STEP Summer Seminar 2017 - Tom Rye, TRI - Managing Air Pollution from Transport in Urban Areas in Other Countries

1. STEPping into the Transport Future
Managing Air Pollution
from Transport in Urban
Areas in Other Countries
Tom Rye,
Transport Research Institute, Edinburgh Napier University

2. National/international
mechanisms

3. US emissions standards and EU standards compared (cars,
2011)
Source of graph: CAL (2013)

4. Impacts of Euro (NOx, PM10)
standards
NO2 Concentrations at 81
Monitoring Stations in USA
Total emissions decreased
NOx from diesel cars increased 250%
since 2000
NOx from diesel trucks and buses
reduced
NOx close to major roads stayed same
Source of graphs: CAL (2013); RAC Foundation (2012)
NO2 Concentrations at a typical UK
urban monitoring site

5. www.tri-napier.org
Benefits found include: (CH, DE, AT, CZ)
• Better load factor, reduced empty driving
• Cleaner (newer) fleet composition
• Reduced emissions
• Revenues / Fast cost payback
• No effect on consumer prices
But… traffic diversion, modal shift moderate.
Experience of km-
charging for freight

6. www.tri-napier.org
Since 2001, all HGVs from 3.5t, all roads, fee variation
by distance, weight, emissions class.
- Fee level calculated on basis of infrastructure and
external costs, including congestion, climate, noise,
accidents, air pollution, landscape fragmentation, health
costs.
- 2/3 of revenues earmarked for national public
transport fund (incl Alpine rail tunnels, noise reduction)
- 1/3 revenues to the Cantons (local authorities)
Swiss Heavy vehicle fee

7. www.tri-napier.org
Approved by public referenda
Impacts 2001-2005:
-Increased efficiency: + 16,4 % tkm / - 6,4 % vkm
-Reduced emissions:
- 10 % PM10, - 16 % NOX, - 4 % CO2
-Modal split transalpine transport: 64% rail, 26% road
- Revenue: €900million (2006)
www.are.admin.ch
Swiss Heavy vehicle fee

8. Local mechanisms

9. Berlin LEZ intro 2008
Berlin Low Emission Zone - 2008
85 square km, 1.1 million residents
Applies to all vehicles – can be retrofitted.
Minimum standard to enter zone – Euro 4
diesel, Euro 1 car, shown by green sticker,
cost €6
Impacts (source
http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/luftqualitaet/umweltzone/de/allgemeines.shtml#a3 ) :
• 2012 96% of diesel cars, 85% of trucks stickered.
• 60,000 diesel vehs retrofitted with particle filters.
• Without the environmental zone only 80% of diesel
cars and 50% of trucks would be stickered.
• 2010 regs halved PM and cut NOx by 20%
compared to trend

10. Milan Area C since 2011
Local air pollutants Percentage reduction 2014
compared to 2010
PM10 emissions 61%
Nitrogen Oxides 30%
Nitrogen Dioxide 36%
Volatile Organic
Compounds
31%
Greenhouse Gases
CO2 33%
Methane 14%
Nitrous Oxide 31%
• 8 square kilometre central city of Milan (region of 3.7 million people)
• Applies to all vehicles entering zone 0730-1930 M-F.
• Pay per entry, to a maximum of €10, charge being dependent on the
vehicle emission standard, some vehicles banned completely
• Discounts for residents frequent users.
• Area C replaced EcoPASS charge that applied only most polluting
vehicles.
• Impacts seen below (Source: AMAT, 2015; image from Wikipedia):

11. London LEZ
Introduced 2008
Preceded by detailed modelling
Covers Diesel lorries, buses, coaches,
motor caravans, motorised horseboxes,
larger vans, and minibuses
Must meet Euro 3 or Euro 4 (large
vehicles) for particulates
PM10 annual mean concs cut by 2.46%
and 3.07% within the LEZ compared to
just over 1% for locations outside the
LEZ (source GIZ China, 2014)
No “after” monitoring report publicly
available????

12. Retrofitting polluting vehicles
Low cost option
Examples from London:
1998 minibus – Euro 2 diesel
Owned by charity
Specially adapted to carry
wheelchairs
Buying new vehicle not
possible for charity
Fitted with partial filter to Euro
3 in 2008 – then LEZ stricter
Fitted with full particulate filter
2012, cost £2,500
Volvo FH12 tractor unit for 400
tonne truck
2004, Euro 3 – complied with first
LEZ rules
LEZ from 2012 required Euro 4
Truck fitted with full particulate
filter at cost of £6,000

13. Mechanisms to influence
how people travel

14. Congestion charging
Stockholm 2005, max
€6/day to cross cordon
Immediate 22% reduction
in traffic levels
Particulates fell by 14% in
zone
NOx fell 8.5%
Morbidity benefits greater
than for area wide
measure due to higher
population density in city
Source: Eliasson, 2014

15. Mechanisms to influence
car ownership and type of
car used

16. Car clubs - impacts
Members mostly in 20s, 30s, living in urban areas with high parking
pressures
Each car club car replaces 8-15 older more polluting cars
40% users got rid of a car
26% users joined car club instead of buying a car
Shift to public transport, cycling and walking
Good way to introduce people to EVs and hybrids
Data from London (TRL/Carplus 2012) – big impact on emissions
16

17. Looking to the future:
Shared autonomous vehicles
• Modelling of a SAV system in
Stockholm, using EVs
• 80-85% reduction in CO2 emissions
from personal transport compared to
today (Rigole, 2014)
• Depends on users accepting slightly
less flexibility than with their own
vehicle (up to 5 minute wait and
additional trip time)