www.cero.nu robèrt, m. (2009). international journal of sustainable transportation vol. 3, no. 1
DESCRIPTION
Developed with empirical support from large organizationsTRANSCRIPT
www.cero.nu
Robèrt, M. (2009). International Journal of Sustainable Transportation Vol. 3, No. 1
What is CERO?• Developed for an energy sector with large complexity:
a) travel behaviour needs to be modelled explicitly b) need for tailor-made cost-benefit assessments c) a tool for benchmarking to spread good examples
• Engages a broad range of experts and researchers:– Statisticians– Economists– Behaviourists– Environmental consultants– Technical implementers– Change managers
• Developed in a doctoral thesis at KTH: ”Mobility Management and Climate Change Policies”
Developed with empirical support from large organizations
Macro economic effects from 10% trafic reductions in Stockholm county
(Robèrt och Jonsson, 2006) -EUR 75 000 000 accident costs -EUR 36 000 000 emission costs -EUR 57 000 000 in vehicle time costs( = EUR 170 000 000/year)
Why setting climate targets for employee travel?
Travel costs and emissions walk hand i hand- Short-term cost cut potential: 100 000-500 000 Euro/1000 employees and year
Employee travel costs and emissions at the County Council of Kalmar
- “Indirect values” of showing best practiceIT-sector, transport sector, energy sector, public authorities…
CERO is based on backcasting
Travel policiesMapping Target
Mapping- Employee commute trips are in general far most dominant
Benchmarking
A trigger for internal processing and stakeholder dialogues (benchmarking positions are fictitious)
Ton/pers
6,0
5,5
5,0
4,5
40 000 50 000 60 000 70 000 Kr/pers
ArlandaLandvetter
Sturup
Norrköping
Mapping of individual preferences
Car-sharing Taxi
Problem with climate targets:
% - reductions are appropriate for emission audits but hard to follow-up in policy terms
%CO2
Transformation of the backcasting target
%CO2
)(1
ˆ
2111
2,1ji
ji
i
jij
i j m
jim
jimt
j
uusN
suYX
Modules of tailor made 1% CO2-reductions (commute trips)
• 31 car commuters switch to public transport• Train tickets to 4 commuters with longest
commute distance
• Encourage 38 car commuters to renewable fuel cars
• Allow telecommuting at least once a month • Offer eco-driving to at least ¼ of staff• Encourage at least 191 car commuters with
commute distance 0,5-6km to cycle
• Replace 7% of business trips by car to public transport Annual cost reduction 1,1 Mkr
• Replace 4% of business trips by car to virtual meetings Annual cost reduction 2,3 Mkr
• Replace all business trips with private car to car sharingCosts unchanged
• Replace 2% of aviation trips abroad to virtual meetings Annual cost reduction 540.000 kr
• Replace 3% av domestic aviation to trainAnnual cost reduction 215.000 kr
Modules of tailor made 1% CO2-reductions (business trips)
An example of a policy package targeting 40% CO2-reductions…
Policy business trips Substitution rate to alternative
CO2 reduction Potential cost reduction (million SEK)
Car to public transport 19% 2,5% 1,0Car to car-sharing (bio-fuelled) 24% 2,5% 0,6
Car to video-conference 34% 5,0% 5,7Aviation to videoconference 33% 5,0% 3,5Work commute trips Number of car commuters
switching modePrivate car to Public transport 87 5,0% -Private car to Telework 76 5,0% -long-distance commute to railway 35 5,0% -Petrol car to bio-fuelled car 212 10,0% -Total 40% 10,8
Labour productivity effects
j
iji
ji
i
jij
j
ttNM
P 22111
2,12,1̂
The CERO-process in practiceThree backcasting steps
2. Scenario level – Select an optimized travel scenario from the smorgasbord
1. Principal level – Reach consensus on the target description
3. Plan of action level – Selection of measures that correspond to the optimized travel scenario
CO2
Economy
Employee acceptance
Thank you!