Transcript Climate Change & Energy

CDM and Transportation
COP-9
December 2003
Mauricio Hurtado
Climate Change, Foreign Affairs Ministry, Chile

Jodi Browne
Climate Change & Energy, IISD

Eduardo Sanhueza
Principle - CC&D, alternative member EB

Franz Tattenbach
FUNDECOR, Costa Rica, Vice-chair of EB and Meth Panel

Transport and Climate Change

The transport sector is responsible for ~ 25% of
CO2 emissions worldwide, and this contribution
is increasing
 Key factors
 Travel activity (vehicle kilometers traveled, tonkilometers)
 Mode split
 Vehicle energy intensity (efficiency, loading)
 Fuel carbon content (lifecycle)
Transport & Climate Change

The rate of
increase of CO2
emissions from
transport is much
higher in
developing
countries than
developed
countries.
Developing country growth = 3.2% per year
Developed country growth = 1% per year
(World Energy Outlook, 2001)
CO2 Emissions From Transport
Country
Per Capita CO2 from
Transportation (kg)
(1998)
Transportation Sector Cars Per 1000 People
% of Total Carbon
Emissions
Chile
1028
28%
110
China
178
8%
8
India
120
13%
7
Mexico
1010
27%
143
South Africa
1740
20%
121
France
2257
35%
526
Japan
1971
22%
552
United Kingdom
2238
24%
441
United States
6082
30%
769
Sperling & Salon, 2002
Transport & CDM
Of the 80 projects currently in the CDM pipeline
only 5 are transportation…of those,
none address travel demand

CDM represents a crucial opportunity to develop
a sustainable transportation sector e.g. Chile
- increased funding flows
- enhanced capacity
- expanded technology
Energy Sector GHG Emissions 1998
Commercial
9%

Agricultural
1%
Transport
33%
Manufacturing
23%
Electricity
34%
In Chile,
transportation
represents 2nd
largest source of
GHG emissions
in the energy
sector approximately
33%
Transport Emissions in Chile
Airplanes
9%
Buses
10%
Ships
13%
Cars &
Light
Trucks
36%
Heavy
Trucks
22%
Taxis
10%
Growth in Travel ‘Drives’ GHGs
GHGs from Passenger Cars in Chile: 2000 - 2020
(Based on Pew Center Report)
2.50
Vehicle Kilometers
Relative Growth (2000 = 1)
2.25
2.00
Total GHGs
GHG Emissions Rate
1.75
1.50
1.25
1.00
0.75
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
Transport & CDM Project: Chile
Project Partners: IISD, CCAP, CC&D, CGTS


Funded by Canadian International Development Agency
(CIDA)
Explore the potential to reduce GHGs and promote
transportation CDM projects in Chile
Project Goal

To be of technical assistance to Chileans to reduce GHG
emissions and promote involvement in the CDM, specifically
in the transportation sector
Potential for replication

Help establish precedent for assessing transportation CDM
projects
Possible CDM projects currently being examined…
1) Area 10: Technology switch of buses within downtown
area of Santiago
2) Bike Infrastructure: Developing bike lanes, storage,
facilities
3) Location Efficiency: Concentrating mixed-use
developments around metro stations
Area 10: Technology switching





Santiago: new design for public transport
Segregated routes for articulated buses (Min
EURO3)
Feeding areas for buses of lower capacity
(progressive switch from EURO1,2,3)
Exploring potential for CDM to implement hybrid
diesel-electric buses in the feeding areas
Demonstration: Area 10 (downtown core = 34 buses)
Area 10: Technology switching

Methodological questions…
• Set baseline as current or
marginal technology?
• Monitoring:
Fuel based (sales)?...OR
Distance based (calculate
fuel use from VKT &
efficiency)?
What to do with crediting for a program…over a number of years –
incentive declines…

 Because of interest to keep baseline stable…perverse incentives?
Bicycle Infrastructure

Increase non-motorized trips in Santiago

Introduction of further bicycle infrastructure (lanes)

Measure the emissions reductions from increased
travel by bikes on a specific route (modeling,
observation, etc.)

Quantify those reductions and
develop as a CDM project
Bicycle Infrastructure – ?’s
Methodological questions…
Compare project to current or future projected mode
split?
 What to do if data is not available for short (bike
appropriate) trips?
 Monitoring:
Surveys? (determine mode choice without bikes)
Counting? (what sampling frequency is sufficient?)
Modeling?

Location Efficiency - background
Urban form can:
Reduce number of motorized trips
Increase share of non-motorized trips
Reduce travel distances, increase vehicle occupancy
rates
Through:
DENSITY – i.e. lot size
DIVERSITY – mix of land uses & proximity
DESIGN – street layout, block design, parking
Location Efficiency - examples
Policy initiatives aimed at impacting travel demand:
 Location-Efficient Mortgage (LEM)
 Policy Guidance on using land use measures to improve
Air Quality (US EPA)
 ‘Transit-Oriented Development’ (TOD) initiatives, such
as Hong Kong’s metro station concession program; US
programs (WMATA, BART, etc.)
 Other financial incentives, i.e., aimed at developers
Location Efficiency: our project
Densification or “location efficient” development around
metro stations…
-
-
-
Identify specific real estate development opportunities
Quantify the travel behavior impacts of those developments
Estimate the net impacts on transportation greenhouse gas
emissions of the prospective developments
Determine how to fit this within the CDM.
Supporting existent work looking at efficient dev’t (MINVU) or
“neighborhood efficiency”
Location Efficiency - ?’s
Baseline and Additionality:
 Where would the developments have otherwise located?
 What would have been the travel characteristics and
subsequent emissions of those alternative locations?
 Over what time period can the emissions reductions be
realistically credited?
 To what degree are the reductions “additional” to businessas-usual?
 How can co-benefits (i.e., local air pollution reduction, other
social benefits (costs)) be calculated and effectively
incorporated into the methodology?
Location Efficiency - ?’s
Monitoring and verification:
 How can the emissions reductions be adequately monitored
and verified?

Could surveys be incorporated into the real estate projects to
determine trip-making behavior (including all non-motorized
trips)?

Could public transport ridership be monitored
• Track VKT or mode split?
• Surveys? Local traffic counts? Metro boardings?

Is it appropriate to use modeling results for current or
projected data?
Location Efficiency – ?s
Subsidies - Urban renovation, historic preservation, low
income housing


CDM could bringing additional funds to support subsidies
How/if subsidies could be modified to fit as a CDM project?
Mechanisms to promote transit-oriented development;
transport-efficiency subsidies (or mortgages), a fund in
which a CDM investor could invest, others

How to develop these?; Who would be the “players” (Metro,
Ministry of Planning, Banks, Municipalities).
Transport & Carbon Price

At $5/tonne CO2… removing a car from the
road would be worth about $15 to $20/year

not sufficient incentive on its own

added sweetener for otherwise locally
beneficial projects
Discussion – key questions

How to compensate for impacts on own baseline? i.e.
disincentives?

If transportation projects are not feasible under the
current CDM guidelines, is there a need for revised
guidelines? If so, what type? How could these be
developed and introduced?
Upcoming Events
UNFCCC Side Event: Wed, 10 Dec 1:00 p.m.- 3:00 p.m.
“Getting there: tackling transport emissions”
Multi-stakeholder, high-level event on technical and lifestyle fixes
as options for reversing the transport emissions trend. Moderated
by Simon Upton.
******************************************************************************
“CDM and Transportation: Challenges and Opportunities”
Santiago, Chile, Sept 2004
Int’l workshop on Transport & CDM issues
& presentation of the conclusions of the IISD/CCAP/CC&D work
Thank you! FOR MORE INFORMATION...
Jodi Browne
Climate Change & Energy, IISD
Tel: +1 (613) 238-9821
[email protected]
Steve Winkelman
Manager of Transportation, CCAP
Tel: +1 (202) 408-9260
[email protected]
Eduardo Sanhueza
Director , CC&D
Tel: +56 (2) 209-1770
Email: [email protected]