economic impacts of non-technical measures for emisison reduction · pdf fileeconomic impacts...
TRANSCRIPT
© Fraunhofer ISI
Economic Impacts of Non-Technical
Measures for Emisison Reduction in
Transport
T h e P E P W o r k s h o p , 2 7 . 9 . 2 0 1 3 , A l m a t y
C l a u s D o l l , F r a u n h o f e r I S I , G e r m a n y
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 2
Clean a i r in c i t ies through c lean cars
More efficient motors
and new propulsion
technology
90% reduction of
most pollutants in
road transport since
1990
50% reduction in road
fatalities
0
50
100
150
200
250
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009
Inde
x 19
91 =
100
Gesamtemissionen in Deutschland gegenüber 1990
Kohlendioxid (CO2)
Lachgas (N20)
Methan (CH4)
Org. Verbindungen (VOC)
Staub und Ruß (PM)
Stickstoffoxide (NOx)
Schwefeldioxid (SO2)
Kohlenmonoxid (CO)
Ammoniak (NH3)
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 3
Background: Past and Future of Road
Transpor t ‘s Env i ronmenta l Ef fects
... but more cars lead to
Congestion and a huge waste of
time
Rising CO2 emissions together with
increasing damage per ton of CO2
More accidents, particularly with
vulnerable road users
More noise pollution with serious
health implications
Valuation of CO2 emissions
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 4
0
50.000
100.000
150.000
200.000
250.000
300.000
350.000
Car Bus / Coach MC LDV HDV Rail Pass. Rail Freight Air Pass. IWW
Million EUR
per year Up- & Downstream (difference low/high scenario)
Climate Change (difference low/high scenario)
Up- & Downstream Processes (low scenario)
Climate Change (low scenario)
Other Cost Categories
Noise
Air Pollution
Accidents
©INFRAS/CE/ISI
314.000
19.00029.000
48.000
66.000
6.000 4.000
27.000
2.000
Tota l ex ternal costs of t ranspor t in Europe
2008: 515 bn. € or 1000 € per inhabi tant
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 5
Est imates of average delay costs in
European count r ies
5
Ranges of average delay costs 2008
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
UK NL LU NO DE DK IE BE SE ES IT GR PT CH FI FR CZ AT PL SI HU EE LT LV BG RO SK
Avera
ge d
ela
y c
ost
s (€
/1,0
00 v
km
)
Maximum (Trans-Tools results)
Minimum (regression over national studies)
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 6
Decades of fos ter ing car f ree t ravel in
European c i t ies - no measurable ef fect
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
-6 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 10
Nu
mb
er
of
citi
es
ou
t o
f al
l o
bse
rvat
ion
s w
ith
mu
lti y
ear
d
ata
(n =
16
6 /
35
0)
Percenatage points of modal share
Histogram of annual changes in the percentage of car use for commuting trips
Data source: Eurostat _Urban Audit Database, accessed 15.7.2013
Vitoria/Gasteiz, Spain. 0.8% 2001 to 74% 2008
Copenhagen,Denmark. 42% 1996 to 26'% 2005
Bilbao, Spain. 75% 2005 to 56% 2008
Data source: Eurostat Urban Audit Database
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
-6 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 10
Nu
mb
er
of
citi
es
ou
t o
f al
l o
bse
rvat
ion
s w
ith
mu
lti y
ear
d
ata
(n =
16
6 /
35
0)
Percenatage points of modal share
Histogram of annual changes in the percentage of car use for commuting trips
Data source: Eurostat _Urban Audit Database, accessed 15.7.2013
Vitoria/Gasteiz, Spain. 0.8% 2001 to 74% 2008
Copenhagen,Denmark. 42% 1996 to 26'% 2005
Bilbao, Spain. 75% 2005 to 56% 2008
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 7
The Study „Economic Aspects of Non-Technical
Measures for Emission Reduction in Transport“
Core research questions:
Does low emission and sustainable mobility pay off for the user?
Which consequences do sustainable mobility patterns have for society?
By which instruments can we achieve the ecological reconstruction of curent
mobility systems?
Client: German Federal Environment Agency (UBA)
Projektteam: Fraunhofer ISI, Karlsruhe (lead)
INFRAS, Zürich
IFEU, Heidelberg
Laufzeit: Nov. 2009 – Oct. 2012
Internet: www.ntm.isi-projekt.de
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 8
The case s tudies: f ive measures for
reduc ing emiss ions in t ranspor t
Measure1:
10 %-points
more cycling
and walking
in clities
Measure 2:
10 %-points
more bus
and tram
in cities
Measure 3:
10 % shorter
journeys on
all relations
Measure 4:
10 % less
fuel use
per person on
all car trips
Measure 5:
10 %-points
more rail in
long-distance
freight
Individual level:
What do these measures
mean for the user?
Macro-economic level:
Which impacts does the
implementation of the measures
have on the economy?
Policy level:
Which instruments are
suitable to implement
the measures?
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 9
Cost categor ies and data sources
Kategorie Indikator
Private costs Total user costs of mobility incl. purchase and maintenance
of vehicles: fuel, parking and tickets (ADAC, DB, BVG,
Stadtmobil, etc.)
Travel and
wait time
Benefit of lower travel time by trip purpose: business: 23,48
€/h, commuting 8,48 €/h, private 7,10 €/h. Social benefits:
3,50€/h. (EU Handbook ext. costs 2008, fed. investm. plan).
Health Up to 50% lower heart infarct risk with regular exercising.
Corresponds to 2000 €/month and person acc. to state of
fitness (WHO HEAT Tool, DeStatis)
Traffic
safety
External accident costs by means of transport and road
type; value of statistical life of 1.6 mill. € (UIC 2011)
Environment,
climate. noise
Climate change consequences (80 – 145 €/t CO2) plus
health risks and building damages by air pollutants and
noise (UBA methodological convention 2012)
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 10
The PExMo mobi l i ty cost ca lcu la tor
Features:
Tool in MS Excel
Multi-modal trip chains
Cars by size and emission class
Single and season tickets for PT,
rail and Carsharing
Time costs by trip purpose, mode
and level of congestion.
External costs of climate change,
air pollution and noise by mode,
urban/rural environment and time
of day
Legende:Aus Liste auswählen Wert ist veränderbar Wert ins Feld eintragen Ergebniswert/ Referenzwert (nicht veränderbar!)
Allgemeine Datenabfrage: (Bitte nur Zutreffendes ausfüllen!)
1. Bitte geben Sie Ihre Daten zum motorisierten Fahrzeug Nr.1 (MIV 1) an:
Fahrzeugtyp: Kleinwagen Benzin Fixkosten: 14.72 Cent/km 14.72 Cent/km
Schadstoffklasse: Euro 5 Variable Kosten: 10.63 Cent/km 10.63 Cent/km
2. Bitte geben Sie Ihre Daten zum motorisierten Fahrzeug Nr.2 (MIV 2) an:
Fahrzeugtyp: Bitte auswählen Fixkosten: #NV Cent/km #NV Cent/km
Schadstoffklasse: Bitte auswählen Variable Kosten: #NV Cent/km #NV Cent/km
3. Bitte geben Sie Ihre Daten zur Bahnfahrt an:
BahnCard-Kunde: Bitte auswählen #NV Euro/Jahr #NV Euro/Jahr
Bitte auswählen 0 Euro/Jahr
4. Bitte geben Sie Ihre Daten zur Fahrt mit dem ÖPNV an:
Zeitkarten-Besitzer: Bitte auswählen Preis der Zeitkarte: 0 Euro/Jahr
5. Bitte geben Sie Ihre Daten zu Fahrten mittels CarSharing an:
Fixkosten: 8.25 Euro/Monat Fixkosten (veränderbar) 8.25 Euro/Monat
1,3 Cent/km var. Kosten (veränderbar) 1,3 Cent/km
6. Bitte geben Sie Ihre Daten zu Fahrten mit "Sonstiges" an: (unter Sonstiges versteht man: Leasingwagen, Leihwagen, etc.)
0Cent/km
7. Bitte geben Sie Ihre Daten zu Fahrradfahrten an:
Fixkosten: 50.00 Euro/Jahr Fixkosten (veränderbar) 50.00 Euro/Jahr
Variablen Kosten: 30.00 Euro/Jahr var. Kosten (veränderbar) 30.00 Euro/Jahr
weiter
MIV
1M
IV 2
Bah
nfa
hrt
ÖP
NV
Car
Shar
ing
Son
stig
es
Fah
rrad
Gesamtkosten (fix +
variabel):
Preis der Zeitkarte:
Preis der BahnCard:
Zeitkarten-Besitzer:
Variable Kosten:
Blatt zurücksetzen
Frei verfügbar unter:
www.ntm.isi-projekt.de/downloads.php
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 11
Personal benef i ts o f more cyc l ing
and walk ing
Example:
Commuting (15 km, 250 days/a); cycling
instead of driving a car. Direct and
indirect annual savings:
Car owning and use: +3100 €
Health benefits +1900 €
Environment, noise + 150 €
Travel and wait time -1700 €
Safety -1900 €
Total +1500 €
Impacts:
Car size, exhaust standard, number of passengers
Length and type of route, state of fitness of the traveller
Comparing commute and leisure trips in cities with car (compact), PT, bike and walking
Car Bike Commuting 15 km
Car Bike Walk Short leisure trips 3 km
Environment * Safety
Lost health benefits Travel & wait time
Direct private costs
* Including climate and noise Source: PExMO-Tool (Fraunhofer)
A
nn
ua
l co
sts
(eu
ros)
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 12
Personal benef i ts through more
publ ic t ranspor t use
Example:
Commuting (15 km, 250 days/year) by
bus/tram instead of car. Direct and
indirect savings per year
Car and tickets:^^ +2300 €
Health impacts + 600 €
Safety: + 200 €
Environment, noise + 100 €
Travel and wait time - 300 €
Total +2900 €
Impacts:
Size, age, emission standard and occupancy of the car,
Distance from / to public transport stops, number of interchanges, occupancy rate and
environmental friendliness of bus and tram fleet.
A
nn
ua
l co
sts
(eu
ros)
Environment * Safety
Lost health benefits Travel & wait time
Direct private costs
* Including climate and noise Source: PExMO-Tool (Fraunhofer)
Car Tram Bike & Tram Commuting 15 km
Car Tram leisure trips 3 km
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 13
Personal benef i t o f more ef f ic ient
car use
Example:
Commute (15 km, 250 days/a) by car with
2 instead of 1 person. Direct and indirect
savings per year:
Car owning and use +1800 €
Safety + 200 €
External impacts + 100 €
Health impacts 0 €
Travel and wait time 0 €
Total + 2100 €
Einflussgrößen:
Pkw-Größe, Umweltstandard und Anzahl der Insassen
Zeitaufwand zur Erhöhung des Besetzungsgrades
Comparing commute, leisure and business trips in cities with car of different size and occupancy
A
nn
ua
l co
sts
(eu
ros)
Environment * Safety
Travel & wait time Direct private costs
* Including climate and noise Source: PExMO-Tool (Fraunhofer)
Mid class Small Mid class petrol E3 petrol E5 petrol E3 1 person 1 person 2 persons
Commuting 15 km
Upper cl. Compact Upper cl. diesel E3 diesel E5 diesel E3 1 person 1 person 2 persons
Business trip 100 km
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 14
Macro-economic model l ing approach wi th
ASTRA
System dynamics model
ASTRA-D:
Developed since 1998 for EC
and German institutions
Closed macro-economic
feedback model
Integrated consideration of
transport and economic
sectors
Time sequence of policy
measures possible
Modeling of second round
effects
Detailed computation of
emissions by mode and time
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 15
Macto-economic benef i ts o f more
act ive mobi l i ty
Instruments:
• Parking fees, congestion charges
• Investment in cycle lanes
• Advertisement and campaigns
More cycling helps public transport. Doing so
we provide a real alternative to the private
car.
The environmental alliance creates
investments and jobs (+4%), which more
than balance less production in the
automotive industry.
Travel time increases also in remaining car
travel due to de-acceleration measures. Well
received in times of increasing stress and
burn out.
Emissions: air pollutants (-8%) decline more
intensively than CO2-Emissionsn (-2%) due
to energy use of public transport.
Macro-economic key indicators
Gross domestic product
Employment transport
Emplayment general
Infrastructure transport
Infrastructure general
Travel time
CO2 emissions
Pollutions (NOx)
Particles (PM)
Macro-economic key indicators
Change to scenario without measures (%)
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 16
Selected macro-economic ind icators :
measures compared to base case
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
M1:Fuß &Rad
M2:ÖPNV
M3:kürzereWege
M4:Kraftst.-efizienz
M5:Güter-bahn
Ch
an
ge 2
03
0 a
gain
st
refe
ren
ce
case w
ith
ou
t m
easu
res BIP
Beschäftigung
Investitionen
Verkehrswegebau
KIimagase(CO2)
Luftschadstoffe (NOx)
GDP Employment Investment Transp. infrastr. THG (CO2) Air pollutants
M1: cycle & walk
M2: public
transport
M3: shorter paths
M4: fuel
efficiency
M5: rail
freight
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 17
Compar ison of macro-economic costs and
benef i ts – w i thout t rave l t ime
Benefit- and cost
categories
M1
Walking &
cycling
M2
Public
transport
M3
Shorter
trips
M4
Fuel
efficiency
M5
Rail
freight
Health benefits 11,53 18,67 12,60 17,40 0,00
Safety benefits 0,64 0,40 6,93 -0,01 0,11
Environment etc. benefits 0,49 0,27 3,06 -2,28 3,46
Total benefits 12,66 19,34 22,59 15,11 3,57
Investments and operations 1,29 2,41 11,02 0,20 1,73
Benefit-cost-
ratio +9,8 +8.0 +2,1 +75,5 +2,1
Curr. value 2010 (bill. Euro)
* Ohne Zeitkosten
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 18
Compar ison of macro-economic costs and
benef i ts – w i th t rave l t ime
Benefit and cost categories
Unit Cycling& walking
Public transport
Shorter car trips
Efficient car use
Rail freight
Time benefits Present
value
2010 *
Bill. euros
-63,26 -51,35 -55,25 -28,99 -1,34
Health benefits 11,53 18,67 12,60 17,40 0,00
Safety benefits 0,64 0,40 6,93 -0,01 0,11
Environmental benefits 0,49 0,27 3,06 -2,28 3,46
Total benefits Present
value
2010 *
bill. euros
-50,61 -32,01 -32,66 -13,89 2,23
Benefits without time 12,66 19,34 22,59 15,11 3,57
Investments 1,29 2,41 11,02 0,20 1,73
Benefit-cost ratio (BCR)
Ratio
-39,2 -13,3 -3,0 -69,4 1,3
BCR without time 9,8 8,0 2,1 75,5 2,1
BCR for environment 0,4 0,1 0,3 -11,4 2,0
* Net present value with 2020 and 2030 values
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 19
Success factors to sh i f t people away f rom
the pr ivate car
Most important: classical hard
facors of public transport supply:
Network density
Costs
Travel speeds
Soft factors relevant, but less
expressed:
Safety (accidents + crime)
Staff (friendliness)
Source: USEmobility project EC 7th Framework Programme)
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 20
Linked success of publ ic t ranspor t , walk ing
and cyc l ing pol ic ies
Survey on UIPT Urban Mobility
Database: Main success factors for
public transport use:
Quality of supply (vehicle kilometres)
Generalised costs in relation to cars
Number of bike parking places
Percentage of green areas in cities
Success of walking & cycling closely
linked to PT
With good and complete alternatives
people are ready to go without car
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 21
Recommendat ions
The case studies show, that transforming mobility systems to a more sustainable one
is possible and pays off for the individual and the society
In addition to environment and climate protection transport users users save
money. In addition they experience a considerable health benefit when cycling or
walking more of up to 2000 €/year.
For shifting travel demand away from the private car, investments in cycling and
walking infrastructure and in PT are required. This mostly balances out income
declines in the automotive industry.
Transport systems may be successfully transformed by setting prices and fees,
various regulatory measures, attractive and high capacity PT services as well as a
modern region and city concepts (city of short paths). Most powerful are
combinations of push and pull measures.
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 22
Posi t ive Vis ion 2050: Seamless and
susta inable mobi l i ty
Mobility Card
Electric city cars
PT / Bike-sharing
Car-sharing
New personal transporters (PT)
Modern public transport
PTAs
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 23
Impl icat ions for cent ra l As ia
Due to income levels, benefits and costs of policies for walking and cycling are
considerably lower. But benefit to cost ratios may be similar
Mentality differences may exist. But successful examples from Europe indicate, that
environmentally friendly travel can be implemented in very different cities.
New technoligies (e-bikes) and organisational forms (carsharing) may help that central
asian countries manage mobility in quickly developing economies better than the
west in the past 50 years
© Fraunhofer ISI
Seite 24
Avai lab le mater ia ls
At www.ntm.isi-projekt.de study reports and the PExMo tool are available (German only):
E-Paper for public communication (German)
Full report (German)
Summary (German and English)
PExMo Cost Calculator (German)
5 measure leaflets: (German)