region: An Introduction’, International journal of environmental research and public health, vol. 15, no. 4, p. 813.

Jerksjö, M & Hallquist, Å 2016, ‘Measurements of bus emissions 2010-2015’, IVL rapport B, no. 2254.

Jewell, J 2011, ‘The IEA model of short-term energy security (MOSES)’.

Johansson, TB 2013, ‘Fossilfrihet på väg’, Stockholm, Sweden: Ministry of Enterprise, SOU, vol. 2013, p. 84.

Kampman, B, Verbeek, R, Grinsven, A, van Mensch, P, Croezen, H & Patuleia, A 2013, Bringing biofuels on the market: options to increase EU biofuels volumes beyond the current blending limits, CE Delft.

Kennedy, B 2017, Two-thirds of Americans give priority to developing alternative energy over fossil fuels, PEW Research, <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/23/two-thirds-of-americans-give-priority-to-developing-alternative-energy-over-fossil-fuels/>.

Kuthut, N 2015, Fast Charging Facts: Enhancing use of electric lift trucks, AGVs, and other motive electric vehicles, Power Designers.

Laiz?ns, A, Graurs, I, Rubenis, A & Utehin, G 2016, ‘Economic Viability of Electric Public Busses: Regional Perspective’, Procedia Engineering, vol. 134, pp. 316-21.

Larsen, U, Johansen, T & Schramm, J 2009a, ‘Ethanol as a fuel for road transportation’, Main Report. IEA-AMF report, vol. 100, pp. 1-87.

—— 2009b, Ethanol as a future fuel for road transportation.

Lebeau, K, Van Mierlo, J, Lebeau, P, Mairesse, O & Macharis, C 2013, ‘Consumer attitudes towards battery electric vehicles: a large-scale survey’, International Journal of Electric and Hybrid Vehicles, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 28-41.

Mariasiu, F 2012, ‘Consumers’ attitudes related to biofuel use in transportation’, International Review of Management and Marketing, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1-9.

Martin M, WE, Peck P, Hackl R , Holmgren K, 2017, Environmental and Socioeconomic benefits of Swedish Biofuel Production, The Swedish Knowledge Centre for Renewable Transportation Fuels.

Mobility, ECD-Gf & Transport 2011, White Paper on Transport: Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area: Towards a Competitive and Resource-efficient Transport System, Publications Office of the European Union.

Morel, J, Marquis-Favre, C & Gille, L-A 2016, ‘Noise annoyance assessment of various urban road vehicle pass-by noises in isolation and combined with industrial noise: A laboratory study’, Applied Acoustics, vol. 101, pp. 47-57.

Moro, A & Lonza, L 2017, ‘Electricity carbon intensity in European Member States: Impacts on GHG emissions of electric vehicles’, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment.

Norwegian Petroleum 2018, Employment in the Petroleum Industry, viewed 1st July 2018, <https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/economy/employment/>.

Nylund, N-O & Koponen, K 2012, Fuel and technology alternatives for buses: Overall energy efficiency and emission performance, VTT.

Ober, JA 2018, Mineral commodity summaries 2018, US Geological Survey.

OECD 2018, Taxing Energy Use 2018- Companion to the taxing energy use database, OECD Publishing, Paris.

Olsson, O, Grauers, A & Pettersson, S 2016, ‘Method to analyze cost effectiveness of different electric bus systems’, in EVS29 International Battery, Hybrid and Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Symposium. Montreal, pp. 1-12.

Park, E, Lim, J & Cho, Y 2018, ‘Understanding the Emergence and Social Acceptance of Electric Vehicles as Next-Generation Models for the Automobile Industry’, Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 3, p. 662.

Partnersamverkan för en förbättrad kollektivtrafik 2014, Miljökrav vid Trafikupphandling: Buss.

Skatteverket 2018, Tax exemption for biofuels, Skatteverket, viewed 4th July 2018, <https://www.skatteverket.se/foretagochorganisationer/skatter/punktskatter/energiskatter/energiskatterpabranslen/skattebefrielseforbiodrivmedel.4.2b543913a42158acf800021393.html?q=import>.

Sorrell, S, Speirs, J, Bentley, R, Brandt, A & Miller, R 2010, ‘Global oil depletion: A review of the evidence’, Energy Policy, vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 5290-5.

Sorrell, S, Speirs, J, Bentley, R, Brandt, A & Miller, R 2015, Global oil depletion—an assessment of the evidence for a near-term peak in global oil production. A report produced by the Technology and Policy Assessment function of the UK Energy Research Centre.

Statens energimyndighet 2015, Hållbara biodrivmedel och flytande biobränslen under 2014.

Statista 2018, Electricity prices for households in Sweden from 2010 to 2017, semi-annually (in euro cents per kilowatt-hour), Statista, viewed 4th July 2018, <https://www.statista.com/statistics/418124/electricity-prices-for-households-in-sweden/>.

Sverdrup, HU, Ragnarsdottir, KV & Koca, D 2017, ‘Integrated Modelling of the Global Cobalt Extraction, Supply, Price and Depletion of Extractable Resources Using the WORLD6 Model’, BioPhysical Economics and Resource Quality, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 4.

Sveriges Bussföretag 2018, Statistik om bussbranschen: Mars 2018, Stockholm.

Sweco 2012, Innovative biogas fuelling system alternatives for buses, Baltic Biogas Bus, Stockholm.

Sweden Statistics 2016, ‘Electricity supply, district heating and supply of natural gas 2015’, Statistics Sweden.

Traffic 21 2016, Policymaker Guide: Which alternative fuel technology is best for transit buses?, Carnegie Mellon University: Scott Institute of Energy Innovation.

Transport & Environment 2017, How will electric vehicle transition impact EU jobs?, Transport & Environment.

Van Kauwenbergh, SJ 2010, World phosphate rock reserves and resources, IFDC Muscle Shoals.

Volvo 2015, Volvo Opportunity Charging Systems for electric and electric hybrid buses, Volvo.

W, JB 2016, Mineral Commodity Summaries, US Geological Survey.

Xylia, M & Silveira, S 2015, Fuel options for public bus fleets in Sweden, f3-The Swedish knowledge centre for renewable transportation fuels.

—— 2017, ‘On the road to fossil-free public transport: The case of Swedish bus fleets’, Energy Policy, vol. 100, pp. 397-412.

AppendixWeighting Survey

Weighting Calculations LINK Excel.Sheet.12 C:\Users\eamon\Documents\Book4.xlsx Sheet1!R1C1:R21C16 a f 4 h * MERGEFORMAT
Qualitative Scores Unweighted/Weighted
Indicators Weighting factor Diesel Biogas FAME HVO Bioethanol BEV Opp BEV Over
Cost of Ownership 0.9 5 4.5 4 3.6 5 4.5 5 4.5 4 3.6 2 1.8 2 1.8
Market Share 0.5 2 1 3 1.5 2 1 5 2.5 1 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.5
Range/Refuel time 0.7 4 2.8 2 1.4 4 2.8 4 2.8 3 2.1 2 1.4 1 0.7
National Energy Security 0.5 5 2.5 5 2.5 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2 4 2
Short-term back up 0.4 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 1 0.4 1 0.4
Current Policy 0.6 1 0.6 5 3 5 3 5 3 5 3 3 1.8 3 1.8
Future Policy 0.6 1 0.6 5 3 5 3 5 3 5 3 5 3 5 3
Required Change 0.5 5 2.5 5 2.5 5 2.5 5 2.5 5 2.5 1 0.5 5 2.5
WTW GHG reductions 0.9 1 0.9 5 4.5 1 0.9 4 3.6 1 0.9 5 4.5 5 4.5
Air Pollution 0.9 3 2.7 3 2.7 3 2.7 3 2.7 3 2.7 5 4.5 5 4.5
Noise levels 0.7 3 2.1 3 2.1 3 2.1 3 2.1 3 2.1 5 3.5 5 3.5
Nutrient Availability 0.4 1 0.4 5 2 1 0.4 1 0.4 1 0.4 3 1.2 3 1.2
Resource constraints 0.3 1 0.3 5 1.5 3 0.9 5 1.5 3 0.9 3 0.9 3 0.9
Social acceptance 0.4 1 0.4 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2
Job creation 0.4 1 0.4 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2 5 2
Total Unweighted Score 39   65   56   64   53   50   53  
Total Weighted Score   23.7   36.3   31.8   36.6   29.7   30   31.3

Post Author: admin