Transcription

1 Task 1: Development of a better understanding of the scale of co-benefits associated with the transport sector GHG reduction policies Nikolas Hill, AEA 28 November 2011, Diamant Conference Center, Brussels 1

2 Overview Introduction Overview and approach to the selected cobenefits considered in Task 1 Focus on elements not covered previously: Energy security Ad-hoc task looking at congestion Questions and Discussion 2

3 Introduction Task 1 Previous EU Transport GHG: Routes to 2050? study indicated cobenefits of policies to reduce transport GHG could be significant Further research required EU Transport GHG: Routes to 2050?: Initial work on energy security; Development of functionality in SULTAN tool allowing for high-level assessment of potential NO X and particulate matter impacts of scenarios However, recognise a need to quantify the benefits as far as possible Task 1 focus on four areas of co-benefits: Air Quality; Noise; Health; and Energy Security. (+ Ad-hoc paper on Congestion) 3

4 Introduction Task 1 Objective: to develop a better understanding of the cobenefits associated with possible transport sector GHG reduction policies Outputs: Develop a better understanding of air quality co-benefits; Development of an understanding of the noise co-benefits of specific relevant GHG abatement policies; Understanding of the health co-benefits of specific GHG abatement policies; Estimates of the energy security implications of different abatement options, using new quantitative data for the key assessment criteria; Identification of the relative values of the different co-benefits; and Paper presenting the task findings from all of the above, and will provide the basis of a chapter in the final report. Partners: AEA (Lead); CE Delft and TNO. 4

5 Co-benefits of GHG reduction policies Recap from June large stakeholder conference: Air Quality Noise Health (physical exercise and accidents) 5

6 Air Quality AQ co-benefits widely reported: more detail on selected elements Review of developments with respect to air pollutant emissions from transport in the BAU scenario. Consider full EU fleet penetration of Euro 6/VI Possible development beyond Euro 6/VI Review of development of non-exhaust air pollutant emissions for conventional and non-conventional vehicles (PM ~50%): Regenerative braking systems reduced PM 0% Tyre wear Potential impacts of limited number of selected GHG reduction options on overall air pollutant emissions from transport: Economic instruments; infrastructure and spatial policy; traffic management and speed; and information/awareness measures. 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% Petrol passenger cars Euro 5 Euro 4 Euro 3 Euro 2 Euro 1 Pre-Euro 6

7 Air Quality Review of potential impacts of technical and non-technical GHG reduction options (new propulsion systems, energy carriers, road transport): Indirect emissions from production of electricity and hydrogen; Hybrid vehicles Use of biofuels Measures affecting driving profiles Non-technical policy measures (economic instruments, infrastructure and spatial policy, traffic management and speed, information/awareness measures) Next Step: Bring elements together in more in-depth quantitative exploration of the potential AQ impacts of a limited number of selected transport GHG reduction options (via SULTAN scenarios) 7

8 Environmental Noise Environmental Noise Directive (2002/49/EC) adopted in 2002 to tackle noise problems across the EU MS required to produce noise maps for agglomerations and major transport links, including roads, railways and airports Noise generation from road/rail influenced by: Vehicle type (and propulsion technology) Speed Traffic intensity and modal split Road/Track type, and Road/Rail surface conditions Time and route of operation is also a factor that determines exposure levels (e.g. night time freight haulage issues) 8

9 Environmental Noise Noise impacts of road and rail and exposed population can be substantially reduced by all policies that reduce: Vehicle speeds Engine speeds Traffic intensity Policies reducing GHG in urban areas via access restriction have potentially large and immediate traffic noise reductions Noise reduction impacts of EVs, HEVs and FCEVs take 12+ years for full effects and principally benefit urban areas Lower level benefits of such powertrains for rail, due to predominance of rolling noise 9

10 Health Health-related co-benefits: Improved air quality due to lower levels of pollutant emissions from transport; Reduced noise levels due to reduced noise from transport; Reductions in the number and severity of traffic accidents; Increases in the amount of physical exercise taken by people due to a shift in non-motorised transport modes (walking and cycling); and Indirect effects related to the life cycle effects of vehicles, energy carriers or infrastructure. Air quality and noise covered in subtasks of Task 1 and life cycle effects covered in Task 2 Focus on health impacts from accidents and physical exercise Analyse: The way GHG policies for transport induces these effected; and Impacts of these effects on human health 10

11 Health - Accidents Speed limits: Probably result in lower accident risks and less severe accidents Road charging: Contribute to improvement in traffic safety ex-ante studies on road pricing in the Netherlands (no statistically significant results for London/Stockholm studies) Vehicle standards: Standards leading to reduction in vehicle mass will likely result in lower severity of accidents important driver is decrease in mass difference Hybrid/electric car introduction on a mass scale may result in higher accident rates, due to lower audibility by pedestrians and cyclists Options stimulating shift to slow modes /public transport: Shift from car to bicycle increase in fatalities/injuries Shift from car to public transport slight improvement in traffic safety. 11

12 Health - Physical Exercise Health effects of inactivity include mortality, cardiovascular diseases, Type 2 diabetes, cancer and obesity lowers productivity, results in healthcare costs When more active transport modes are introduced more people tend to walk/cycle Quantification and monetisation of health effects of physical (in)activity range from /km health benefit Indicative estimates on benefit for 10% inactive EU population becoming active are 9-32 billion /year Health benefits of increased physical activity are therefore substantial and should be taken into account in carrying out cost-effectiveness assessment of policies 12

13 Energy Security Previous project report: Energy Security and the Transport Sector Overview of energy security issues relating to the transport sector; Extent to which the supply of energy for the transport sector is secure (qualitative current/future situation); Review of existing approaches to quantifying energy security benefits associated with GHG abatement options; Development of a new framework approach for quantifying the energy security benefits/impacts of transport sector GHG abatement options. Full quantification not possible semi-quantitative analysis using a qualitative scoring system allowing GHG options to be ranked This new project sub-task concerned with: Improving the quantitative datasets for a range of parameters; and Investigating the impacts of energy security of using different methods to produce alternative transport fuels 13

14 Co-benefits of GHG reduction policies Energy Security 14

15 Energy Security Approach Policy options (fuel types) Oil derived liq. fuels LPG Natural gas Biofuels Hydrogen Electricity Demand reduction The MCA framework Energy security factors a) Linkage between price of new energy source and oil price b) Proportion of vehicle fleet able to use new energy source* c) Cost of new energy source compared to oil d) Surplus of supply capacity over demand* e) Susceptibility of new energy source to disruptions f) Resource concentration for supply Timescale * Indicator is under review 15

16 Energy Security Link of fuel price with oil price a) Linkage between price of new energy source and oil price The chosen metric was oil cost factors (OCF) Ratio showing the effect of a percentage change in oil price on the price of the new energy source. Normalised score Hydrogen Electricity Biodiesel Bioethanol Natural gas 30 Oil-derived 20 liquid fuels, LPG 10 Energy demand reduction

17 Energy Security Proportion of fleet compatible b) Proportion of vehicle fleet able to use new energy source* Challenge : making comparisons across modes/different vehicle sizes Proposal: utilise gross tonne-km metric based on vkm activity and typical GVW Rate of technological development Policy frameworks which support development Deployment of alternative fuel vehicles Rate of withdrawal of incompatible vehicles Proportion of vehicle fleet able to use alternative f uel * This metric is currently still under development and will be implemented following the Focus Group 17

18 Energy Security Cost of energy relative to oil c) Cost of new energy source compared to oil A key element of energy security is affordability, which is assessed in this indicator. With rising energy costs, affordable prices have become a central element of energy security concerns Normalised Price (excl. tax) 100 Normalised score Jet fuel Biofuel Ship fuel Gasoline Diesel CNG LPG Electricity 0 Hydrogen

19 Energy Security Surplus of supply capacity d) Surplus of supply capacity over demand This metric is currently still under development and will be implemented following the Focus Group Need to analyse the global capacity/stores by fuel vs expected demand A sufficient fuel would constitute a large-scale source not limited by finite global stores. Current rates oil production rates sufficient, but capacity must increase to meet the anticipated future demand growth depends on the remaining reserves of oil and the capacity of oil companies to increase the rate of extraction 19

20 Energy Security Susceptibility to disruptions e) Susceptibility of new energy source to disruptions Scores sourced from the World Energy Council (2007) Expert members of the Mobility Specialist Study Group ranked the reliability and security Normalised score Energy demand reduction Electricity Biofuel Oil-derived liquid fuels Hydrogen LPG Natural gas

21 Energy Security Resource concentration for supply f) Resource concentration for supply Geographical concentration of resources endows regions with a certain amount of market power which could adversely affect energy security in terms of affordability and sufficiency. Normalised ** 100 Hydrogen Electricity Natural gas Oil-derived liquid fuels & LPG ** Current source is 2006 study to be updated consistent with wider project analysis Biofuel 21

22 Energy Security Next Steps Develop a suitable weighting for the combined indicators % energy security indicators by option based on a multicriteria analysis (MCA) using all the normalised scores Initial proposal is for this MCA to be based on an unweighted average of each factor, so that a single overall score will be assigned to each fuel. Assessment complemented by further visual comparisons, e.g.: Linkage to oil Resource concentration price Fleet readiness Surplus supply capacity Fuel Cost Susceptibility to disruptions 22

23 Next Steps Update and finalise report chapters on co-benefits (August 2011). Start to develop final chapter: Indications of the relative values of the different co-benefits. Not possible to monetise all of the co-benefits to compare values develop semi-quantitative method, e.g. MCA Take into account evidence on the scale and importance of each cobenefit to the wider community of EU Draw upon previous research on monetised benefits and impacts to develop relative ranking for different co-benefits. Take on board updated SULTAN and scenarios (e.g. NOx, PM and Energy Security, once they have been integrated). 23

24 Co-benefits of GHG reduction policies Ad-hoc Paper on Congestion: Interaction of GHG policy for transport with congestion and accessibility policies 24

25 Interactions with congestion and accessibility policies Objective: examine the potential interaction between GHG policy and reducing congestion and improving accessibility Focus is on road transport Includes an exploration of how GHG and congestion policies could be combined effectively Transport Policy Assessment covers: i. Link between GHG and congestion ii. Mechanisms used Reducing road congestion Overlap in policy fields Decarbonisation of transport sector iii. Assessment of policy instruments (win-win vs win-loose) iv. Recommendations 25

26 Congestion and GHG: The link between GHG and congestion Congestion is the impedance vehicles impose on each other, due to the speed-flow relationship, in conditions where the use of a transport system approaches its capacity. (Schneider et al., 2002) link between congestion and GHG emissions: Total amount GHG emissions in the transport sector = total amount of vehicle kilometres x GHG emissions per kilometre Impact of traffic speed on: the CO 2 emissions per kilometre driven the amount of vehicle kilometres Combination of the two effects: 26

27 Congestion and GHG: Options for reducing congestion or GHG emissions Options for congestion reduction and their GHG impacts Enlarging the maximum capacity at the bottleneck Reducing the traffic volume at the bottleneck Impacts on congestion from reducing GHG emissions 27

28 Congestion and GHG: Analysis of policy instruments Considered a range of types of policy instruments and assessed impacts on GHG emissions and congestion: Regulation Economic Instruments Infrastructure and Spatial Planning Speed and Traffic Management Information and Communication Other instruments to stimulate innovation and development 28

29 Congestion and GHG: Analysis of policy instruments Policy instruments GHG Emissions Congestion Win-win and win-neutral policies Fuel tax/ets CO 2 regulation for road vehicles +++ +/- CO 2 regulation for non-road vehicles +++? Differentiated kilometre charging Flat kilometre charges (lower) speed limits (strictly enforced) ++ + Congestion charges Favouring less GHG intensive modes in traffic management + + Policies for advanced distribution concepts + + Urban planning/spatial planning + + Parking policy + + Advanced traffic management systems + + Energy and CO 2 -labelling of road vehicles + 0 Green public procurement + 0 Fleet tests and demonstration programmes + 0 Eco-driving for individuals and organisations +? New non-road infrastructure ++/- + Loose-win policies New road infrastructure Rewarding congestion avoidance - ++

30 Congestion and GHG: Summary and Recommendations Win-neutral policies: Many instruments to tackle GHG only have small impact on congestion (e.g. technology options that are not tied to location or time) Win-loose policies: Instruments aimed at reducing congestion often have potential for increasing GHG (mostly related to capacity expansion) Consider short-term (flow) and long-term impacts (induced demand) Win-win policies: Taxes and charges make car travel less attractive Shift to more footprint efficient modes (e.g. bus) or non-road modes Policy implications: Take into account risk of adverse effects in the decision making process Focus on policy instruments related to the reduction of congestion, since congestion instruments might significantly increase GHG Where infrastructure expansion is considered, need to investigate whether the same congestion can be achieved without GHG increase 30

31 Any questions or comments?

32 Development of a better understanding of the scale of co-benefits associated with the transport sector GHG reduction policies Nikolas Hill, AEA 28 November 2011, Diamant Conference Center, Brussels 32