european experience for the japan clean air programme l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE FOR THE JAPAN CLEAN AIR PROGRAMME PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE FOR THE JAPAN CLEAN AIR PROGRAMME

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 142

EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE FOR THE JAPAN CLEAN AIR PROGRAMME - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 187 Views
  • Uploaded on

EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE FOR THE JAPAN CLEAN AIR PROGRAMME A Workshop Tokyo 4-5 November 1998 Sustainable Environment Consultants Day 1 Introduction European Auto-Oil Programme development Integrated evaluation framework Air quality Auto-Oil I analytic process Economic methodology

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE FOR THE JAPAN CLEAN AIR PROGRAMME' - sandra_john


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
european experience for the japan clean air programme

EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE FORTHE JAPAN CLEAN AIR PROGRAMME

A Workshop

Tokyo 4-5 November 1998

Sustainable Environment Consultants

workshop programme
Day 1

Introduction

European Auto-Oil Programme development

Integrated evaluation framework

Air quality

Auto-Oil I analytic process

Economic methodology

Auto-Oil II overview

Auto-Oil II air quality

Day 2

Modelling and Optimisation

Non technical and local measures

Political outcome of AOPI.

Cost Benefit analysis

Summary and conclusions

Identification of topics requiring further information for JCAP

Workshop programme
evolution of car emission standards
Evolution of Car Emission Standards

European Standards

100

80

Japanese

Standards

60

% of Base (HC, CO/10, NOx)

Normalised to Uncontrolled Levels

40

EEC 5th (Optional)

Appendix 23 (83 US)

20

U.S.. Standards

0

1986

1966

1982

1970

1974

1990

1978

Model Year

evolution of car emission standards cont d
Evolution of Car Emission Standards (Cont’d)

100

European Standards

80

Japanese Standards

Tier I

60

% of Base (HC, CO/10, NOx)

Normalised to 83 U.S. Levels

Euro I

TLEV

40

LEV

U.S. Standards

20

Euro II

ULEV

0

1990

1996

1992

1998

2000

1994

Model Year

by early 1990s
By Early 1990s
  • Considerable reductions in motor vehicle emissions over more than 20 years
  • Traffic growth led to concern over vehicle emissions
  • Best available technology at reasonable cost
  • How much more emission reduction needed?
  • What other measures should be considered?
european symposium auto emissions 2000
European Symposium: Auto Emissions 2000
  • September 1992
  • Participants included European Commission, motor and oil industries, environmental and motoring organisations, researchers, member states
  • Conclusion - need for a broader new framework (AOPI)
article 4 directive 94 12 ec
Article 4 Directive 94/12/EC

Commission to take the following approach in developing year 2000 standards:

  • the measures will produce effects to meet the requirements of the Community’s air quality criteria
  • cost effectiveness assessment
  • the measures shall be proportional and reasonable
1st auto oil programme aopi
1st Auto-Oil Programme (AOPI)
  • European Programme on Emissions, Fuels and Engine Technologies (EPEFE)
  • Air Quality Modelling
  • Cost-effectiveness Study
epefe
EPEFE
  • Joint motor and oil industry research programme
  • Commission participated in agreeing parameters to be studied
  • 12 gasolines
  • 16 diesels
  • 35 light duty vehicles (16 gasoline; 19 diesel)
  • 5 heavy duty diesel engines
epefe cont d
EPEFE (Cont’d)
  • Produced equations linking fuel parameters to emissions
  • Undertook speciation of HC emissions for air quality modelling
air quality modelling
Air quality Modelling
  • Cities:
    • carbon monoxide, benzene, nitrogen dioxide
  • EU for regional ozone
  • Concentrations forecast for year 2010
  • Air quality targets agreed
  • Gap between 2010 air quality and targets identified
  • Emission reduction targets agreed
cost effectiveness study
Cost Effectiveness Study
  • Identify optimal mix of the following policy measures:
    • Vehicle Technology
    • Fuel Quality
    • Inspection and Maintenance
    • Non-technical Measures
framework requirements
Framework requirements
  • Scope
    • pollutants
    • space
    • time
    • economic sectors
  • Objectives
    • environmental
    • economic
  • Available policy measures and application period
auto oil programmes objectives and scope
Objectives

To develop strategy to meet air quality standards across EU at least cost

Focus on air quality standards in 2010, but period to 2020 to be considered

Strategy least cost, but also practicable in wider economic, social and political terms

Strategy consistent with other environmental objectives

Scope

Pollutants - NOx, CO, VOCs, PM, benzene, ozone, (SO2, CO2)

All 15 EU countries

Pollution emission from transport and stationary sectors to be considered

All emission control instruments and measures for transport to be considered

Auto-Oil programmes: objectives and scope
possible objectives constraints and implications
Possible objectives, constraints and implications

A. Minimise the Present Value of abatement costs so as to meet physical environmental targets

(Objective used in Auto-Oil programmes 1 and 2)

  • Ensures environmental targets will be met
  • Gives no value to overshoot of targets
  • Does not require impact weighting

B. Minimise Discounted Cost/Impact ratio (whilst meeting physical environmental targets?)

  • Ensures environmental targets will be met
  • Gives more weight to short term impact reduction
  • Requires impact weighting

C. Minimise the Net Present Value of costs due to damage and those due to abatement

  • This is a CBA and requires an assessment of the benefits of reducing environmental impacts
  • Requires a full analysis of the social costs of pollution
  • Will give more weight to short term costs
  • Does not guarantee that physical environmental targets will be met, may lead to over or under ‘achievement’
  • Does not require impact weighting
addressing time issues in auto oil
Addressing Time Issues in Auto-Oil
  • How to assign relative value to the short and long term alleviation of environmental impacts?
  • How can physical impacts be compared with costs?
  • How can one environmental impact be weighed against another?
emission profiles
Emission profiles
  • Observations
  • Fuels and I&M have bigger short term reduction
  • Vehicle packages have bigger long term reduction
  • If both packages have same effect in 2010, then fuel will have more effect before 2010, and vehicle packages more after2010
  • 11 year life typical EU, 20 year typical Madrid/Milan
the time problem illustrated
The time problem illustrated
  • For pollutant 1
  • 2000 to 2010
  • Both instruments allow targets to be achieved
  • Instrument 1 reduces total emission over the period by 55% more than 2.
  • 2000 to 2020
  • Instrument 1 reduces total emission over the period by the same as 2.
  • 2010 to 2020
  • Instrument 2 reduces emission by more than 1
  • Instrument 2 allows targets to be achieved, 1 does not.
  • For pollutant 2
  • 2000 to2010
  • Both instruments allow targets to be achieved
  • Instrument 1 reduces integrated total emission by 65% more than 2.
  • 2000 to 2020
  • Neither instrument allows targets to be reached.
issues for discussion
Issues for discussion
  • Years and time periods set for
    • air quality objectives
    • economic evaluation
  • Value of air quality improvement in other years
  • Emission control measures
overview of process
Overview of Process
  • Model air quality situation today (1990)
  • Validate modelling results against measurements
  • Forecast change in emissions as result of already agreed measures
  • Forecast future air quality (2010)
  • Identify gaps between future air quality and targets
schematic of air quality modelling
Schematic of Air Quality Modelling

Air Quality

100

80

60

Necessary improvement

40

Target

20

0

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

air quality modelling cities
Air Quality Modelling - Cities
  • Athens, Greece
  • Cologne, Germany
  • London, England
  • Lyons, France
  • Madrid, Spain
  • Milan, Italy
  • The Hague, Netherlands
air quality modelling pollutants
Air Quality Modelling - Pollutants
  • Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
  • Carbon monoxide (CO)
  • Benzene (C6H6)
  • Ozone (O3)
  • Particulate Matter (PM)
city air quality modelling
City Air Quality Modelling
  • Pollutants assumed to be inert
  • 9 source categories
    • 6 road transport
    • small, medium and large stationary sources
  • Emissions from each source modelled separately
  • Air quality derived from addition of contributions from the 9 sources
city air quality modelling cont d
City Air Quality Modelling (Cont’d)
  • Only NOx modelled
  • Several models used - different models best for different cities.
  • Best model chosen for deriving emission reduction target
  • Grid of 2500 2x2km grids covering area 100km x 100km. 50 grids with highest concentrations investigated.
city air quality modelling cont d35
City Air Quality Modelling (Cont’d)
  • CO and Benzene concentrations calculated from CO/NOx, and Benzene/NOx ratios for different emission sources.
  • Compliance with air quality targets based on highest concentration in city
  • NO2air quality targets converted into NOx target using air quality data
nox target
NOx Target
  • Less severe target:
    • 98th percentile of 200 g/m3 NO2 equivalent to an annual mean of 79 g/m3 NO2
    • this is equivalent to 183g/m3 NOx
  • More severe target:
    • 98th percentile of 93 g/m3 is equivalent to an annual mean of 37 g/m3 NO2
    • this is equivalent to 66 g/m3 NOx
city air quality modelling results
City Air Quality Modelling Results
  • Carbon monoxide
    • All cities will meet the targets
  • Benzene
    • All cities will meet the less and more severe targets
    • The very severe target will not be met in four cities
  • Nitrogen Oxides
    • the more severe target is only met in one of the seven cities
emission reduction targets
Emission Reduction Targets
  • Assumes:
    • that all sectors reduce emissions by an equal amount
    • no account taken of cost-effectiveness of reducing emissions in other sectors
  • Based on worst grid in city
particulate matter
Particulate Matter
  • No modelling undertaken
    • Insufficient emission data
    • Insufficient monitoring data to validate results
    • Inadequate models
  • Emission reduction target derived from
    • Current but very limited monitoring data
    • Crude estimate of reductions required to meet target
    • Agreement between Auto Oil partners
regional ozone modelling
Regional Ozone Modelling
  • EMEP model
  • Used for the UNECE Protocol on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution
  • Now being used for EU ozone strategy
  • Scenario approach used to define emission reduction targets
regional ozone modelling cont d
Regional Ozone Modelling (Cont’d)
  • Scenario approach
    • zero road transport NOx emissions
    • zero road transport VOC emissions
    • zero road transport NOx and VOC emissions
    • 20%/40%  in stationary VOC emissions
    • 40%  in stationary NOx + VOC, and 20%  in road transport NOx+VOC emissions from 2010 basecase
    • 60%  in stationary NOx + VOC, and 40%  in road transport NOx+VOC emissions from 2010 basecase
regional ozone modelling cont d44
Regional Ozone Modelling (Cont’d)
  • Under no scenario were the air quality targets met everywhere in Europe.
  • For example: under zero road transport emissions 24% of the land cover of the EU exceeds the 8-hour average target (180 g/m3) in 2010
  • Emission reduction target of 70% for NOx and VOC from 1990 levels was agreed by Auto Oil Partners
issues for discussion45
Issues for Discussion
  • What pollutants are included in the Japanese Clean Air Programme?
  • How is air quality being modelled?
  • How are the models being validated?
  • How are the air quality targets being set?
  • Are there other environmental targets (e.g. CO2)?
  • How are the air quality targets being translated into targets for the optimisation?
slide47

Executive

Legislature

Judiciary

Council of Ministers

comprising the Foreign Minister of each of the EU member states

European Parliament

comprising MEPs directly elected by the voters of the EU

European Court of Justice

European Commission

the civil service of the EU, headed by Commissioners (political appointees) and Directors General (non-political)

Directives are the laws of the EU

Drafted by the Commission, under direction from the Council of Ministers, approved by the European Parliament, enforced by Member States, and interpreted by the European Court of Justice.

parameters of the cost effectiveness study
Parameters of the cost effectiveness study
  • to focus on measures which could be introduced by the year 2000
  • to measure their effects on emissions for the target year 2010
how to achieve the objectives
How to achieve the objectives

To achieve these objectives, within the parameters specified, the study focused on measures which were:

  • technically capable of introduction on an EU-wide level by the year 2000; and
  • likely to have a significant impact in reducing pollutant emissions by the year 2010
steps in the cost effectiveness study
Steps in the cost effectiveness study
  • define air quality targets
  • specify measures that could be used to hit them
    • technical
    • fuel quality
    • inspection and maintenance
    • non-technical
  • stipulate timescale
  • estimate costs of measures
  • convert costs to a common basis
  • estimate effects of measures
  • develop and run full cost effectiveness model (Transopt)
key elements in the methodology i

Dates

Key elements in the methodology - I

Dates:

  • 1996 - date of new European directives
  • 2000 - date of introduction of measures required
  • 2010 - date at which target pollutant emissions are examined

Cost categories:

  • investment costs of implementing the measure
  • direct operating costs (variable and fixed)
  • administrative / regulatory costs
  • indirect costs
  • welfare costs

Only the incremental costs of introducing a measure were relevent

for the purposes of the economic analysis

key elements in the methodology ii
Key elements in the methodology - II

Dates

Conversion of costs to a common basis:

  • all costs were measured in constant 1995 prices
  • the flow of costs between 1995 and 2015 was discounted back to 1995, applying a discount rate of 7%
  • the Net Present Value (NPV) of these costs was then computed
  • the NPV was divided by the economic lifetime of a particular measure to calculate its annual economic cost

Only the incremental costs of introducing a measure were relevent

for the purposes of the economic analysis

overall approach
Overall approach

STAGE 1

Inception

Inventory of measures to be studied

Agree methodology

STAGE 2

Non-technical

Fuel

Vehicles

- database on existing fiscal measures

- desk research

- desk research

- econometric estimation of demand

- cost analysis

- questionnaires and interview programme

elasticities for vehicles and fuel

- regional analyses

- prepare data on costs and effects

- case studies of best practice in

- alternative fuels

transport planning

- prepare data on uses and effects

- prepare data on costs and effects

Model testing

Workshop

STAGE 3

Scenario testing and sensitivity analysis

Analysis of results

Reporting

inventory of possible technical measures

TYPE OF

DESCRIPTION

OBJECTIVE

MEASURE

Improvements to vehicle engine technology

Vehicle

Reduction in emissions per

vehicle kilometre travelled

Manufacture

New propulsion technologies eg ZEV

Fuel quality improvements

Reduction in emissions per

vehicle kilometre travelled

Alternative fuel

Fuel

Reduction in emissions at

Vapour recovery systems for petrol stations

point of refuelling

Avoidance of potential

Improved inspection and maintenance

increases in emissions

Reduction in emissions by

Identification of gross polluters (Stedman approach)

elimination of high polluters

Vehicle

Operation

Reduction in emissions by

On board diagnostics (OBD)

rapid identification of problem

Reduction in emissions through

Enhanced service and recall procedure

extension of period during which

emissions remain under control

Inventory of possible technical measures
cost categories

VEHICLE

DEVELOPMENT

Engineering

R & D

Depreciation

Capital Costs

‘Core’

Costs

1

INVESTMENT

Materials

Parts

Labour

Production Overheads

PRODUCTION

COST

Purchasing

Finance

Admin

BUSINESS

OVERHEADS

Advertising

Marketing

Discounts

Warranty

COMMERCIAL

COSTS

‘Business Support’

Costs

2

Reasonable

Level

PROFIT

Including

dealer profit

DEALER

COST

Cost Categories
medium gasoline car example

Scenario 2

(-30% CO

-40% HC & NOx)

Scenario 3

(-45% CO

-65% HC & NOx)

Scenario 1

(-20%)

Parts cost

Other variable costs

Development /

investment costs

Business support costs

TOTAL

36

9

14

3

62

142

38

26

10

216

247

65

33

17

362

+

+

Medium gasoline car example
fuel quality methodology

DATA SOURCES

PROCESS

OUTPUT

Arthur D Little Studies since 1988

Results provided on an agregated basis for the total European Union

Develop cost curves for changes in selected quality parameters for both gasoline and diesel fuels in 1995 prices

Other Consultant Studies

Industry Input Concawe Europia

  • Account taken of:
  • regional differences
  • refinery type and facilities
  • feedstock variations
Fuel quality methodology
inspection and maintenance methods
Inspection and maintenance methods
  • periodic roadworthiness emissions tests under:
    • idle
    • free acceleration
    • transient conditions
  • remote roadside sensing
  • conformity of vehicles in circulation (CVC)
  • on board diagnostics (OBD)
issues for discussion64
Issues for Discussion
  • What potential policy measures are included in the Japan Clean Air Program?
  • What cost categories are included for each?
  • How are these costs put on a comparative basis?
  • Over what period are they being discounted?
  • What discount rate is appropriate for Japan?
  • How is the JCAP dealing with the uncertainties about their effects?
auto oil programme ii initiated 1997
Auto-Oil Programme II: initiated 1997
  • Terms of reference laid out in proposed AOPI passenger car and fuel quality Directives
  • Terms of reference changed in Directives 98/69/EC and 98/70/EC
  • Air quality work will continue
  • More analysis of stationary sector
  • More work on non-technical mechanisms
  • Less emphasis on cost-optimisation
  • Work programme currently being revised
aopii cities
Athens*

Berlin

Cologne*

Dublin

Helsinki

* AOPI cities

London*

Lyon*

Madrid*

Milan*

Utrecht

AOPII Cities
environmental objectives
Environmental Objectives
  • Air quality targets
  • Consistency with the EU ozone and acidification strategies
  • Impact on CO2 emissions to be assessed
aopii air quality targets
AOPII Air Quality Targets
  • Based on new EU Directives for NO2 and PM10
  • Based on provisional Directives for benzene and carbon monoxide
  • For regional ozone based on the provisional National Emission Ceilings Directive developed under EU ozone strategy
eu air quality framework directive
EU Air Quality Framework Directive

Limit values apply:

where the highest concentrations occur to which the population is likely to be directly or indirectly exposed for a period which is significant in relation to averaging period of limit value

air quality modelling overview
Air Quality modelling - Overview
  • 10 cities
  • Larger modelling domains
  • All pollutants fully modelled
  • Photochemical models
  • Complex relationship between emissions and air quality(i.e. non linear)
  • Integration with optimisation model complex
  • No ozone modelling - undertaken under different EU programme
new modelling in aopii
New Modelling in AOPII
  • PM to be modelled - ‘provisional results’
  • Street canyon modelling
emission scenario
Emission scenario

NOx emission

g/car km

Total NOx emission

kt

sample transport model results

Cost streams

Sample transport model results

Car NOx emission scenarios - kt

optimisation overview
Optimisation overview
  • Objective: achieve environmental targets at least cost
  • Optimisation procedures determineed by form of objectives, inputs, system and outputs
    • multi pollutant targets make cost curve analysis limited
    • multi year targets
    • discrete multi pollutant inputs (e.g. exhaust packages) make optimisation harder
    • non linear system
    • single point solutions difficult for policy use
aopi modelling and optimisation process
AOPI modelling and optimisation process

For each city :

  • Set the urban emission reduction targets.
  • Input the urban traffic and emission data for the country in which the city is located..
  • Use TransOpt to estimate the stock turnover and fleet emission fractions by vintage in 2010 for the different vehicle categories.
  • Use TransOpt to find the least cost combination of technical mechanisms (vehicle, fuel and I&M packages) which achieves the required emission reduction.
  • Apply the least cost combination to each of the 12 EU States and so estimate the total EU cost of that combination, and the emission reductions achieved in each State.
transopt runs
TransOpt Runs

EU wide technical mechanisms

For each country in 2010, TransOpt optimises over technical mechanisms to meet emission limits. Most costly (% increase over base cost, or ecu/person) country determines levels of technical mechanisms to meet limits in every European country.

Non-technical ‘local’ mechanisms

For representative countries/’cities’ in 2010, TransOpt optimises over technical and non-technical mechanisms to find any cost savings over use of technical mechanisms only. This indicates possible city and EU wide cost savings using all available mechanisms.

Ancillary runs

Sensitivity analysis: cost (vehicle vs fuel vs I&M; technical vs non-technical); urban demand growth; etc.

Simulate annual flows of emission and cash to examine possible ‘overshoot’ in years after 2010; and facilitate emission discounting.

transopt model process
TransOpt Model Process

Input : emission limits

: constraints on instruments and mechanisms

: country base data and scenario assumptions

Adjust instruments and mechanisms until minimum cost package found

Output aggregate results : emissions

: costs

: key data

Model each country in turn

requirements bubble limits
Requirements - Bubble Limits
  • EC sets air quality targets
  • Targets are translated into bubble limits for a given year and spatial class
  • Emissions from non vehicle sources are subtracted
  • Results in air pollution limits for transport by spatial class (maybe by country)
transopt transport optimisation model
TransOpt - transport optimisation model
  • Developed specifically for needs of Auto Oil 1 programme
  • Main focus on technical measures in road transport - exhaust and evaporative emission control packages, fuel packages, inspection and maintenance
  • Calculates transport annual emissions and costs
  • Optimises to minimise costs of meeting environmental targets. Specially developed optimisation technique applied.
  • Outputs least cost combinations of packages
conclusions and commentary
Conclusions and commentary
  • Only costs of emission control included
    • economic benefits of improving air quality excluded
  • Input data
    • Uncertainty in costs and effects - marginal costs of exhaust packages
    • Countervailing effects of fuels for different pollutants
    • Importance of basic scenario assumptions
    • Likely convergence of countries fleet characteristics
  • Least cost curve depends on target pollutant(s)
  • Total cost curve shows sharply increasing average marginal cost
  • Robustness of the solution
    • increases as more packages are brought into play
    • I&M (which includes durability and OBD)
      • 20% out of 50% maximum NOx reduction
      • little experience of degradation
  • Targets not met in Athens, Madrid and Milan
    • Non-technical and local mechanisms required
issues for discussion101
Issues for discussion
  • Which sectors and pollutants will be included?
  • Will control measures be discrete or continuous?
  • What is the best balance between simultaneous optimisation and cost curve based analysis?
  • What outputs are required for policy process?
framework for analysis

POLICY INSTRUMENT

MECHANISM

AGENTS

IMPACT

Price of cars x price

Fiscal

elasticity of demand

Vehicle stock

by type

Exhortation

Consumer preferences

X

Regulation

Vehicle technology

TOTAL

Emissions per

POLLUTANT

Fiscal

vehicle kilometre

Price of fuel

=

EMISSIONS

by type of vehicle

FROM

and type of fuel

Regulation

Fuel regulations

ROAD VEHICLES

Regulatory/Fiscal

Fuel quality

X

Price of car use vs price

Fiscal

of public transport

Exhortation

Number of

Consumer preferences

vehicle kilometres

travelled

Planning

Transportation system

Planning/Fiscal

Modal split

Framework for analysis
some general considerations
Some general considerations
  • the impact of NTMs depends on producer and consumer responses, which are uncertain
  • in general, demand for:
    • road space
    • fuel
    • car ownership

appears to be price inelastic but income elastic

  • therefore prices for these commodities must increase at a rate faster than real incomes for consumer demand to fall
  • from a welfare perspective, price based measures are more cost effective than rationing
road pricing findings of case studies
Road pricing - findings of case studies

Singapore

10

X

1973

8

Road

price,

ECU

6

(1995

prices)

London

X

1994

4

5 cities

X

X

London

Oslo

2

X

1994

Bergen

X

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Road demand as a % of 'free' road use

1) Oslo, Bergen, Singapore - actual experience

2) London - Touche Ross London Congestion

charging study 1994)

3) 5 cities - Dasgupta et al, UK Five Study

road pricing with and without revenue hypothecation
Road pricing with and without revenue hypothecation

D1

D

Road

price,

ECU /

kilometre

P

D

Q0

Q1

Q

Private car use, kilometres

DD = Demand curve without revenue hypothecation

D1D = Demand curve with revenues from road prices allocated to public

transport subsidies

scrappage subsidies new cars for old
Scrappage Subsidies: New Cars for Old
  • Provides an incentive to replace heavy polluters with new clean technologies
  • Boosts the auto industry & economy during a period of recession
  • Accelerates the impact of technical regulation
issues for discussion117
Issues for Discussion
  • Should non-technical measures be included in the Japan Clean Air Program?
  • Can they be treated on a like-for-like basis with technical measures?
  • Which NTMs can be introduced at national level?
  • Which NTMs can only be introduced at city or regional level?
  • What does this imply for an integrated approach to emissions reduction?
political results of aopi
Political Results of AOPI
  • Vehicle Technology - light duty
    • Directive 98/69/EC (13th October 1998)
    • Passenger cars/light duty commercial vehicles
    • Euro III and Euro IV emission limits from 2000/2001 and 2005/2006
    • Modified test cycle
gasoline cars from 70 220 eec to 98 69 ec 2005
Gasoline Cars - from 70/220/EEC to 98/69/EC (2005)

% emissions compared

to 1970 unregulated levels

diesel from 88 76 eec to 98 69 ec 2005
Diesel - from 88/76/EEC to 98/69/EC (2005)

% emissions compared

to 1988 unregulated levels

political results of aopi cont d
Political Results of AOPI (Cont’d)
  • Vehicle Technology - heavy duty
    • Commission proposal to emissions by about 30% from 1995/96 levels for NOx and PM by 2000.
    • October 1998, 1st reading in European Parliament proposed a mandatory Euro IV standard for 2005, equivalent to 70% reduction in emissions from the year 2000 proposed limit values.
    • ACEA has stated that this is not achievable. It has proposed a 30% reduction for 2005.
    • The Directive is scheduled to be agreed by summer 1999.
political results of aopi cont d124
Political Results of AOPI (Cont’d)
  • Fuel Quality
    • Directive 98/70/EC (13th October 1998)
    • environmental gasoline and diesel quality standards from the year 2000
    • very low sulphur diesel; and low aromatic and sulphur gasoline from 2005
political results of aopi cont d125
Political Results of AOPI (Cont’d)
  • Inspection and Maintenance
    • Proposal for random roadside tests for trucks
    • It appears unlikely that a more stringent roadworthiness test will be introduced due to a lack of interest amongst member states.
issues for discussion126
Issues for Discussion
  • Are the policy measures being considered in the Japanese Clean Air Programme politically acceptable?
  • How robust will the analysis be considered by outsiders?
  • Can complex technical programmes be communicated effectively to politicians in Japan?
  • Will influential politicians want the highest possible standards irrespective of cost?
impact pathway analysis some valuation issues
Impact Pathway Analysis: some valuation issues

Pathway Stage

Data / Model

General Questions

Technology

Burden

Concentration Field

Impact

Damage

What are the boundaries for emission effects?

How accurate are burden and dispersion models?

How well can health and other impacts be measured?

How clearly can they be ascribed to particular pollutants?

What happens if dose/response functions are non-linear?

How reliable are existing valuation methods? E.g. the value of human life.

Are valuations transferable, eg how appropriate are US or EU values in Japan?

Emission factor

Dispersion model

Dose / response function

Valuation database

treatment of uncertainty
Treatment of uncertainty
  • Why are we uncertain? Not principally because of:
    • known variances in environmental impacts; or
    • sampling variability
  • But rather because of:
    • methodological issues; and
    • fundamental scientific uncertainties
issues for discussion135
Issues for Discussion
  • Will the Japan Clean Air Program seek to estimate the benefits of emissions reduction?
  • If so, what methods will be used to value the benefits?
  • If not, how will the JCAP determine the optimal level of abatement?
  • How will the JCAP deal with the uncertainties relating to dose/response relationships, health impacts, the value of life, etc?
setting air quality and emissions targets
Setting Air Quality and Emissions Targets
  • Assess health effects of pollution loads
  • Define maximum safe concentration levels
  • Calculate maximum rates of emission consistent with these
defining the scope of the emissions abatement program
Defining the scope of the emissions abatement program
  • Stationary as well as mobile sources?
  • Local as well as regional / national sources?
  • How detailed? E.g. in the mobile sector, covering lawn mowers and motorbikes as well as cars, buses and lorries? Rail and air as well as road vehicles?
defining policy measures
Defining policy measures
  • Technical regulation of emissions standards
  • Regulation of fuel quality standards
  • Inspection and maintenance programmes
  • Non-technical measures: taxes, subsidies, user charges, voluntary agreements, exhortation
cost analysis
Cost Analysis
  • Collating and classifying costs
  • Ensuring costs are calculated on a comparable basis
  • Selecting a discount rate
  • Discounting future costs back to real (1998) prices
  • Calculating their Net Present Value
benefits analysis
Benefits Analysis
  • Identifying and classifying benefits
  • Applying methods to value them on a comparable basis
  • Selecting a discount rate
  • Discounting future benefits back to real (1998) prices
  • Calculating their Net Present Value
how senco can help
How SENCO can Help

SENCO can help the JCAP by providing independent advice and support on:

  • air quality and emissions targets;
  • the methodology for calculating the costs of different measures to hit these targets;
  • the methodology for calculating their benefits;
  • the modelling and optimisation process;
  • the use of the programme for policymaking