Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Last-Mile Parcel Delivery by Automated Vehicles and Robots

Increased E-commerce and demand for contactless delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic have fueled interest in robotic package delivery. We evaluate life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for automated suburban ground delivery systems consisting of a vehicle (last-mile) and a robot (final-50-feet). Small and large cargo vans (125 and 350 cubic feet; V125 and V350) with an internal combustion engine (ICEV) and battery electric (BEV) powertrains were assessed for three delivery scenarios: (i) conventional, human-driven vehicle with human delivery; (ii) partially automated, human-driven vehicle with robot delivery; and (iii) fully automated, connected automated vehicle (CAV) with robot delivery. The robot's contribution to life cycle GHG emissions is small (2-6%). Compared to the conventional scenario, full automation results in similar GHG emissions for the V350-ICEV but 10% higher for the V125-BEV. Conventional delivery with a V125-BEV provides the lowest GHG emissions, 167 g CO(2)e/package, while partially automated delivery with a V350-ICEV generates the most at 486 g CO(2)e/package. Fuel economy and delivery density are key parameters, and electrification of the vehicle and carbon intensity of the electricity have a large impact. CAV power requirements and efficiency benefits largely offset each other, and automation has a moderate impact on life cycle GHG emissions.

Automated summary

The study evaluated the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions for automated suburban ground delivery systems and found that the contribution of robots to GHG emissions is minimal. Full automation, while reducing labor costs compared to traditional delivery, does not significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.