Published on March 14, 2008
Slide1: Daniel Sperling Professor and Director email@example.com IPIECA October 13, 2004 Institute of Transportation Studies University of California, Davis (Passenger) Transport Policy and Climate Change What I Will Say: What I Will Say I. Tends Headed in Wrong Direction (unsustainable?!) (a review) More carbon emissions, vehicle travel (esp rapid in developing countries) Next 50 years is very problematic II. Many Transport Strategies and Options Technical efficiency can offset increasing driving Non-carbon fuels necessary to significantly reduce GHGs Many compelling options in rapidly expanding economies III. Revolutionary Transformations Needed in Policy and Technology to Reduce GHG Reductions Climate change is weaker “driver” in transport than other sectors Freight story is similar – increasing travel and fuel use, with few alternatives being seriously pursued. Slide3: Source : International Energy Agency, 2000 REALITY: CO2 Emissions Increasing (Worldwide and US), with Increasing Share From Transport Slide4: Abundant “Oil” But Being “Re-carbonized” – Such as Alberta Tar Sands Vehicle travel continues to increase -- faster than population (2%/yr US; faster elsewhere): Vehicle travel continues to increase -- faster than population (2%/yr US; faster elsewhere) Lane-miles +16% Population +29% Slide6: … and US Vehicle Fuel Economy is Flat Source: Heavenrich, R.M., and K.H. Hellman. 2003 Slide7: Fuel Economy is Being Traded for Weight, Power and Performance in the US market (LDVs) Source: Hellman and Heavenrich, EPA 2003 Slide8: 4.5´ longer, 2´ higher than Hummer. For sale Sept 2004! Navistar ad says: “POSSIBLY TOO MUCH TRUCK . LIKE THAT’S A PROBLEM.” If trends continue, this will be the SUV of the future … Navistar SUV Slide9: Efficiency Innovation is Strong, Increasing 1-2%/yr (US light vehicles) – but not enough to overcome travel increases Policy and prices matters! Private desires vs public interest GHG trends are even more “problematic” in developing world: GHG trends are even more “problematic” in developing world Vehicles and travel are increasing rapidly The New Reality for Personal Vehicles in Developing Countries: The New Reality for Personal Vehicles in Developing Countries Personal transport is now available at low cost and therefore at very low incomes. The result is greater mobility in developing countries, with rapidly increasing energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (and traffic congestion, traffic deaths, and pollution). Slide12: China Indonesia Laos India Slide13: $2300 $3400 $700 In China, rural vehicle prod‘n is greater than conventional car and truck prod’n (over 3 million vehs/yr) (with huge benefits for development) Transport Energy & GHG Emissions Will Increase up to 7 Fold in Some Regions in Next 20 Years: Transport Energy & GHG Emissions Will Increase up to 7 Fold in Some Regions in Next 20 Years Source: Sperling and Salon, 2002 (Pew) While vehicle use soars, mass transit declines (virtually everywhere) : While vehicle use soars, mass transit declines (virtually everywhere) Source: Kenworthy and Laube (1999) Public transport share of motorized passenger kilometers And Urban Population Densities are Falling Everywhere : And Urban Population Densities are Falling Everywhere Source: Demographia (2001). The point is …: The point is … GHG and oil trends for transportation are headed in the wrong direction – virtually everywhere in world. More vehicles and vehicle travel due to increasing income and deteriorating transit, in concert with sprawling land use Vehicles are larger and more powerful Fuels are re-carbonizing These are robust trends. There is no evidence these trends will change – barring catastrophes or major perturbations of some sort. Slide18: Source : IEA, 2000 Demand for more and larger vehicles is closely linked to income. Is this an ironclad relationship? USA Slide19: Car ownership rates can vary widely, even at similar incomes … Beijing has 2-3 times more cars per capita than Shanghai (1.8 million vs 800,000), with less income. (And Delhi, with far less income, has even more vehicles per capita!). There is not a fixed relationship between income and car ownership. Policy makes a difference! How to Reduce GHG Emissions (and avoid road paralysis)??: Reduce vehicle travel (demand management and urban form) … ineffective in US Improve conventional technology (more energy efficient vehicles) … diverted to “private benefits” in US Introduce advanced (electric) powertains and low-carbon fuels In developing countries, motivations for change are road construction costs, air pollution, and oil dependency (frequently in this order). How to Reduce GHG Emissions (and avoid road paralysis)?? Policy Framework to Restrain GHGs : Policy Framework to Restrain GHGs Regulation Market Direct instruments investment Vehicle Efficiency Fuel Choice Mode Choice Travel Activity Vehicle Load This is the easy part. The hard part is devising and implementing specific and effective actions for each region. CO2 Equivalent GHG Emissions (Full Energy Cycle): CO2 Equivalent GHG Emissions (Full Energy Cycle) Grams/ Grams/ Vehicle-Km Passenger-Km Car (2.5 passengers) 300 120 Small Motorcycle (two-stroke) (1.2 pass) 120 100 Small Motorcycle (four-stroke) (1.2 pass) 70 60 Rail Transit n.a. 50 Diesel Bus (40 pass) 1000 25 India/China Heavily utilized buses have much lower GHG emissions per passenger-km than any other motorized mode. Slide23: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Per Km, Relative to Gasoline-Powered ICE, Full Energy Cycle Fuel/Feedstock % Change Fuel Cells, Hydrogen with Solar Power -90 to –85 Ethanol from Cellulose -90 to –40 BEVs, Natural Gas Plants -60 to –25 Hybrid EV -40 to -10 Diesel -25 to -15 BEVs, current U.S. power mix -20 to 0 Gasoline - Actual impacts could vary considerably. These estimates reflect a large number of assumptions and should be treated as illustrative. Technology is key for large reductions in GHGs, relatively more so in OECD (where vehicle use is growing more slowly) Modes of Travel: Modes of Travel Bus/metro Jitneys, Motorcycles Walking, Bicycling Cars Mode Split Many modes of travel, each with unique attributes. The challenge is to create incentives, public investment, and rules that lead to “efficient” use of modes. Income GHG Policy Initiatives in Japan, EU, China, and California: GHG Policy Initiatives in Japan, EU, China, and California Japanese have fuel economy requirements that reduce new-vehicle fuel consumption by more than 20% by 2010 -- based on “top-of-class” rules. EU has a voluntary agreement with automakers that reduce CO2 emissions of light duty cars by 25% by 2008. China and California have proposed rules to reduce GHGs and fuel consumption But these rules and laws at best only offset increases in light duty vehicle travel. Slide26: Diesel Cars Becoming Common in Europe Low Carbon Alt Fuel Choices?: Low Carbon Alt Fuel Choices? Most Promising Cellulosic ethanol (trees, switch grass, etc) Battery electric vehicles (grid electricity) Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (fossil, renewable) Other? “3rd rail” electricity (overhead, pavement, rail) Fuel cells that reform etoh/meoh on-board Slide28: Source: Dan Sturges, UC Davis … a new idea with great potential to reduce travel ... applying telematics to create new modes and increase intermodalism. Findings: Developing Countries: Findings: Developing Countries Economies and populations of many cities are growing at unprecedented rates and personal vehicles are often available at relatively low cost. Rapid motorization and large increases in transport-related GHGs are unavoidable in near and medium term future. Relationship between car ownership and income is NOT fixed. (Income is primary force of motorization, but much variation in veh ownership between cities/countries at similar income levels.) Policy and investment decisions with far reaching implications must be made quickly, or consequences could be catastrophic. Many sensible policies and strategies available to slow motorization and GHGs in near and medium term. Slide31: Many strategies for reducing GHGs are also attractive transportation, economic, environmental, and social strategies. Strong local expertise and strong commitment to planning and management are needed to meet transportation challenges (and restrain GHG emissions). (Even with greatest sophistication and best managers, choices are not obvious. Blind copying of other cities in most cases would be ineffective.) Findings: Developing Countries (cont’d) Suggested Strategies and Policies: Suggested Strategies and Policies Manage growth in vehicle use and vehicle size (with “carrots” and “sticks”) (feebates, congestion pricing, HOT lanes, etc) Energetically pursue conventional and unconventional alternatives to current car usage and ownership patterns (BRT, “new mobility”) Coordinate land use, energy, environmental, and industrial policy Pursue enhanced technologies such as 4-stroke motorbikes in LDCs, hybrids, and fuel cells Adopt rules and market instruments to reduce oil use and GHGs Preserve attractiveness of non-motorized options (esp LDCs) Expand R&D on clean energy R&D (pubic and private) OECD: Social Values versus Economics: OECD: Social Values versus Economics FACTS: US/OECD can “afford” high levels of energy consumption Fossil energy is abundant Mobility (accessibility) is highly valued It is “easier” and less expensive to reduce GHGs in other sectors Result is slow adoption of “green” transport technologies, and high demand for large, powerful vehicles in US But if we believe these decisions are unacceptable, then what decision/policy framework should be used?