Transcript Global Climate Change Transportations Role in Reducing

Disclaimer
Much of the information presented is based
on PB work for NCHRP 20-24(59).
Contractor’s 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
Projected Impacts of
Climate Change
150 Global Firms
Seek Mandatory Cuts in
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Coca Cola, General Electric, Shell, Nestle, Nike,
DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, British Airways,
Shanghai Electric, et al.
 Said that the scientific evidence for climate
change is “now overwhelming”
 Called for a legally binding agreement to
“provide business with the certainty it needs to
scale up global investment in low-carbon
technologies”
November 11, 2007
Public Concern is
Substantial and Growing
60% -- effects of global warming are already
happening
11% -- the predicted effects of global warming
are unlikely
78% -- make homes more energy efficient
77% -- ride mass transit whenever possible
71% -- install solar panels on homes
62% -- buy hybrid cars
58% -- more drastic measures are needed
-- Gallup Survey of Americans, April 2007
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, Especially Passenger
Cars and Light Trucks, Account for 78%
of Transportation C 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
1st & 2nd Legs:
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 and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are
promising paths to decarbonization – but
many technology and economic issues must
be overcome
 Low CO2 electric plants are key to low CO2
electric vehicles
Actual and Projected GHG Emissions
for New Passenger Vehicles by Country,
2002-2018
3rd Leg:
VMT
• Slowing U.S. VMT growth to 1% annually 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
3rd Leg:
VMT (continued)
 1% VMT growth allows increase in
VMT/capita (pop growth = 0.9%/year)
 In near-mid term, slower VMT growth is
especially valuable to GHG targets
 VMT growth is already slowing down,
due to fuel prices and demographic
changes
4th Leg:
Vehicle/System Operations
10-20% LDV GHG reduction potential:
 Manage speed (40-50 MPH is optimal)
 Reduce congestion, accel-decel
 ITS to reduce poor signal timing could
reduce 1.315 MMT CO2/yr
 55 MPH speed limit + enforcement
could reduce road fuel use 2-4%
 Reduce idling and encourage “eco
driving” by drivers
What About Federal Cap and
Trade Legislation?
S.2191 (Lieberman-Warner):
 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, with 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”
Fleet Characteristics
Influenced by Fiscal Incentives
What About Land Use?
 “It is realistic to assume a 30 percent cut in VMT with
compact development.”
 “… smart growth could …reduce total transportationrelated CO2 emissions from current trends by 7 to 10
percent as of 2050.”
 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)
-- “Growing Cooler” by ULI, CCAP, et al, 2007
What About Transit?
• Transit serves 1% of PMT and 0% freight in the U.S.
• APTA: Transit reduced GHG by 6.9 MMT in 2005*
(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…..”
* APTA includes 3.0 MMT reduction for transit’s effect on congestion reduction
What About Transit?
(Continued)




Has huge popular support
Serves other goals
Is seen as key to land use changes
In Gallup survey, 77% cite transit as
GHG strategy
Many States Are Developing
Aggressive Climate Action Plans
State Climate Action Plans –
Transportation Elements Are All Over the Map
State
Year
Vehicle
Low
Carbon
Fuels
Smart
Growth and
Transit
Other
AZ
CA
CO
2020
2020
2020
40%
54%
40%
7%
6%
26%
25%
38%
22%
28%
2%
13%
MT
NM
OR
2020
2020
2025
61%
31%
80%
24%
21%
14%
8%
16%
6%
7%
31%
0%
WA
2020
8%
23%
64%
5%
Statewide Climate Action 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 Will it Cost to
Reduce GHG?
-- McKinsey & Company
Four Views on
Reducing Transportation GHG
1. David Greene and Andreas Schaefer,
for Pew Center on Climate Change
(2003)
2. European Council of Ministers of
Transport (2006)
3. Sir Isaac Stern, “The Stern Report to
the U.K. Government” (2007)
4. ULI “Growing Cooler” report (2007)
1. David Greene and
Andreas Schaefer,
for Pew Center
Sources of Transportation GHG
Reductions, 2015 and 2030
Total < Sum of Components

Greene & Schafer (Pew Center, 2003) concluded that a
A comprehensive,
tailored
set ofset
policies
could cut
U.S.cut
transportation
comprehensive,
tailored
of strategies
could
U.S.
GHG in half by
2030
transportation
emissions in half by 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.
2. 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.”
3. “Stern Review”
for U.K. Government (2007)
 “Transport is one of the more expensive sectors to cut
emissions from because the low carbon technologies tend to be
expensive and the welfare costs of reducing demand for travel
are high.”
 “Transport will be among the last sectors to bring its emissions
down below current levels.”
 “ [I]n the period beyond 2100, total GHG emissions will have to
be just 20% of current levels. It is impossible to imagine how
this can be achieved without a decarbonized transport sector.”
4. ULI “Growing Cooler”
Report, 2007
 “…the U.S. transportation sector cannot do its fair
share … through vehicle and fuel technology alone.
We have to find a way to sharply reduce the growth
in vehicle miles driven….”
 “Require transportation conformity for GHG”
 “Enact “Green-TEA” transportation legislation that
reduces GHGs… yet another paradigm shift…
further address environmental performance, climate
protection, and green development”
 “Provide funding directly to MPOs”
-- Similar recommendations are in Brookings reports
Climate Adaptation Will be 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
A Top 10 List
for Consideration by State DOTs
GHG Strategies
1. Support/invest in vehicle & fuel improvements
2. Increase ridesharing/transit/bike/ped programs
3. Promote/support land use improvements
4. Support/implement pricing strategies
5. Manage speed/congestion
Process Strategies
1. Develop expertise in GHG/energy reduction
2. Develop expertise in climate adaptation
3. Establish links with MPOs and environmental organizations
4. Involve/educate legislatures, the public and key civic groups
5. Estimate cost-effectiveness of strategies
BONUS: Develop a proactive state DOT climate/energy action
plan