Transcript Presentation: GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE

GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE:
Challenges & Opportunities for
Transportation
Cynthia J. Burbank
National Planning and Environment Practice Leader
Parsons Brinckerhoff
East West Gateway Council
Air Quality Advisory Council Meeting
December 11, 2008
Disclaimer: Much of the information presented is based on PB work for
NCHRP 20-24(59). Work is in progress and is not a NCHRP report nor
does it represent the panel’s views. The NCHRP work is intended to
inform AASHTO members' policy-development discussions and does not
include making recommendations on matters of policy.
Climate Change is Real
and Poses Major Risks
 “Warming of the climate system is
unequivocal…”
-- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
 “An overwhelming body of scientific evidence
paints a clear picture: climate change is
happening, it is caused in large part by
human activity, and it will have many serious
and potentially damaging effects in the
decades ahead.”
-- Pew Center on Climate Change
 But public awareness and commitment in
the U.S. doesn’t yet reflect the risks
GHG Targets Are Daunting
Climate scientists
80% below 1990 by 2050
California, Montana, Florida
80% below 1990 by 2050
Oregon
75% below 1990 by 2050
Massachusetts, Vermont, New
Hampshire, Connecticut, Maine,
Rhode Island
75-85% below 2001 by 2050
Colorado
80% below 2005 by 2050
New Mexico
75% below 2000
Climate Security Act (Lieberman- Up to 66% below current levels
Warner) S.2191
by 2050
Global Warming Reduction Act
(Kerry-Snowe) S.485
62% below 1990 by 2050
Climate Stewardship and
Innovation Act (McCainLieberman) S.280
60% below 1990 by 2050
United Kingdom
60% below 1990 by 2050
Transportation is 28% of U.S. GHG –
and Rising
U.S. GHG Emissions by Sector (1990-2005)
Source: INVENTORY OF U.S. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND SINKS: 1990-2005 (April 2007) Fast Facts USEPA #430-F-07-004
9
Highway Vehicles = 78% of
Transportation CO2 Emissions
U. S. Transportation Carbon Emissions by Mode, 2003
(Million metric tons CO2)
Pipeline/Other, 47
Internat'l./Bunker,
84
Waterborne, 58
Rail, 43
Air, 171
Light Vehicles,
1113
Heavy Vehicles,
350
Transportation GHG Reduction
is a Four-legged Stool
The 3-legged stool:
– Vehicles
– Fuels
– VMT
The 4th leg:
– Vehicle/System Operations
Light Duty Vehicles & Fuels
 50% cut in GHG/mile is feasible by 2030
from conventional technologies and biofuels
 Almost complete decarbonization of transport
vehicles/fuels by 2050 is a “realistic
ambition,” with advanced technology/fuels
 Electric & hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are
promising – but must overcome many
technology and economic issues
 The need for technological improvement is
urgent
Worldwide Car Ownership
Rising Dramatically
Vehicle “Decarbonization”
is Essential
“In the long term, carbon free road
transport fuel is the only way to achieve
an 80-90% reduction in emissions,
essentially “decarbonization.”
--The King Review for the U.K. Government, by
Professor Julia King, Vice-Chancellor of Aston
University and former Director of Advanced
Engineering at Rolls-Royce plc, March 2008
Vehicle “Decarbonization”
is Necessary
“[I]n the period beyond 2100, total GHG
emissions will have to be just 20% of
current levels. It is impossible to imagine
this without decarbonization of the
transport sector.”

-- Sir Nicholas Stern, Stern Review to the
U.K. Government, 2007
VMT Matters
Slowing U.S. VMT growth to 1% annually – or less -- may be
necessary to meet GHG targets
Alternative Scenarios for U.S. Light Duty Vehicle 2050 CO 2 Emissions
1400
1200
70% Below 2005 Levels in 2050 (363 Million Metric Tons CO2)
1210
1000
1000
949
800
800
760
600
600
471
400
400
377
200
200
0
0
2005
Scenario 1:
Scenario 2:
Scenario 3:
Scenario 4:
100 mpgge fleet
100 mpgge fleet
50 mpgge fleet
50 mpgge fleet
1.0% ann. VMT growth 1.5% ann. VMT growth 1.0% ann. VMT growth 1.5% ann. VMT growth
Scenarios
Million Metric Tons CO2
Million Metric Tons CO2
1200
1400
Vehicle/System Operations
Also Matter
10-20% LDV GHG reduction potential by:
 Managing speed (40-50 MPH is optimal; speed
limits/enforcement could reduce road fuel use 2-4%)
 Reducing congestion and accel-decel
 Reducing poor signal timing (could reduce 1.315
MMT CO2/yr)
 Reducing car and truck idling
 Optimizing tire inflation
 Encouraging “eco driving”
Carbon Tax or Federal Cap &
Trade Legislation Can Achieve Big
GHG Reductions
S.2191 (Lieberman-Warner Cap & Trade):
 Imposes a declining cap on GHG for power
plants, oil importers and refiners, industrial
sources
 Reduces U.S. GHG 66% below 2005 levels
by 2050
 Has lower % effect on transportation GHG
 Increases energy prices -- gas prices $1.40
higher by 2050
 Allocates $171 billion to transit over 38 years
 Lowers U.S. GDP 0.9-3.8% in 2050
Prices Are Key to
GHG Reduction
 Higher energy prices are essential to
promote energy conservation and new
technologies in all sectors
 In transport, pricing can be powerful:
- PAYD Insurance
- Mileage fees
- Parking pricing
- Congestion pricing
- Vehicle “feebates”
What About Land Use?
According to “Growing Cooler“ report by ULI/CCAP:
“It is realistic to assume a 30 percent cut in VMT with compact
development.”
“… smart growth could …reduce total transportation-related CO2
emissions from current trends by 7 to 10 percent as of 2050.”
“Growing Cooler” assumes:
– 67% of development in place in 2050 is new or rehab
– 60-90% of that development is “smart growth” (equivalent to
15 housing units per acre)
Is this realistic? What will it take? Who should lead?
Transit Helps – But is Small in
Percentage Potential
• Transit serves 1% of PMT and 0% freight in the U.S.
• APTA: Transit reduced GHG by 6.9 MMT in 2005
• This is 1/3 of 1% of U.S. transportation GHG
• European Ministers of Transport caution: “Modal shift policies
are usually weak in terms of the quantity of CO2 abated ….
Modal shift measures can be effective when well targeted,
particularly when integrated with demand management
measures. They can not, however, form the corner-stone of
effective CO2 abatement policy…..”
 Serves other goals – and is seen as key to land use changes
Many States Are Developing
Aggressive Climate Action Plans
State Climate Plans –Transportation
Elements Are All Over the Map
State
Year
Vehicle
Low
Carbon
Fuels
Smart
Growth and
Transit
Other
MN
2025
15%
35%
25%
25%
NC
2020
35%
12%
38%
15%
SC
2020
14%
55%
29%
1%
CT
2020
51%
38%
8%
2%
ME
2020
53%
25%
21%
1%
MD
2025
24%
12%
45%
20%
NY
2020
59%
11%
27%
4%
PA
2025
45%
36%
18%
0%
RI
2020
46%
10%
31%
14%
VT
2028
21%
14%
49%
17%
How Much Should We Pay
Per Ton of GHG Reduction?
$17 to $44/ton of GHG = cost of climate damages,
2007 (3% discount rate)*
Compare to:
$80/ton savings for LDV fuel economy standards**
$20/ton savings for cellulosic biofuels**
$30-50/ton cost for signal optimization***
$100-800/ton cost for transit service
improvements***
* EPA study, 2008
** McKinsey & Company study, 2007
*** WASHCOG estimate, 2008
Technology Yields Huge GHG
Reductions at up to $50/Ton
($50/ton of GHG = $0.50/gallon of gasoline)
-- McKinsey & Company
No Silver Bullet – Instead We Need
Silver Buckshot
Greene & Schafer (Pew Center, 2003) concluded that a
- David Greene
and Andreas
Schaefer,
for Pew
comprehensive, tailored
set of strategies
could
cut U.S.
Center
on Climate
Change
transportation
emissions
in half
by 2030.
Total < Sum of Components
Sources of Transportation GHG
Reductions, 2015 and 2030
60%
Information and
Education.
50%
Systems
Infrastructure
Pricing
40%
Carbon Cap
Hydrogen
30%
Low-Carbon
Fuels
Air Efficiency
20%
Heavy Duty
Truck Effic.
10%
LDV Efficiency
0%
2015
2030
Source: Greene and Schafer, Pew Center on Global Climate Change, May 2003.
European Council of
Ministers of Transport (2006)
 “The most effective measures available include fuel taxes,
vehicle and component standards, differentiated vehicle
taxation, support for eco-driving and incentives for more
efficient logistic organization, including point of use pricing for
roads. “
 “More integrated transport and spatial planning policies might
contain demand for motorized transport.”
 Mode shifts … cannot … form the corner-stone of effective CO2
abatement policy and the prominence given to modal shift
policies is at odds with indications that most modal shift policies
achieve much lower abatement levels than measures focusing
on fuel efficiency.”
 “Ultimately higher cost energy sources …. will be required if
there are to be further cuts in transport sector CO2 emissions.”
Climate Adaptation Is as
Important as GHG Reduction
 “Climate change will affect transportation primarily
through increases in several types of weather and
climate extremes… very hot days; intense
precipitation events; intense hurricanes; drought;
and rising sea levels, coupled with storm surges and
land subsidence.”
 “The impacts …. will be widespread and costly in
both human and economic terms and will require
significant changes in the planning, design,
construction, operation, and maintenance of
transportation systems.”
-- TRB Special Report, March 2008
CONCLUSIONS



Many strategies are needed to reduce surface transport GHG:
1.
Adopt pricing measures to reward conservation and
tech innovation
2.
3.
4.
Maximize energy efficiency of current vehicles (50 MPG)
Invest in tech breakthroughs for decarbonized vehicles
Push “eco driving” and congestion/speed management
5.
6.
7.
Implement more efficient land use
Maximize and reward carpools & vanpools
Increase biking, walking, transit use, trip chaining, telecommuting
$50/ton of GHG should be the cost ceiling for the near term (but
how can transportation agencies fund even this?)
Adapting transportation infrastructure to climate impacts is
important and will be difficult and costly