the lost benefits of ineffective transport regulation in asia · the lost benefits of ineffective...

The Lost Benefits of Ineffective Transport Regulation in Asia: Quantifying the Impacts of Governance Failures

Markus Amann, Zbigniew Klimont1, Jens Borken-Kleefeld1, Chris Heyes1, Wolfgang Schöpp1 Eric Zusman, Naoko Matsumoto2, Katsuya Kasai2, Kai Po Jenny Law2, Ryoko Nakano2, Sudarmanto Budi Nughroho2, Andreas Jaeger2, Akiko Miyatsuka2, Nanda Kumar Janardhanan2, So-Young Lee2 Robert Earley, Alvin Mejia3, Chee Anne Roño3, Sameera Kumar3, Kaye Patdu3 Supat Wangwongwatana International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenberg, Austria Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Hayama, Japan Clean Air Asia, Manila, Philippines, Beijing, China, and New Delhi, India Regional Resource Centre for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand

Outline

• Why Diesel?

• Core Elements of a Clean Diesel Strategy

• Integrating Governance into Modelling

• Modelling Results

• Conclusions

The UNEP Studies on SLCPs

Source: WHO, 2012

Technological Solutions Exist

But No Silver Bullets

Three Core Elements of a Diesel Control Strategy

Non-Cost Barriers Arguably Most Formidable

PM Mitigation Option Health Impacta

Climate Impactb Costc Non-Cost Barriers Notes

Institutional

New Vehicle Emissions Standards + / $$

Technological challenge to make durable low-emitting engines

Low turn-over of rolling stock, deteriorating control technologies

Fuel Standards: ultra-low sulfur diesel ++ + $$ Refinery costs and

equipment Technology Enabler

Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) Programs +++ ++ $ Institutional barriers and

technical capacity In conjunction with ambient monitoring

Age Limits / Vehicle Retirement Programs ++ + $ Institutional barriers Equity considerations

Fuel Testing for Adulteration ++ + $ Institutional barriers Systemic-level

intervention needed Exhaust After-treatment

Oxidation Catalyst + / $ May require low sulfur diesel

Diesel Particulate Filter (DPF) ++ + $$ Can only be installed on

modern engines Requires low sulfur diesel

Catalyzed, Continuously Regenerating DPF +++ ++ $$$ Generally only supplied

with new engines Requires ultra-low sulfur diesel

Source: Reynolds, Kandlikar, and Grieshop, 2012

Need Low Sulphur Diesel for Clean Diesel

Source: ICCT, 2010

Sulphur Levels are Coming Down in Some Countries But Remain High in Others in Asia

Source: Clean Air Asia, 2014

Sulphur Levels Vary Within Countries

Source: Palguna and Safrudin, 2010

Subsidies for Diesel Fuels Remain High

Implementing I/M Diesel Programs is Challenging

Limited Information on I/M Diesel Programs

Location Program Type GVWR Test Procedure

Exhaust Constituents Measured

Percentage Failed

United Kingdom Decentralized >7700 J1667 Opacity 1.3

Arizona-Tucson Centralized >8500 LC Opacity 3.5

Washington/Pudget Sound Centralized >8500 J1667 Opacity 4

Washington/Vancouver Centralized >8500 J1667 Opacity 4

Utah/Utah County Decentralized >8500 J1667 Opacity 4.5 New York-Metropolitan Area Counties Decentralized >8500 J1667 Opacity 5.5

Nevada-Las Vegas and Reno Decentralized >8500 J1667 Opacity 7

Arizona-Phoenix Centralized >8500 J1667 Opacity 8.6

New Hampshire Roadside >10,000 J1667 Opacity 9

Nevada-Las Vegas and Reno Roadside >8500 J1667 Opacity 30 Canada/Vancouver-British Columbia Roadside

>11000 J1667 Opacity 48

Clean diesel can be an uphill battle for environment agencies

Subsidies

Fuel Quality

Standards

Emissions Standards

I/M Programmes

Ministry of Environment

Governance Matters

Non Gov

INGOs

NGOs/CSOs

Local NGOs/CSOs

Public

IOs

Nat Govs

Loc Gov

Private

TNCs

Nat Industry

SMEs

Global

National

Local

Key points

• Governance failures often undercut regulatory implementation

• How can these failures be integrated into models

• Two problems – Lags in implementation of standards

– Ineffective I/M programs

Analyze Three Scenarios

1. “original policy plans” the letter of emission control legislation

2. “current practices” • Lag in standards • I/M programmes

actual implementation schedules and enforcement practices

3. “leapfrog” direct transition from the current emission standards to Euro-6/VI equivalent standards

Pollutants Analyzed

• Pollutants from mobile sources – fine particulate matter (PM2.5) – nitrogen oxides (NOx) – black carbon

• for health impacts • co-controls on other ozone precursors

(NMVOC and CO) are also considered

PM2.5 emissions (kilotons) from road transport

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

China

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog

Originallyplanned policy

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

India

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Indonesia

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Thailand

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog


Current practices will result in up to 2.5 times higher PM2.5 emissions from road transport than what has been aimed for when the policies were first adopted.

NOx emissions (kilotons) from road transport

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

India

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Indonesia

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog

Originallyplanned policy 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Thailand

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog


By 2030, NOx emissions from road traffic would then be 80% higher than in 2010 in India, 50% in China, 20% in Thailand and 10% in Indonesia.

BC emissions (kilotons) from road transport

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

China

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

India

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Indonesia

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog

Originallyplanned policy 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Thailand

High emitters

Current practices

Leapfrog


Increases in black carbon (BC) emissions from road traffic a little below 70% in Indonesia and below 50% in India.

The costs of delayed/ ineffective enforcement in 2010 resulted in between 8,000 and 24,000 premature deaths in China; and 5,000 and 14,000 premature deaths in India in 2010

Continuation of current practices would lead to 30,000 and 55,000 premature deaths in both countries annually by 2030.

2005

2005

2030

2030

Conclusions • Diesel emissions warm climate and pose grave threat to public

healthco-benefits

• Achieving co-benefits requires well designed control strategy, especially important in Asia

• Experience has shown difficult to implement such a strategy – Delays with standards – Ineffective I/M programmes

• Possible to integrate governance failures into modelling

• Look at three scenarios in four countries

Conclusions • PM2.5 emissions were 50% higher than would have resulted from

effective policy implementation in 2010

• BC emissions and NOx emissions were 40% and 30% higher relative to more effective enforcement regimes.

• The costs of delayed and ineffective enforcement in 2010 resulted in between 8,000 and 24,000 premature deaths in China; and 5,000 and 14,000 premature deaths in India in 2010.

• Continuation of current practices would lead to 30,000 and 55,000 premature deaths in both countries annually by 2030.

Historic fuel consumption for road transport and projections for 2030

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

2000 2010 2030

Peta

joul

e

Buses - Diesel

Heavy duty trucks - Diesel

Cars and light duty trucks - Diesel

Cars and light duty trucks - Gasoline

Motorcycles

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

2000 2010 2030

Peta

joule

Buses - Diesel




Motorcycles

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2000 2010 2030

Peta

joul

e

Buses - Diesel




Motorcycles

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000 2010 2030

Peta

joul

e

Buses - Diesel




Motorcycles

China India

Indonesia Thailand

• For the past (i.e., 2005-2010), the analysis employs statistics on fuel consumption and fleet composition published by the International Energy Agency (IEA).

• The future evolution up to 2030 follows the trajectory developed by the Energy Technology Projections (ETP) project of OECD/IEA (IEA 2012),

Appendix ‘Original policy’ case ‘Current practices’ scenario Powered two-wheelers (LD2/M4)

Euro 3 from 2009, full compliance

Euro 3 from 2009, 75% compliance

Nationwide Beijing Shanghai Guangzhou

Passenger cars and light trucks, gasoline (LD4C/LD4T-GSL)

China 3 from 2007,

China 4 from 2010

China 5 from 2018.01, full compliance

China 1 from 2000.07/2001.10

China 2 from 2005.07/2006.07

China 3 from 2008.07/2009.07/2011.07

China 4 from 2011.07

China 5: n/a ICCT & Dieselnet,

90% effectiveness assumed

1999.01

2003.01

2006.01

2008.12

2013.02

1999.07

2003.03

2007

2009.11

2014.05

n/a

2005.07

2006.09

2010.06

n/a Passenger cars and light trucks, diesel (LD4C/LD4T-MD)

China 3 from 2007,

China 4 from 2010

China 5 from 2018.01 full compliance

China 1 from 2000.07/2001.10

China 2 from 2005.07/2006.07

China 3 from 2008.07/2009.07/2011.07

China 4 from 2013.07

China 5: n/a ICCT & Dieselnet,

90% effectiveness assumed

1999.01

2003.01

2006.01

(2008.07)a

2013.02

1999.07

2003.03

2007

2009.11

2014.05

n/a

2005.07

2006.09

2010.06

n/a Heavy duty trucks and buses, diesel (HDT/HDB-MD)

Euro III from 2007

Euro IV from 2010.07 full compliance,

China I from 2001.09

China II from 2004.09

China III from 2008.06 China IV from 2013.7 China 3 from

60% compliance as local producers might not be ready with the technology.

1999.01

2003.01

2006.01

2008.12

2013.02

1999.07

2003.03

2007

2009.11

2014.05

n/a

2005.07

2006.09

2010.06

n/a

Appendix

‘Original policy’ case ‘Current practices’ scenario Powered two-wheelers (LD2/M4)

Bharat II from 2005, Bharat III from 2010 onwards, 100% compliance

Bharat II from 2005, Bharat III from 2010 onwards, but in-use compliance only 50%


Bharat 3 from 2010 and Bharat 4 nationwide from 2015, full compliance

Bharat 3 from 2010 ICCT & Dieselnet plus Bharat 4 in Delhi, assume 75% compliance (e.g. due to catalyst removal/inactivation)

Passenger cars and light trucks, diesel (LD4C/LD4T-MD)


Bharat 3 from 2010 ICCT & Dieselnet plus Bharat 4 in Delhi, 90% effectiveness for Bharat 3 and 75% for Bharat 4 due to problems with provision of low sulfur fuel.

Heavy duty trucks and buses, diesel (HDT/HDB-MD)


Bharat 3 from 2010. Delhi: Bharat 3 from 2005 and Bharat 4 from 2010 onwards ICCT & Dieselnet. 60% effectiveness as local producers might not be ready with the technology and/or lack of low-sulfur diesel.

Appendix

‘Original policy’ case ‘Current practices’ scenario

Powered two-wheelers (LD2/M4)

Euro 2 from 2007, full compliance.

Euro 3 from 2013

Despite legal requirement for Euro 3 from 2013, it is assumed that in reality ~80% of control devices are removed, only 20% are assumed to work in practice.



Euro 4 from 2012, full compliance (Delphi 2014/15)

Euro 2 from 2015, 75% compliance (e.g. due to catalyst removal/inactivation)

Passenger cars and light trucks, diesel (LD4C/LD4T-MD)


Euro 4 from 2012, full compliance (Delphi 2014/15)

Euro 2 from 2015, 90% effectiveness as not much tampering options

Heavy duty trucks and buses, diesel (HDT/HDB-MD)

Euro II from 2007, full compliance

Euro II from 2015, 60% compliance as local producers might not be ready with the technology

the lost benefits of ineffective transport regulation in asia · the lost benefits of ineffective...

Documents