|Thompson et al.<br>(2018)|Design for Manufacture<br>and Assembly (DFMA®)<br>analysis is used.|Total system cost ranges from US$50/kWnet to produce<br>100,000 FCEVs to US$45/kWnet to produce 500,000<br>FCEVs per year in 2017 based on the comparison with the<br>fuel cell system in the commercially available Toyota<br>Mirai. Decreasing system cost to US$30/kWnet will be<br>needed for cost competitiveness with ICEVs.|
|---|---|---|
|Ruffini & Wei (2018)|Learning The learning<br>rate approach and life<br>cycle cost analysis are<br>used.|The fuel cell system is the key factor in making FCEV life<br>cycle costs comparable to ICEV costs. With an 18%<br>learning rate, FCEVs are estimated to be cost-competitive<br>with ICEVs by 2025, but with an 8% learning rate, this<br>cost-competitive point is pushed out almost 25 years.|
|Breetz & Salon (2018)|TCO approach is used for<br>conventional, hybrid, and<br>electric vehicles in 14<br>cities in the USA from<br>2011 to 2015.|BEV cost substantially more than the conventional and<br>hybrid vehicles mainly due to their higher purchase price<br>and rapid depreciation outweighed its fuel savings. Based<br>on 10 years TCO, to bring the EV (Nissan Leaf) to cost<br>parity with the ICEV (Toyota Corolla), the Leaf's purchase<br>price would need to drop by US$5,091 (15%) under full<br>electricity prices, US$3,192 (10%) with half-priced<br>electricity, and US$1,292 (4%) with free electricity.|
|Ally & Pryor (2016)|TCO based on life cycle<br>assessment of FCEV<br>(buses) compared with<br>diesel, CNG, and hybrid<br>buses in Australia from<br>2012 to 2014.|At the current level of capital and operation costs and with<br>the current performances of hydrogen and fuel cell<br>technologies, the TCO of a fuel cell bus is 2.6 times that of<br>a conventional diesel bus.|
|Simmons et al. (2015)|Vehicle model-specific<br>approach and sales-<br>weighted average<br>approach is used in the<br>USA.|Consumers realize, on average, 17.3% fuel economy<br>improvement and save US$1,070. Most new technologies<br>(hybrid electric vehicles) become financially attractive to<br>consumers when average fuel prices exceed US$ 5.60/gallon, or when annual miles traveled exceed 16,400.|
|Gambhir et al. (2015)|MACC and<br>decomposition analysis is<br>used for low-carbon<br>vehicles in China.|<br>The substitution of low-carbon fuel-driven trucks (fuel cell<br>and battery) for their business-as-usual alternatives<br>(ICEV) results in cost savings by 2050. In contrast, the<br>low-carbon fuel-driven passenger cars are, in most cases,<br>significantly costly -- 20 to 60 percent more expensive<br>than ICE vehicles in 2050.|

# **4.3 Power Sector**

The electric power sector offers the highest opportunities to invest in green or clean infrastructures, particularly renewable electricity (RE) generation technologies, including hydro, solar, wind. The critical question is whether the investments in green/clean power generation technologies help reduce the total electricity supply costs. The answer is mixed (please see Table 4). In some cases, the expansion of renewable electricity reduces the cost of electricity supply and eventually electricity prices. On the other hand, it would result in the opposite in many cases. In the following section, we present existing literature analyzing the impacts of renewable or clean electricity generation technologies on electricity supply costs and prices.

26