Extensions of the March 28, 2009 Bakersfield Valley CAN Event

1. Extensions of the March 28, 2009 Bakersfield Valley CAN Event Emily Wimberger

2. Objectives • Vehicle fleet and owner characteristics • Registration status of vehicles attending the Tune In Tune Up event • Does the event have an impact on vehicle registration status • Further program improvements • Increase emission reductions • Identify dirty vehicles before repairs • Evaluate CARFAX as a research tool

3. Acknowledgements • Tom Knox - Valley CAN • Doug Lawson - NREL • Pierre Mérel - UC Davis • Jeffrey Williams - UC Davis • Rocky Carlisle - IMRC • Cindy Stover - ARB • CARFAX

4. Bakersfield FleetMileage and Model Year

5. Bakersfield FleetVehicle Make

6. Registration Status

7. Registration Status on Day of Bakersfield Event

8. Valley CAN Registration Impact • 160 vehicles did not pass pre-repair inspection, had complete information, and received complete repairs • 104 of these vehicles did not have current registration status March 28, 2010 • 51 of the 104 unregistered vehicles had current registration status as of April 8, 2010

9. Vehicle Comparisons

10. Fleet Comparisons

11. Ownership Comparisons

12. Emission Levels at Event

13. Bakersfield Fleet and Repairs

14. Incomplete Repairs

15. First Post Event Inspection Results for all 298 Vehicles Issued Vouchers

16. Emission Reductions • 255 vehicle sample • Failed pre-repair inspection • Repair cost greater than cost of inspection • Across the 255 vehicle sample, total emissions were reduced by 36,595 lbs • The total cost of these emission reductions was $110,756 • Each pound of emission reduction cost $3.03 • How can we improve the efficiency of the event?

17. Marginal Cost of Emission Reductions • In order to maximize emission reductions, we first look at each vehicle and estimate the cost to reduce emissions by one unit

18. Marginal Cost = Total Repair Cost Change in Emissions Change in Emissions = Pre-repair Emissions - Post-repair Emissions Marginal Cost

19. Marginal Cost for Event Vehicles • 118 of the 255 vehicles had both pre and post-repair emissions levels • We calculated the marginal cost of emission reductions for these vehicles

20. Marginal Cost Calculations

21. Marginal Cost Curve

22. Cost Curves by Model Year

23. Moving along the Cost Curve

24. Estimating Marginal Cost • We grouped all 255 vehicles by model year • 1985 and older • 1986-1991 • 1992-1995 • 1996-1999 • 2000 and newer • We then estimated the marginal cost for the 137 vehicles that had no post-repair emission data

25. Optimal Repairs • Given the marginal cost and the average emissions for all vehicles, we calculated the optimal amount of repair dollars and the resulting change in emissions for each vehicle

26. Event and Optimal Statistics

27. Caveats • Assumes the goal is total emission reductions, not vehicles obtaining smog check certificates • Assumes all vehicles at the event are being driven regardless of smog inspection or registration status • The high repair cost per vehicle shows that there is lots of room for improvement, but does not mean that $1,000 repair vouchers are feasible • These are preliminary results • We raise many questions but not making policy recommendations

28. Next Steps • Look at the correlation between the emission levels of vehicles at the event and emission levels at the time of repair • Can we identify and target vehicles that will have a low marginal cost of emission reductions? • Tiered vouchers • Vehicle retirement • Can we identify vehicles at the event that fall into the ‘51 Vehicles’ category