Noise and air quality action plans and mitigation measures. Núria Castell and Núria Blanes

Transcription

1 Noise and air quality action plans and mitigation measures Núria Castell and Núria Blanes EIONET Workshop, Bern,

2 Objectives Compare action plans and measures for both air quality and noise related to road traffic. Identify co-benefit and antagonistic measures. Assess effectiveness of measures for AQ and noise. Improve knowledge and awareness on AQ and noise co-management. 2

3 Why is important Traffic is an important source of noise and air pollution Same group of citizens are exposed to high levels of noise and air pollution Scientific evidences support the harmful effect on health of noise and air pollution. Some of the measures to abate noise can also be beneficial to reduce air pollution and vice-versa Need to avoid measures that are good for one and prejudicial for the other Need for Cooperation and Co-management to get a Cobenefit 3

4 Methodology Selection of the cities Organize, translate and evaluate the information Create a list of common and specific abatement measures First qualitative estimation of the co-benefit Documented quantification of the effect of identified measures, after implementation 4

5 Selection of the cities Selection of cities from the 12 participating in the Air Pilot Selection based in the Action Plans submitted for noise 5

6 Action plans for noise Country Urban areas (Air Implementation Pilot) Complete noise action plan Summary Language Complete noise action plan Summary Language AT Vienna Documents YES German Documents YES/Old template/files missing German BE Antwerp YES YES Flemish BG Plovdiv NO YES Bulgarian CZ Prague NO YES/Template not used English and Czech DE Berlin YES NO German ES Madrid YES YES Spanish FR Paris IE Dublin Documents NO English NO/Summary Summary English IT Milan LT Vilnius NO YES Lithuanian RO Ploiesti SE Malmo NO YES/Template not used Swedish YES YES Swedish 6

7 Groups of abatement measures Emission technological measures Measures on the propagation path Traffic management Socio-Economic measures Land use and urban planning General measures 7

8 Co-benefit: qualitative evaluation Emission technological measures Noise AQ Cleaner vehicles technologies (hybrid, electric, hydrogen) Noise emission regulations ++ Low noise tyres Air quality emission regulations ++ Retrofit (e.g. use of diesel particulate matter filters) to newer EURO stds Reduce use of studded tires + ++ (PM) Intensification of street cleaning ++ + (PM) 8

9 Co-benefit: qualitative evaluation Measures on the propagation path Noise AQ Screens, sound barriers, noise barriers + (+) Dams + Cuttings + Embankments + Tunnels + + High low frequency isolation + Low barriers using natural materials + + Buildings as noise barriers + (+) Noise insulation at buildings + (+) 9

10 Co-benefit: qualitative evaluation Traffic management Noise AQ By-pass roads, traffic re-routing, park and ride ++ + Replacement of road surfaces to low noise surfaces + Pedestrian crossings? Speed limits and traffic calming measures ++ + Traffic bans, Low-emission zones Improve traffic flow (traffic light coordination). Calming green waves + ++ Street design, street network, roundabouts + (+) Driving behaviour (eco-driving)?? Truck restrictions. Rerouting heavy traffic + ++ Noise reducing devices? 10

11 Co-benefit: qualitative evaluation Socio-economic measures Noise AQ Optimisation of the modal split + + Reduction of freight transport, new concepts of distribution of goods (+) + Congestion charging scheme + ++ Increase the occupancy, workloads of the vehicles (e.g. Car sharing or car pooling) Subsidies/ price strategies in favour of cleaner vehicles Managing mobility demand, intelligent traffic management ? Low-noise night time delivery?? 11

12 Co-benefit: qualitative evaluation Land use and urban planning Noise AQ Avoidance of motorised traffic Land use planning + + Parks embedded in Q-Zones, quiet areas ++ + Telematics (overall range of measures) + Identification of hot spots (noise & AQ) (+) (+) Noise & AQ zoning (+) (+) 12

13 Co-benefit: qualitative evaluation General measures Noise AQ Increase public awareness (+) (+) Avoid the generation of additional traffic + + Promote public transport and encourage cycling and walking /10/2014 type the subject in footer (View Header and Footer) 13

14 First results (on going work) Dublin Madrid Berlin 14

15 Dublin: common measures Emission technological measures Facilitate the introduction of electric charge points (only mentioned in Noise Action Plan) Traffic management Park and ride Speed limits and Traffic calming measures Improve traffic flow 15

16 Dublin: common measures Socio-Economic measures Optimization of the modal split Reduction of freight transport Car sharing General measures Promote public transport and encourage cycling and walking Shift the split in traffic from private motor traffic towards more public transport 06/10/

17 Dublin: Examples Smarter travel and Dublin bike rental scheme Fiscal measures to discourage the use of car Actions to ensure alternatives to the car Better, safer cycle routes. Cycle-friendly Integration of public transport and cycling 450 bikes at 40 stations. 2.6 million bicycle journeys since 2009 Programs like cycle to work, green schools No quantitative assessment of the impact 06/10/

18 Dublin: Examples Adaptive transport management (ATC) Dynamically adjust traffic signal timings and phasing in response to traffic conditions ATC use data collected by traffic detectors: flow and queuing data ATC can also use air quality data as input. Reduce volume of traffic entering an area with high pollutant levels (not implemented yet) No quantitative assessment of the impact 06/10/

19 Madrid: common measures Emission technological measures Regulations on taxis, renewal of municipal fleet, promotion of electrical cars Measures on the propagation path M30 underground and with sound barriers 06/10/

20 Madrid: common measures Traffic management Speed limits and calming measures (only mentioned in noise action plan) LEZ and traffic restriction in residential areas (only in AQ Plan) More pedestrian streets Eco-driving (only in AQ Plan) 06/10/

21 Madrid: common measures Socio-economic measures Optimisation of the modal split: better infrastructure for buses, park and take public transport facilities Car pooling (only mentioned in AQ Plan) Prices strategies for parking (only in AQ Plan) Improvement of the mobility information (only in AQ Plan) 06/10/

22 Madrid: common measures General measures Increase public awareness Promote public transport and encourage cycling and walking 06/10/

23 Madrid: examples Discouragement and restriction of the use of private motor vehicles Low emission zone 100% buses equipped with clean technologies Restrictions in the parking 10 % higher prices in LEZ Favour cleaner vehicles Areas of residential priority (access only residents, public transport, ambulances) 3 neighbourhoods, 155 ha, dwellers Pedestrian streets and extension of sidewalks 32.7% increase in , new in planning 23

24 Madrid: examples Freight transport and distribution of goods Voluntary agreements to renew commercial fleets 29 companies have joined Mobility advantages for cleaner vehicles Reduced prices in the parking places More sustainable loading and unloading Different times depending on the emissions Advantages for cleaner vehicles 24

25 Berlin: measures (only AQ Plan) Emission technological measures Cleaner vehicles technologies Use of particle filters for bus and municipal fleet Traffic management Speed limits on major roads (30 km/h) LEZ Test pilot on traffic light coordination and speed limit Truck restrictions 25

26 Berlin: measures (only AQ Plan) Socio-economic measures Extension of parking spaces in high demand areas General measures Promote public transport and encourage cycling and walking 26

27 Berlin: examples Speed limits on major roads and hotspots From 2009 speed limit of 30 km/h for major road sections 130 km for the whole day 100 km temporally restricted The 30 km/h was made for noise protection by court decisions 27

28 Berlin: examples Impact of the speed limit Urban motorway A107, vehicles/day Local PM10 decrease by 30% Local NOx decrease by 18% Local NO2 decrease by 15% Scenario modelling 375 sections, 52.3 km Reduction of 30% for PM due to local-traffic Reduction of 15% for NO2 due to local-traffic 28

29 Conclusions The analysis of Dublin, Madrid and Berlin shows that the cities are implementing co-benefit measures. It is not clear to what extend there is a joint effort in the design and implementation of air quality and noise plans. Only Berlin has a quantitative evaluation of some of the measures. Next step will be to include more cities and To do a quantitative assessment of the benefit for noise and air quality of specific measures (based also in literature). 29

30 Thank you for your attention Nuria Castell, 30