Update on German city measures to control (diesel) vehicle emissions - Martin Lutz

Routes to Clean Air | Martin Lutz | September 2019 1
Senate Department for
Environment, Transport
and Climate Protection
Senate Department for Environment, Transport and Climate Protection | Berlin | Germany
1
Update on German city measures to control
(diesel) emissions
Martin Lutz
Head of Air Quality Management
Berlin Senate Department for Environment, Transport
The Air Quality Plan of Berlin: 2nd revision 2019
■ Introduction: Compliance situation in Germany and Berlin
■ Emerging legal pressure and how to deal with it
■ What to do in Berlin?
■ Examples for mobility–related measures and their likely
impact
■ Successes & challenges of local diesel bans
■ What can we learn for the revision of the AQ Directive
■ Conclusion & looking ahead

22
Air quality
 Berlin‘s compliance in relation to EU limit/target values
pollutant main source Status
SO2 power plants, industry, domestic
heating
 problem solved 20 years ago
 switch to clean fuel & control technology
CO, HM Traffic, heavy industries  never a problem
Benzene traffic  problem solved 10 years ago
PAH traffic, domestic heating  problem solved 5 years ago
Ozone long-range transport, traffic  diminishing problem, to be solved at national & EU level
PM2.5 long-range transport, traffic  Problem (seemingly) solved
PM10 long-range transport, traffic,
residential heating
 Largely solved, shrinking local share
NO2 Road traffic (Diesel)  serious problem, national court verdicts & law suit filed
by EU, traffic bans impending

33
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Despite of decreasing traffic volumes in Berlin
 -15% passenger car traffic since 2002
…NO2 concentrations stagnate above
the limit value
 Interesting shape of NO trend, suggesting
no NOx emission decrease between
 2008, the likely start of Diesel-Gate and
 2016, its terminus
Berlin AQ assessment
 NO2 pollution & traffic trend
 Extra measures badly needed
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Nitrogendioxide(NO2)inµg/m³
Trend of nitrogen oxide levels in Berlin
Traffic increment
traffic sites NO
traffic sites NO2
urban background sites NO2
city periphery NO2
limit value for NO2

44
Low emission zone
Automatic monitoring site in residential areas and at the cities’ periphery
Automatic monitoring site in busy roads at the kerbside
monitoring site with miniaturised monitoring devices for traffic related pollutants in busy roads
NO2 annual mean 2018
NO2 non-compliance in Germany & Berlin
 exceedances and sources

55
NO2 non-compliance in Germany & Berlin
 exceedances and sources
Rechnung mit Immiscpb Modell
Vor Nachrüstung und
Euro VI-
Neubeschaffung
local traffic:
NO2 direct
emissions
31%
local traffic:
converted NO-
emissions
19%
other traffic
city-wide
25%
aviation
1%
domesticheating
4%
industry
2%
mobile construction
machinery
3%
biogenicsources
0,1%
Offroad
0,6% rail
0,2%
shipping
1%
regional
background
14%
NO2-source analysis 2015 based on modelling
averagedover 24 roadside hot spots
IMMIS_EMIS2015_EMIS2020_HVS_RUBIS_2015_alleQuellen RW-ML.xlsx
coaches 3%
buses23%
HGVs 12%
LGVs14%
Diesel-cars 43%
Petrol cars 6%

© sepavone / depositphotos
Mounting legal pressure for action
against NO2
 How to deal with it on local and national level

77
NO2 non-compliance in Germany
 pressure for bold action
■ From the European Commission
 Legal action against Germany
■ From court rulings in Germany
 ~30 court trials initiated by NGOs require more
measures & ambition…
 NGO applied for “coercive detention” against the
Bavarian Government for ignoring earlier court
rulings, which called for Diesel bans in Munic up to Euro 5
 Referred to ECJ to decide soon, whether this is legally required
 Supreme court verdict in Feb 2018
 Traffic restrictions must be enforced in the absence of alternative measures
to ensure compliance as soon as possible, i.e. within ~1 year
 Can be legally enforced without a “blue sticker” for clean Diesel
 Euro 6 must be allowed to be proportionate (irrespective of real-driving emissions)
 Diesel bans can be limited to single roads to be proportionate, i.e. pollution levels may rise unless
they exceed the limit values
Source: Right to Clean Air (2019)

88
Initiatives by Berlin and other ‘Länder” in the Council of Fed. States” and the
Assembly of States´ Environment & Transport Ministers asking ….
 to stop Diesel subsidies & better fund alternative fuels (LNG, CNG, H2) & charging infrastructure
 to intensify compliance testing of in-use vehicles
 to stricter interpret & enforce current Euro 6 type – approval regulations
in particular regarding the use of defeat devices
 Empower consumers to claim their rights individually & collectively,
or by qualified consumer organisations on their behalf
 To tighten regulations for regular vehicle inspections so that
malfunction of exhaust treatment systems can be detected
 to extend existing/develop up new national labelling schemes (sticker) for clean vehicles
 Based on real driving emissions
 Including retrofitted vehicles
 To allow car buyers to easily identify clean vehicles
 To facilitate enforcement of access restrictions schemes (LEZ)
 To define technical criteria for SCR-retrofit
(control efficiency, durability, etc) and
to press auto industry to bear the costs
 addressing the national government

99
 recent national activities
„National Forum Diesel“ of the Federal Gov. & Länder & German auto makers in summer 2017
■ Aim: Avoid access restrictions for Diesel vehicles
■ Offer by German auto industry:
 Voluntary Software – Update for Euro 5 & 6 Diesel cars
 Scrappage bonus to replace Euro 4 Diesel-cars and older
 250 Mio. € contribution to 1 billion € funds
promised by the Federal Government for …
 E-Buses, E-Taxis & municipal vehicles, charging
infrastructure, digital ticketing, cycling infrastructure, PT
■ Impact of software–update & bonus insufficient
and other measures too slow
■ 4 Working groups to look into the implementation
of alternative measures, inter alia on „hardware“- retrofit of in-use Diesel cars & HDVs (Euro 4-6):
 SCR-retrofit technically feasible for almost all heavy vehicles and the majority of Euro 5 Diesel PC & LGVs
 Costs: 15-25.ooo € for buses/trucks 1500-3000€ for LGVs and cars
Since spring 2019:
 (too) ambitious technical specifications for SCR-retrofits in force
 Funding schemes for buses, heavy municipal vehicles, commercial LGVs launched – at last
 Commitment to bear costs for hardware – retrofit of Euro 5 Diesel only from Volkswagen and Mercedes
Source: BMVI

1010
How to solve the NO2 problem?
 Modelled impact range of different local measures
…based on AQ plans of Stuttgart & Hamburg and experience in Berlin
Challenges:
 In Berlin, we need to bring down NO2 by
up to 25 µg/m³ by 2020
 E-Mobility, city- and transport planning
measures mostly of medium-/long-term
nature
 Ban of Diesel with high real driving
emissions indispensible at least
in some polluted roads
 Need to model effect of traffic re-routing
and potential pollution increase
 Hardware-retrofit would ease the pressure,
but comes rather late

How we‘re gonna meet the NO2
AQ standard in Berlin asap?
 A few mobility-related measures & their effect

2020
limit value 40 µg/m³
limit value 40 µg/m³
base year 2015 business as usual scenario 2020
Air Quality projections for Berlin
 NO2 model results for 2015 and 2020
 ~62 km roads in non-compliance with NO2 limit value
1.8 km above 60 µg/m³, ca 50.000 effected residents
 15 km roads in non-compliance with NO2 limit value
 Based on Handbook Emission Factors (HBEFa) Vers. 3.3, modified by raising RDE for Euro 5/6 LGVs to PC levels
 Model still underestimates by about 10%

1313
Air Quality projections for Berlin
 Problem: new emission factors show higher RDE
Brand-new HBEFa Vers. 4.1 underpinned by a lot more RDE-tests and Remote Sensing Device data
■ Takes account of decline in filter efficiency during full vehicle lifetime, better temperature correction
■ RDE factors for LGVs twice as high than in version 3.3
■ Software – update (“SU”) has a visible effect (~25%), but results in a mere 1-2 µg/m² NO2 reduction
due to limited number of updated vehicles
■ Only Euro 6d(temp) and 6d are really clean
Average RDE of NOx of Diesel passenger cars
HBEFa, lifetime mileage (except for 6d/6dtemp))
 HBEFa 3.3
 HBEFa 4.1
 Type approval limit
Average RDE of NOx of Diesel passenger cars
HBEFA 4.1, 50.ooo km mileage
Source: German UBA 9/2019, www.HBEFA.net

 consequences of recent court verdict
 Diesel bans up to Euro 5/V essential for
8 NO2-hot spot roads
 11 street sections, 2.8 km in total (in red)
 Bans in a larger area disproportionate
(e.g. the current LEZ)
 Measures for another 106 roads sections
(14 km) need to be seriously scrutinised
 alternative measures (parking
management, modal split shift, cleaner
vehicles)
 Speed limit 30km/h
-5 µg/m³ reduction can be assumed
 or Diesel bans as a last resort
 uncertainty margin (underestimation) of
the forecast model of 4 µg/m³ to be
accounted for

1515
Citywide measures
Large-scale parking management;
SCR-Retrofit buses, munic. veh.
Measures along heavily trafficked routes
Local interventions in hot spot street sections
Speed limit: 30 km/h
Bans for diesel cars
365€-Ticket for public
transport, investment in
cycling infrastructure
Synchronised traffic lights,
traffic mangement, capacity
constraints
Pedestrian zone, bicycle roads,
resdistributing road space
Compliance
in up to 50
street
sections
 Strategic contribution to strategic urban mobility change (Mobility Law, SUMP, Climate Strategy)
 Local Diesel bans in polluted roads as a last resort to ensure compliance asap
 Shift of polluting Diesel traffic in other roads
 Little to no net health benefits
Holistic approach for 117 road sections to swiftly attain NO2-limit value
 less car traffic
 Shift to cleaner
transport modes
 SCR-retrofit of Diesel
 Slower & smooth traffic
flows
 less air & noise emissions
 less accidents, support
Vision Zero
Compliance
in 20-50
street
sections
Compliance
in about 15
hot spot
sections
 Traffic calming
 Little effect of local
Diesel bans on fleet
emission performance

City-wide measures
 extended parking management & massive
investments in public transport & cycling

1717
Mobility measures of the SUMP
 bicycle strategy
before after
Re-allocation of road space in favour of cyclists & pedestrians:
Safe riding on extra bicycle lanes on the road
 Reduces noise levels at the building line
Setting up a dense cycle – route network
Safe riding through smaller roads and parks
 Attractive new routes trough the centre
along the former wall

1818
Mobility measures
 extending parking management
■ SUMP: 100% parking management by 2025
■ Air Quality Plan: already 75% by 2020 and plus higher fees
Current parking
management
areas
Planned
extension by
end of 2020
Raising fees
from 1-3€/h to 2-4€/h

1919
19
Mobility measures
 extending parking management
■ Effects on traffic volumes emerging from
 Expansion from 40% to 100% parking management in central Berlin
 Raising fees to 3€/h everywhere (now 1-3 €/h depending on demand)
 Attractive job-ticket 50€/month
 Better cycling infrastructure, speeding up bicycle trips by 2 kmph
■ Impact on NO2: 0.1 to 2.7 µg/m³ reduction city-wide
Decrease blue)/
Increase (red) of traffic
volumes [veh/day]
compared to business-
as-usual

Speed limits 30 km/h
impact on emissions and air quality

2121
Measures to reduce vehicle emissions
 Example: Speed limits 30 km/h (i)
 Decisive factor: accelerations generating emission peaks
especially by Diesel vehicles
■ Result of impact analysis in Berlin in the past (3 roads)
 Pollution (based on measurements before/after & comparison wth 50 km/h –roads)
NO2: 6 to 12 µg/m³ or 11 to 19 % reduction
PM10: 2 µg/m³ or 5 % reduction
 Emissions: NOx emission factor up to 20 % lower
 calculated from driving patterns of floating cars at 30 & 50 km/h
 Impact on traffic flows
Higher share of constant speed
no negative effect on congestion
no measurable re-routing effects
 Requisite conditions for positive effect:
Speed control enhances impact
Smooth traffic flow, good traffic light coordination

2222
 Example: Speed limits 30 km/h
■ Ongoing demonstration project in 5
roads (7 km) to strenghten the evidence
■ accompanying measurements of
 traffic volumes
 vehicle speed
 pollution concentrations
 driving pattern for emission calculations
■ Results only by end 2019
■ Following the recent court verdict
30 kmph limits will be enforced in
additional 33 roads (20 km) irrespective
of the results

Local Diesel bans
impact on emissions and air quality
pros & cons

2424
Diesel bans in single roads
 impact on NO2 - concentration
 Dispersion of the problem to other roads
& hence little effect on the fleet
emission performance
 But barely problems with
exceedances of the NO2-LV elsewhere
 Significant improvement, if
all Diesel up to Euro 5/IV be banned
 Re-trofitted cars with
emissions < 240 mg/km must be exempted
 Euro 6a-c can drive, despite of high
real-driving emissions
 Missing sticker for clean Diesel
impedes effective enforcement
 Assumption that 80% of banned vehices
won‘t drive through might be optimistic
60,6
50,7
47,1
59
49,5
46,6
53,1
44,5 44,9
49,4
42,1
44,2
45,5
36,9 38,9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Leipziger Str. Brückenstr. Reinhardtstr.
NO2annualmean2020[µg/m³]
Impact of a Diesel ban in selected roads with high NO2 pollution
reference year 2020: NO2 [µg/m³]
reference year 2020
Ban of D-LDVs <= Euro V
Ban of D-cars/LDVs <= Euro 5
Ban of D-cars/LDVs <= Euro 6c
Ban of D-vehicles <= Euro 5/V
limit value

2525
 conclusions for the revision of the AQ Directive
■ Current delay in compliance (with NO2) results in strict & formal
pressure for measures to meet the AQ limit values asap
■ (NO2-) non-attainment triggers measures solely at
(a declining number of) road-side stations
 Local Diesel bans often limited to single
non-compliant roads
 Concentration & exposure will go up due
to re-routed traffic
 Little to no overall health benefit if health
effects occur at levels below the AAQS
■ When taking measures to comply …
 worsening the air quality elsewhere should be
prohibited
 (also) require to lower the exposure of the
urban population (≙ urban background levels)
■ Option: require %-age reduction of average urban background
levels, e.g. apply EU national AEI to (bigger) cities & agglomerations
AQ limit value
Urban areas
countryside
10
20
30
50
40
60
70
Traffic,
localsources
v monitoring sites
urbanincrement
hot spot
increment
total urban
contribution
relevant for AQ
LV compliance
urban background
NO2,
benzene, EC
[µg/m³]
regional background
v
v
vv
vv v
Urban areas
countryside
10
20
30
50
40
60
70
10
20
30
50
40
60
70
Traffic,
localsources
v monitoring sites
urbanincrement
hot spot
increment
hot spot
increment
total urban
contribution
relevant for AQ
LV compliance
urban background
NO2,
benzene, EC
[µg/m³]
regional background
v
v
vv
vv v

2626
■ Formal attainment of PM – AQ standards everywhere
 but 10 years too late
■ Still serious problems meeting NO2 AQ standard due to Diesel dilemma
■ Little support from the Federal Government
 No blue sticker for clean Diesel
 Funding and legal framework for SCR-retrofit of Euro 5 Diesel too late
■ Huge legal pressure to take drastic measures, i.e. Diesel bans up to Euro 5
 but often limited to single roads with no net health benefit
■ New Air Quality plan for Berlin exploits short-term
sustainable city-wide mobility measures
 Speed limits 30 kmph, cleaner vehicles/retrofit
 parking management, green transport modes
■ Planned integrated AQ Strategy with
Berlin-specific objectives for 2030,
 Based on health impact assessment & cost-effectiveness
 Emphasis on population exposure reduction
 Goal: approaching WHO guideline levels
 Stronger coherence with other planning activities
 In line with forth-coming C40 air quality declaration
Air quality management in Berlin/Germany
 resumeé

27
Thanks for
listening!
More more information
On Berlin‘s LEZ
www.berlin.de/umweltzone (also in EN)
LEZ in Germany see http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/umweltzonen/index.htm
Access restrictions in Europe: http://urbanaccessregulations.eu/
On Berlin‘s new Air Quality Plan see
https://www.berlin.de/senuvk/umwelt/luft/luftreinhaltung/luftreinhalteplan_2025/index_en.shtml
(soon also in English)
On the underlying results of model and scenario runs in
Berlin‘s Environment Atlas (also in English)
https://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/umweltatlas/edinh_03.htm
On the Climate Protection Policy
https://www.berlin.de/senuvk/klimaschutz/index_en.shtml
Look!
A car!
martin.lutz@senuvk.berlin.de

A few backup slides

Mobility measures of the SUMP
 Investments in public transport
Expanding the tram network
into West Berlin
Closing gaps in the light-train network
- extra bus lanes
- traffic light priority for bus & tram
- Building the new Main Station
- Enhancing Berlin‘s connectivity
- Making railway more sttractive
Closing gaps in the metro network

3030
■ Benefits for the “environment”
 Noise reduction of 2-3 dB(A)
 Less (severe) traffic accidents
as stopping distance shrinks by 60% compared to 50 kmph
What about air quality & vehicle emissions? How to analyse effects?
■ Calculation of tailpipe emissions by
 Recording real-word driving patterns in main roads with 30 kmph and 50 kmph
 Vehicle speed, acceleration, gear, gear ratio, exhaust temperature ….
 Application of a complex
vehicle emission model
to calculate (average)
emission factors
for 30 and 50 kmph
situations
 Decisive factor:
avoid or shorten
accelerations
associated with
emission peaks
Vehicle speed (blue, yellow (24h mean)) and NOx-emission (red)
along Potsdamer/Leipziger Str (West - East) with 50 kmph limit

3131
■ Comparison of air quality measurements at trafficked roads
 Before and after enforcement of 30 kmph
 Simultaneously in roads with 50 kmph and 30 kmph
 Take account of confounders,
like road direction, traffic volumes changes, etc
-10,8
-2,6
-1,7
-3,2
-1,1 -0,9
-5,1
2,0
4,5 4,1
-1,0
-0,3 -0,6
-3,3
-12,8
-7,0
-5,7
-2,2
-0,8
-0,3
-1,8
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
µg/m³
T30-Straße Vergleichsstraße Netto-Effekt
elementarer Kohlenstoff
Silberstein-
straße
Silberstein-
straße
Schildhorn-
straße
Schildhorn-
straße
Beussel-
straße
Beussel-
straße
PM10NO2
Schildhorn-
straße
T30-
Straße:
Differenz der Mittelwerte über 3 Jahre vor bzw. nach Anordnung von T303 year difference of mean concentrations before/after enforcement of 30 kmph
Elemental carbon (EC)
Road with 30 kmph Reference road with 50 kmph Net effect

3232
 impact on traffic flows
Effect of scenario 1:
(ban of Diesel-cars up to Euro 5)
In/Decrease of traffic
volumes in relevant
roads around Leipziger
Str. where Diesel bans
will be enforced
Effects of Diesel bans Vehicles affected by the ban
Vehicles not affected by
the ban
residual vehicles
residual vehicles
Unchanged vehicle
Re-routed vehicles
Re-routed vehicles

3333
■ Overall objective: approaching WHO levels by 2030
■ Focus on particulate matter – PM10 and PM2.5
■ Challenge:
Huge interregional, even
transboundary contribution
■ Will run BAU scenario, incl.
 Current national & EU-wide reduction
commitments by 2030
 NERC-Directive
 Berlin-wide reduction resulting
from our Energy&Climate Programme
and new Mobility Strategy (SUMP)
■ Estimate the residual gap & how
it can be closed, incl. support needed
from national gov. & EU
■ Likely option: define %-age
reduction of Berlin contribution
Air Quality Strategy 2030
 Framing the goal & emerging steps
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
PM10 now PM10 2030 PM2.5 now PM2.5 2030
RequisitedecreaseinPM pollutiontomeet
WHO by 2030 inBerlin
regional background urban background increment traffic increment
µg/m³
-29%
Berlincontribution
Berlin
-44%

3434
387
763
317 155
176
29
238
1.298
489 691
500
158
49
278
5
212
95
42
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Cars petrol Cars Diesel LGV HGV Buses Coaches
NOx in t/a
NOx-emissions in Berlin for different vehicle categories and emission
standards
(fleet composition and traffic volumes of 2015)
Euro 6
Euro 5
Euro 4
Euro 3 (Diesel with DPF)
SG 0 (SG 0 =
vehicles without
sticker)
D:Addon-G2017inArbeitLRP-2018-
2025ModellrechnungenIVU
Vehicle fleet composition in Berlin
 NOx-emissions per vehicle type
and emission standard
Hardware-retrofit
potential
 Hardware-retrofit
brings about
10% - 20% reduction
of NOx – emissions
from road-traffic in
Berlin
-10% if limited to Euro 5/6 cars and
50% efficiency/veh.
80% coverage (UBA-assumption)

Update on German city measures to control (diesel) vehicle emissions - Martin Lutz

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Update on German city measures to control (diesel) vehicle emissions - Martin Lutz

Similar to Update on German city measures to control (diesel) vehicle emissions - Martin Lutz (20)

More from IES / IAQM

More from IES / IAQM (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Update on German city measures to control (diesel) vehicle emissions - Martin Lutz