Transcript Lee Schipperucla06 - The UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy

Sustainable Transport and Carbon Emissions
in Mexico and China: Accomplishments and
Potential
Lee Schipper, Ph.D.
EMBARQ
October 2006
1
EMBARQ
• A catalyst for socially, financially, and
environmentally sound solutions to the
problems of urban mobility
2
EMBARQ
• Established as a unique center within World Resources Institute in
2002, EMBARQ is now the hub of a network of centers for
sustainable transport in developing countries.
• Shell Foundation and Caterpillar Foundation are EMBARQ’s Global
Strategic Partners, supporting EMBARQ projects worldwide
• Additional EMBARQ supporters include
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Hewlett Foundation
Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs
BP
US AID
Asian Development Bank
Energy Foundation
Blue Moon Fund
US Environmental Protection Agency
3
Sustainable Transport:
Mobility, Security, and Environment
• Economic Sustainability
– Affordable to users
– Attractive as business
– Each mode or fuel bears full social costs
• Social Sustainability
– Promotes access for all, not just a few
– Builds healthy and solid communities
• Environmental Sustainability
– Minimizes accidents and damage to human health
– Leaves no burdens for future generations
– Reduces greenhouse gas emissions – Not Yet
Governance is The Roof Over these Pillars
Integrating Mobility, Security, and Energy
4
Which Suggest Sustainable Transport?
5
World CO2 Emissions From Fuel
30000
Source: IEA
25000
15000
Sea and Aviation Bunkers
10000
OECD Transport ex Mexico
Non OECD Transport w/Mexico
5000
Non-Oecd non Transport
OECD Non Transport
20
03
20
01
19
99
19
97
19
95
19
93
19
91
19
89
19
87
19
85
19
83
19
81
19
79
19
77
19
75
19
73
0
19
71
MTonnes CO2
20000
6
Global CO2 Emissions from Fuel
• Developing World Share Rising
– Higher economic growth and urbanization
– Shift from renewable to fossil fuels
– Rapid industrialization, but more energy efficient
• Transport Share Rising Fastest
– Vehicles cheaper and cheaper, particularly 2 wheelers
– Urbanization driving more private transport, traveling longer
distances
– Globalization means more goods for int’l trade
• Developing Transport Share Rising Most
– Transport most urban – roads, infrastructure, cars
– Transport share of urban air pollution rising rapidly
– Efficiency falling from congestion, poor fuel
Oil Imports Remain a Concern in Third World
CO2 Not Yet A Reason to Stop These Developments
7
World CO2 Emissions Growth:
Transport and Other Contrasted
1990-2003
Source:
IEA
World, All Sectors
1971-1990
Non OECD Non Transport
Incl Mexico
OECD non Transport ex
Mexico
78
Air and Sea Bunkers
NON OECD Transport incl
Mexico
OECD Transport ex Mexico
-1%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
8
5%
The Bush Metric of Success–CO2/GDP
China Has Far Outpaced the US
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
China
US
Mexico
India
-10%
-20%
Changes in Carbon Dioxide/GDP Ratio 1990-2003
Source: IEA
-30%
-40%
Changes in Total Emissions 1990-2003
Changes in Per Capita Emissions 1990-2003
9
World Oil: The U.S. and China In Context
(All figures in per capita terms)
100
90
US Per Capita
Value = 100
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
GDP
US
Cars
Oil
China
Oil for Cars
Total CO2
ROW
U.S. increment in oil use for cars and light trucks
2002-2003 was half of China’s total in 200310
GHG and Transport: Contrasts between
Developed and Developing World
• Developed World
– Steady growth in individual cars since 1920s
– US, Canada change after 1970s, car saturation today
– EU, Japan approaching car saturation at lower level
• Developing World
– L. America – US patterns from 1960s
– OPEC countries – rapid rise in 1970s, 1980s
– Rest of Asia – two wheelers, buses, now cars?
• The Real Contrast – Time Perspective
– Latin America got US patterns, tech, castoffs
– Asia moving rapidly from castoffs to leaders?
– Asia ahead: Can look back on OECD developments
Why Does Asia. Lat. America Want to Look like OECD?
11
CO2 Emissions from Road Transport
10.00
US 60-03
UK 60-03
China 71-03
India 71-03
Japan 60-03
Mexico 71-03
Brazil 71-03
Turkey 60-03
Korea 65-03
Viet Nam 93-03
Tonnes CO2/Capita
1.00
0.10
Source: IEA
0.01
$0.1
$1.0
$10.0
GDP/Capita, $1000 USD (2000) PPP
12
$100.0
Emissions from Road Transport
• Two Groups of Countries
– “US Like” – High fuel/GDP (US, Mexico, Brazil)
– Europe/Japan Like
– Uncommitted – China, Viet Nam, Turkey
• Driving Factors
– Urbanization
– Fuel Prices – clear split (exception – Turkey)
– Presence of car industry
• Mitigating Factors
– Fuel Economy agreements, standards in OECD, China
– Rising oil prices (?) and concerns about energy security
– World-Wide agreement on CO2 in transport?
CO2 in Transport May be Restrained by High Oil
Prices, Congestion, and
13
Motorization in China and Mexico
Cars and personal light trucks - SUVs/ 1000 people
1000
Source: EMBARQ
100
United States 1910-2003
China 1987-2003
Korea 1970 - 2002
10
Japan 1965 - 2000
w. Germany 1960-1995
Mexico (1986-2000)
1
$1,000
$10,000
GDP Capita, 1995 USD (PPP)
$100,000
Is rapid urbanization in China and other countries
putting cities and cars on a collision course?
Mexican experience says yes.
14
GHG and Transport In Developing World
China and Mexico Contrasted
• Mexico - Oil Exporter (for how much longer?)
– High car ownership (>100/thousand), poor fuel economy
– Fuel prices higher than China, about US level
– Low urban shares of walking, cycles, cities stuffed
• China - Oil Importer now
– Low car ownership (<12/thousand)
– China fuel economy standards, but low fuel prices
– Cars concentrated in cities with high population densities
• The Real Contrast – time perspective
– Mexican cities built around cars, denser Chinese cities around feet
– Mexico influenced by US, China developing own path
– China moving on urban transport, car fuel economy
China Moving Earlier in its Development than Mexico
15
CASE STUDIES: CHINA AND MEXICO
What Happened and What Could Happen
• Mexico
– BRT System
– Real test – Can a huge city turn the corner?
• China
– Headed for Mexico congestion on far fewer
cars
– Not too late to change courses?
– Apply Mexico changes to Chinese cities?
16
Mexico City: Past Political Chaos
Hindered Sustainable Transport
•
•
•
•
•
•
Policy makers in silos: no
effective collaboration
Political neglect of the bus
system
Little integration of public
modes
Road cutting wide swaths
through residential
neighborhoods filled up rapidly
Little cooperation with
surrounding jurisdictions
Little involvement of NGOs or
the private sector
There was Little Change until EMBARQ Appeared.
17
Moving Mexico
Clean Bus Rapid Transit
• Bus Rapid Transit Moving 250 000 people/day
– 10 Min/trip time savings and modest fuel/CO2 reduction
– Profitable system based on new business model, not dirty minibuses
– Dozen of other Mexican cities want similar systems
• Conventional BRT Bus Technology at Minimal Cost
– Results show big improvements possible – if buses not stuck in traffic
– Tested ultra-low sulfur diesel and CNG in Euro 3 or better engines
– Tested two hybrids: modest fuel savings and local emissions reductions
• Retrofit Existing Buses with 15 PPM Sulfur Diesel
– 90% drop in particulate matter on newest buses – diesel particle filters
– Modest drop in NOx and PM on older buses - diesel oxidation catalysts
– Commitment by State Oil Co. to introduce ULSD sooner
Mexico City Proved Turnaround is Possible
Fuel and CO2 NOT the Driver
18
– Next Bus
19
Cars and Urban Transport in China:
Symbol for Much of the World?
•
Congestion: Cars and Other Traffic
•
•
•
•
Air Pollution: Too Many Vehicles
•
•
•
•
Buses and people stuck in traffic
Building more roads makes problem worse
Tough policies called for – by whom?
Enough old smokers to ruin air
New fuels, vehicles improving
Emissions from cars could offset
improvements
Traffic Safety: People First
•
•
•
Walkers, cyclists main victims
Too many kinds of traffic in same place,
unequal road space distribution
More cars and speed will kill more people
20
EMBARQ’s Scenarios for China
•
Base Case – China has Korean car/GDP ratio in 2020
–
–
–
•
Oil Saving Scenario – 40% as much oil, some CNG
–
–
–
•
120-160 million cars, 10,000-12,000 km/car
8-8.5 L/100 km if no new measures
Closer to 2 mn bbl/day oil in 2020
Japanese/Euro level of fuel prices
110-130 million cars, but less driving/car
Take into account fuel economy standards, some hybrids and CNG
Integrated Transport - Livable cities with good transport
–
–
–
Much lower car ownership and use– avoiding the plague
Very small cars (incl. slow electrics, hybrids) to avoid space and
congestion problems in cities
Serious BRT, Metro, car-use restraint, land-use planning – avoid Mexico
21
The Sustainability Challenge:
Cars and CO2 Emissions in 2020
CNG
100
120
100
Oil in Hybrids
80
Oil in Conventional Gasoline Cars
60
80
60
CO2 Emissions
20
20
20
10
rt
Tr
an
sp
o
In
t
eg
ra
te
d
O
A
oa
d
R
20
03
:
20
20
0
20
10
0
il
Sa
ve
d
20
20
20
20
20
10
40
he
ad
40
Sustainable Urban Mobility Saves Cities, Fuel, and
22
Above all, Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Total Carbon Emissions (Mn Tonnes)
Energy Use for Cars, by source, MTOE
Electricity, as Primary Energy
Transport Projects and CO2 Counting:
Difficult Bean Counting
•
Rush to Sell “CO2 Avoided” in Developing Projects
–
–
–
•
Various Mechanisms – in Order of Difficulty
–
–
–
•
Both fuels/vehicles and traffic changes (like BRT)
Most projects are small, changes within noise
Very difficult to measure or model changes
Mayors make feel-good pledges
Companies (including WRI) buy offsets
Countries buy “additional” options: Clean Dvpt. Mechanism
Additionality and CDM Projects – the Real Rub
–
–
–
Verification/Certification becomes expensive and time consuming
Few non-fuel transport projects truly “additional”
Danger of transport projects aimed at CDM, not good transport
23
Transport Project Outcomes:
Not always less carbon, hopefully better transport
Carbon
+
Carbon increase,
Worse transport
Carbon increase,
improved transport
-
+
Quality of transport
Carbon reduction,
Worse transport
Fuel, Emissions, Carbon reduction
Improved transport
24
Measurements Have to Continue Over Time
Example: Mexico City With or Without BRT

Baseline
(the contra -factual “without project” case)
Emissions
Impact:
Base-case
(Now)
Today
25000-46 000 T/year
Project line
(the factual “with project” case)
Time 
Dynamic Base-line & Project-line over time
After John Rogers, Trafalgar SA, Mexico
25
GHG Savings at $5/Ton in Mexico City:
Hypothetical Insurgentes Corridor Case
$160,000
$140,000
US$/year Saved
$120,000
Indirect effects from reduced
congestion on 50 000 cars/day @
10 mins/car
$100,000
$80,000
Direct Effects from Full New
buses
$60,000
$40,000
$20,000
$0
Yearly Savings- CO2
26
Fuel Savings ($340/ton):
Hypothetical Insurgentes Corridor Case
$4,500,000
$4,000,000
$3,500,000
US$/year Saved
$3,000,000
Indirect effects from
reduced congestion on 50
000 cars/day @ 10 mins/car
Direct Effects from Full
New buses
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
Yearly Savings- CO2
Yearly Savings-Fuel
27
GHG, Fuel, Time ($1/hour) Savings
(Ignores less pollution and accidents)
$100,000,000
$90,000,000
$80,000,000
US$/year Saved
$70,000,000
Indirect effects from reduced congestion on 50 000
cars/day @ 10 mins/car
Direct Effects from Full New buses
$60,000,000
$50,000,000
$40,000,000
$30,000,000
$20,000,000
$10,000,000
$0
Yearly Savings- CO2
Yearly Savings-Fuel
Yearly Savings-Time @ 5
min/day/person, $1/hr28
Conclusions:
Are Mexico and China Decarbonising?
• Mexico – Adjustment is difficult
– Metrobus a huge step for reform – will there be more?
– Fuel economy standards possible next step
– Next steps – restraints on car use (congestion pricing?)
• China – Easier to Choose than Change Later
– Fuel economy standards a valuable first step
– Real urban transport – not just token BRT -- reform next
– Next steps – car restraints, protection for NMT
• Overall
– Fuel economy is necessary but not sufficient
– Good urban transport is necessary but not sufficient
– More demos of success needed in both countries
29
GHG In Developing World
Not an Important Policy Driver:
• Little Concrete Action on GHG from Transport
– Auto use in Mexico high, in China low but rising rapidly
– Wasted fuel, extra air pollution from bad traffic
– Less than 20% of urban trips in cars, yet cities stuffed
• Some Motion on Fuel Quality and Fuel Economy
– Increased stringency on fuel quality and emissions in both
countries
– China fuel economy standards, Mexico contemplating
• Lip Service to the Real Threat – Urban Immobility
– More vehicle use, congestion, accidents
– Fuel waste and higher greenhouse gas emissions
– Higher health and accident risks
First Step: More Sustainable Mobility
30
Overall Lessons:
Lower Transport in Developing Countries
• Beyond Carbon -- Aim at Good Transport
– Strong collective transport with some limits on private car use
– Strong support for existing NMT
– Rein in car-based land-use
• Transparent Fuel and Carbon Pricing
– Level playing field for transport
– Clear price signals to users, operators, manufacturers
– End to the subsidies of fuels, vehicles, commuting
• Transparent Governance
– Stakeholder involvement
– Fuel quality and local emissions, fuel economy standards
– Clean rules for transport providers, infrastructure development
31
Lee Schipper
[email protected]
www.embarq.wri.org
32