The three regions in Belgium launch ‘Life Cycle Impact’, an all-in environmental score for cars, compared mutually based on their total lifecycle impacts. It’s an enlargement of the well-known Ecoscore and resumes in one figure the impact of production, fuel production, and use over 200,000 km.
The score, developed by the research center Vito and the VUB university, aims for a broader view than just climate effects and seeks to include effects on human health and different ecosystems. The scores of all models on the market can be found via www.lifecycleimpact.be.
Methodology
In 2025, more than half of the new cars in Belgium were electrified in one way or another, counting 12% conventional hybrids, 9% plug-in hybrids, and 34% full electric. The production of batteries is an environmentally harmful process, and batteries are growing larger to meet customers’ preferences and range fears.
Nevertheless, Ecoscore already showed that BEVs are the best choice when one considers the impact while driving or the production of the fuel/energy needed. Unfortunately, this Ecoscore didn’t account for the car’s production and recycling. Furthermore, in this Ecoscore, all EVs scored very well, so the results couldn’t be differentiated very well from each other.
That’s why the Life Cycle Impact now adopts the Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), based on the EU-approved Environmental Footprint. To calculate the Life Cycle Impact, emissions are accounted for in producing and assembling a car, in using the car over 200,000 km, and in producing the fuel or energy carrier it needs.
These emissions are then checked against the following impact categories of the Product Environmental Footprint: climate change; human toxicity, smog, and particulate matter, bundled as ‘human health’; acidification, ecotoxicity, and eutrophication, bundled as ‘ecosystems’.
For PHEVs, the Life Cycle Impact doesn’t account for current or official CO2 emission values; instead, it uses the official calculations for PHEVs as of 2027. Those are more realistic, while Belgian ‘real life’ data show that on average, only 26% of PHEV mileage is performed electrically, and that for 74% of the time, the internal combustion engine is still in use.
Assessments
The Life Cycle Impact calculation shows some clear assessments. When comparing cars within the same segment, BEVs are always the smartest choice when environmental factors are considered. This is true for small city cars as well as for large SUVs, and all categories in between. A diesel car is the worst choice.
Second assessment: a larger car always scores worse than a smaller car when the same drive/fuel is used. The impact of car production is growing in the total figure because the environmental impact of electricity production is diminishing, as is the impact of ICE cars’ exhaust emissions.
Even when they’re heavier (car and battery weight), BEVs have, on average, the lowest Life Cycle Impact. However, one cannot say that BEVs always have a better score than any ICE car: the Life Cycle Impact of a large electric car with a large battery pack can be greater than that of a small petrol car. This particular comparison between two very different cars may, nevertheless, be fairly irrelevant while consumers very seldom hesitate between a small city car and a large SUV.
Individual buyers usually buy smaller cars: the average weight of the ten most popular private cars in 2025 was some 800 kg less than that of the ten most popular company cars. However, the average Life Cycle Impact of those ten company cars is still slightly less than that of the ten private cars. And this has everything to do with the ten company cars being fully electric.
If there’s one thing to conclude from all this, it’s that when measuring the environmental impact of cars, one should take into account their use, the production phase, and the materials used. The Life Cycle Impact score makes this tangible for cars.
