Clean Air Scorecard for systematic assessment and improvement of AQM in cities

Transcription

1 Scorecard for systematic assessment and improvement of AQM in cities Mylene Cayetano Air Quality Specialist Asia Better Air Quality 2012, Hong Kong PolyU 5 December

2 Air pollution sources and AQ impacts

3 PM10 Concentration (µg/m3) Benchmarking of Asian Cities Beijing, China Annual average particulate matter (PM10) data from #cities in developing Asian countries source: CAI-Asia Developing cities Developed cities WHO IT-1, 70µg/m 3 WHO IT-2, 50µg/m 3 WHO IT-3, 30µg/m 3 WHO AQG, 20µg/m Number of cities (Total: 310 cities) Karachi, Pakistan Manila, Philippines Jakarta, Indonesia Delhi, India

4 Benchmarking of Asian Cities Of over 400 cities included in the benchmarking, only around 300 cities have complete data for PM 10, SO 2 and NO 2 for

5 Need for a Assessment Tool Tools exist to measure general environmental performance No methodology for an objective and comprehensive assessment of a city s management of air pollutants and GHG emissions and identifies improvement areas. Environmental Performance OECD Environmental Performance Review CO 2 Scorecard 5

6 Gaps in Previous Assessments Pollutants covered was limited GHGs and toxics not included Pollution sources heavily biased for mobile More focused on AQM capacity Questions regarding AQ policies and actions was limited Does not guide cities on identifying priority improvement areas and actual measures cities can apply to strengthen and improve their air quality and GHG emissions management 6

7

8 Scorecard Tool Version 2.0 Air Pollution and Health 8 Assesses air pollution levels in cities relative to WHO Clean guideline Air values Policies and Clean and Air interim targets Actions Score Developed based on Air Pollution (API) concept covers PM 10, PM 2.5, SO 2, CO, NO 2, Pb and O 3 Minimum monitoring data required: PM 10 data Non-monitoring and non-reporting: unknown air quality Management capacity

9 Air Pollution and Health : PM 10 Categories Score Band Concentration Levels PM 10, annual average (µg/m 3 ) Basis Excellent WHO annual AQG & IT-3 Good to 50 IT-2 Moderate to 70 IT-1 Poor to 100 Very Poor to 150 Critical and above Current Data for 185 cities (average: µg/m 3 ) Standard deviation is around 50 µg/m3 *WHO annual guideline for PM 10 : 20 µg/m 3 9

10 Scorecard Tool Version 2.0 Air Pollution and Health Management capacity Policies and Actions Score 10 Assesses city s capacity to (1) determine emission sources and their contribution (2) assess air quality status (3) estimate impacts (4) reduce and manage air pollution and GHG emissions through an institutional and policy framework and financing.

11 Scorecard Tool Version 2.0 Air Pollution and Health Management capacity Policies and Actions Score 11 Assesses existence and enforcement of national and local policies and actions to address air pollutants and GHG emissions from : mobile, stationary, area and other sources.

12 Scorecard Tool Version 2.0 Air Pollution and Health 12 Strengths and gaps in air quality and GHG emissions management of the city Clean for Air the assessment Management Policies and year. capacity Actions Proposed Co-benefits policies and measures Recommended actions to improve capacity and policies/measures and to integrate air quality and GHG management, categorized into short and long-term actions Barriers to applying the co-benefits approach, lessons learned, and recommendations. Score

13 Scorecard Tool Version 2.0 Air Pollution and Health Management capacity Policies and Actions Score Categories Scores Fully Developed Maturing Emerging Developing Underdeveloped

14 Case Study: Bangkok, Thailand Score for Bangkok as of August 2010: 66.2 Good 1 - Air Pollution and Health Pollutant Score Category PM Excellent PM Moderate O Excellent SO Good Pb 32.0 Excellent NO Poor CO 32.3 Excellent Final Score Band Category 1 - Air Pollution and Health Moderate 2 - Management Capacity Good 3 - Policies and Actions 23.0 Good Notes: 2009 data Data source: Report on Status of Air Quality and Noise Management B.E (in Thai), PCD, Bangkok Data is from: ambient air quality monitoring stations Data is average of of monitoring stations, but only 2 stations for PM2.5. ABACAS SIM-Air BenMAP AIRNow HEI 14

15 Linkages with other tools Management If score is weak in: Sub index 1 Sub index 2 Sub index 3 Go to: SIM-Air EPA, AIRNow BENMap, Hedley Env l Policies Sub index 1 ABACAS

16 Scorecard Implementation Completed On-going/Pipeline 9 cities including Bangkok, Jakarta, Colombo, Kathmandu, Metro Manila, etc. 3 Cities in Guangdong Province Jiangsiu Province 5 more cities in China Hangzhou, Jinan Vizag, India reports of Jinan and Hangzhou

17 Advantages of Scorecard Allow cities to benchmark themselves and know strengths and gaps in their air quality and GHG emissions management capacity and policies Enable cities to identify concrete policies and measures they can adopt to address the gaps in their air quality and GHG emissions management Applicable to many cities secondary cities to mega-cities scale

18 Summary Entry point for organizations who wants to work with cities Can be performed In order for organizations to convince cities of their AQM needs. Good starting point to assessaqm of cities who wants to work together through twinning. Advantage for developers for easy integration of tools to be applied to cities. Strongly recommend to apply the Clean air scorecard prior to other tool application. Guidance for continuous improvement of their AQM.

19 Further Work on Score Card Classification of cities and weighting of scores (indicators can be tailored depending on the classification of cities) topographical [valley vs. plains] land-use [predominantly industrial cities, etc.] Economic [GDP] Large geographical scope of metropolitan cities (urban conglomeration) Accounting of programs and measures conducted in small area/s of the city Year of applicability of studies (e.g., should a 2003 health impact study still be considered?) 19

20 Further Work on Score Card Coordination process among different stakeholders in conducting the assessment Should not only rely on environment departments but also requires involvement of health, transport, industry, etc. Strengthening indicators for some topic areas, e.g. area and other sources / transboundary capacity to estimate implementation of policies addressing air pollution Allocation for indicators for regional AQM Indoor air quality Process for interpretation AND communication of results 20

21 For more information: Asia Center Unit 3505 Robinsons-Equitable Tower ADB Avenue, Pasig City Metro Manila 1605 Philippines Asia China Office 901A Reignwood Building, No. 8 YongAnDongLi Jianguomenwai Avenue Beijing China Asia India Office india@cleanairasia.org 1st Floor, Building No. 4 Thyagraj Nagar Market, Lodhi Colony New Delhi India Asia Country Networks China. India. Indonesia. Nepal. Pakistan. Philippines. Sri Lanka. Vietnam Asia Center Members 236 Asia Partnership Members Cities Environment ministries and government agencies Development agencies and foundations Non-government organizations Academic and research institutions Private sector companies and associations Asia Donors in 2012 Asian Development Bank Cities Development Initiative for Asia ClimateWorks Foundation DHL/IKEA/UPS Energy Foundation Fredskorpset Norway Fu Tak Iam Foundation German International Cooperation (GIZ) Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) Institute for Transport Policy Studies Institute for Transportation and Development Policy International Union for Conservation of Nature L'Agence Française de Développement (AFD) MAHA Pilipinas Shell Rockefeller Brothers Fund Shakti Foundation Shell Foundation United Nations Environment Program Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles (UNEP PCFV) USAID CEnergy Veolia World Bank 21