CLIMATE CURE 2020 MEASURES AND INSTRUMENTS TO ACHIEVE NORWEGIAN CLIMATE GOALS BY 2020
Chapter 10 The Transport Sector Analysis
TA 2723/2010
Preface
This document is a translation of Chapter 10, Sector analysis of transport, in the Norwegian report Climate Cure 2020, Measures and Instruments for Achieving Norwegian Climate Goals by 2020.
The sector analysis has been prepared by an inter agency working group, conducted by the Norwegian Public Road Administration.
10...... Transport 3 10.1 Main results ...... 3 10.2 Scope of the analysis...... 8 10.2.1 Target and scope...... 8 10.2.2 Assumptions and method...... 8 10.3 Technological status ...... 11 10.4 Measures that have been analysed ...... 12 10.5 Emission reductions and the costs of individual measures that result in reduced emissions from means of transport...... 14 10.5.1 Biofuels...... 15 10.5.2 Increasing the efficiency of passenger cars...... 17 10.5.3 Car tyres...... 18 10.5.4 Electrification of the vehicle fleet...... 18 10.5.5 Hydrogen in the passenger car fleet...... 18 10.5.6 Increased efficiency in delivery vans and heavy vehicles...... 19 10.5.7 Ecological driving...... 20 10.5.8 Electrification of stretches of railway ...... 20 10.5.9 Ferries with natural gas...... 20 10.5.10 Lower ship speeds...... 21 10.5.11 Shore power...... 21 10.5.12 Energy efficiency measures for ships ...... 21 10.5.13 Oslo ASAP (advanced sectorisation and automation project) ...... 22 10.6 Emission reductions and costs for individual measures that result in changed distribution of means of transport/reduced amount of transport ...... 22 10.6.1 Improved collective transport in the six largest cities...... 25 10.6.2 Doubling of the share of bicycles ...... 25 10.6.3 Coordination of goods transport ...... 25 10.6.4 Goods transport by rail ...... 26 10.6.5 Development of intercity trains ...... 26 10.6.6 Development of high-speed railway ...... 26 10.6.7 Long-distance buses...... 27 10.7 Measures where the emission potential and costs have not been assessed ...... 28 10.7.1 More climate-friendly use of space...... 28 10.7.2 Paving the way for pedestrians ...... 28 10.7.3 Active mobility management...... 28 10.7.4 Cleaning of hulls and propellers ...... 29 10.7.5 Modular semi-trailer 25.25 metres long...... 29 10.7.6 Lower speeds on roads...... 29 10.7.7 Upgrading/development of roads...... 29 10.7.8 Intelligent transport systems (ITS)...... 30 10.7.9 Co-modality ...... 30 10.8 Emission reductions and costs for packages of measures/instruments calculated using a transport model 31 10.9 Uncertainty ...... 38 10.10 Assessment of policy instruments, transport...... 39 10.10.1 Economic instruments...... 39 10.10.2 Regulatory instruments...... 45 10.10.3 Information, expertise and research and development (R&D)...... 46
2 10. Transport The sector analysis has been prepared by an inter agency working group, conducted by the Norwegian Public Road Administration, consisting of experts from the Climate and Pollution Agency, the government transport agencies and Avinor (the Norwegian Air navigation service provider and main airport operator), and has drawn on reports by external consultants and estimates from different subject areas. Avinor, the Norwegian National Rail Administration, the Norwegian Coastal Administration and the Norwegian Maritime Directorate have performed the analyses of measures and policy instruments employed in their respective areas, but have not had the opportunity to assess and consider the whole report in detail. Seven independent consulting assignments have been carried out, and their reports are available on the website of Climate Cure 2020: www.klimakur.no. Quality assurance of the calculation results as a whole has also been conducted by an external agent. The transport modelling was carried out by the Institute of Transport Economics, partly on assignment from the Ministry of Transport and Communications under the programme for general transport research (POT) and partly by Climate Cure 2020 represented by the National Rail Administration and the Norwegian Public Roads Administration.
10.1 Main results
To sum up briefly, the analysis of transport sector measures and instruments shows that it may be possible to achieve emission reductions of the order of 3-4.5 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2020. This requires very strong instruments, large investments/transfers and a strong political will. It also depends on developments in and access to biofuels. It is necessary to have a long-term strategy behind the choice of instruments in the transport sector, and the instruments must be adjusted over time as their effects become apparent.
Demand for transport services increases with economic and population growth. Without new or stronger instruments, the baseline scenario projections show that greenhouse gas emissions in the transport sector can be expected to increase from the present 17 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent to about 19 million tonnes in 2020 and 21 million tonnes in 2030. Norway has already extracted some of the emission reduction potential, because a number of instruments have already been introduced, including CO2 tax on fuel. There is also a relatively major emission reduction already incorporated in the baseline scenario in the form of assumptions regarding technical improvements. This means that it may prove costly to achieve the climate target for transport in Norway compared with other countries.
In line with the transport target in the Norwegian Climate Policy (Report no. 34 of 2006-2007 to the Storting) the sector analysis for transport is intended to show how emissions from the sector can be reduced by at least
2.5-4 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent compared with the baseline scenario for 2020, and preferably exceed this goal. This is an ambitious goal. The purpose of the analysis has been to evaluate measures and instruments that can be used to achieve large emission reductions in the transport sector. The social
3 consequences of a number of the measures and instruments may be significant, but a thorough analysis of the consequences has not been made here.
The largest emission reductions can be achieved through measures associated with biofuels and vehicle technology, estimated to be of the order of 1.8 – 1.9 million and 0.8 million tonnes respectively, or a total of 2.6-2.7 million tonnes. A further potential reduction of up to 1.2-1.4 million tonnes is forecast to result from the development of collective transport combined with sharp tax increases on car and/or air transport (simulations 5A and 6B, cf. discussion of transport model calculations). Other measures are estimated to have a potential of about 0.8 million tonne per year. In all, it is considered possible to achieve emission reductions of the order of 3-4.5 million tonnes in 2020 by means of strong instruments. The lowest estimate excludes severe restrictions on road/air traffic. The potential depends on a substantial share of biofuel in the vehicle fleet. These calculations are limited to domestic emissions. Account has therefore not been taken of any changes in emissions abroad as a result of increased use of biofuels, and it is assumed that there is a sufficient quantity of biofuels available on the market.
The transport sector is complex and consists of many players with different needs. In the passenger transport segment, business trips and trading/service account for an important share of the short trips, while leisure travel also accounts for a substantial share of the emissions due to passenger transport. Goods transport takes place over long distances, where a larger share is likely to take place by ship or train, but much of the road transport is also associated with local distribution where there may be few alternatives to road transport. Measures and instruments may therefore be aimed both at achieving a transition to means of transport with less emissions where this is possible, and towards more energy-efficient vehicles. Measures within the sector are often inter-dependent, and costs and effectiveness will vary substantially, depending on the nature of the measure and dimensioning of the instruments. Consequently transport modelling has been carried out to see the effect of different packages of measures and instruments. The effects and costs have been calculated for various levels of fuel prices, doubled toll ring charges, halved collective fares, doubled airfares and high parking charges, combined with development of intercity trains and high-speed trains and more frequent long-distance buses.
The estimated costs of the measures considered are mainly less than NOK 1 500/tonne, but some are also substantially higher. A number of measures prove to be socioeconomically profitable. The reasons for not implementing them may be various obstacles or non-quantified costs.
The effects of a number of measures and instruments in 2030 have also been evaluated. The potential emission reduction associated with increased used of biofuel is estimated at 3.8 million or 7.7 million tonnes, depending on the quantity assumed to be used in the mix. A high proportion of biofuel in the mix is assumed to be based on second-generation biofuel. It is assumed that the potential of technical measures for vehicles will be substantially larger than in 2020 because it takes time to introduce new technology. Moreover, transport modelling shows that developments in railway goods transport (tripled capacity) may result in a further reduction in 2030. In addition comes increased goods transport efficiency. All in all, it is estimated that the measures analysed may result in total emission reductions of up to 8-12 million tonnes in 2030. The estimate is not complete. Environmentally effective siting of residential areas, workplaces, collective
4 transport interchanges, service functions etc. in relation to one another may additionally reduce traffic needs regionally and pave the way for a high share of collective transport, cycling and walking. This requires firm regional and municipal land use management.
To bring about the measures, in both 2020 and 2030, it is necessary to use taxes, invest in infrastructure, provide information about and introduce incentives to promote technical solutions and environmentally friendly transport. There appears to be considerable potential for the introduction of new vehicle technology such as electricity and possibly also hydrogen, and a higher share of renewable biofuel. However, it takes a long time to develop new technology and to replace the Norwegian vehicle fleet, so technology based on petrol and diesel will continue to account for the bulk of the vehicle fleet in 2020. New technology will not account for a significant part of the vehicle fleet in 2020. However, there is a considerable potential for replacing the vehicle fleet and for zero-emission and low-emissions vehicles by 2030 and 2050.
Higher taxes and/or restrictions on car and /or air transport may affect the business sector, personal mobility and residential patterns, and this could have effects on distribution. Such instruments should therefore not be implemented without at the same time providing users of collective transport, pedestrians and cyclists with favourable options. This demands major investment in the railway over and above the National Transport Plan 2010-2019, and increased subsidising of collective transport. User costs are quite high. At the same time, compensation can be made for any effects on distribution. It is necessary to have a long-term strategy behind the choice of instruments in the transport sector, and the instruments must be adjusted over time as their effects become apparent. Shifting goods transport from road to sea and rail is an overarching goal. Balanced use of instruments is a prerequisite for being able to utilise the potential for climate gains inherent in an optimal distribution of the transport volume between different parts of the sector. The instruments must not be an obstacle to the transfer of goods transport.
Figures 10-1 and 10-2 show the potential for emission reductions estimated for groups of measures in 2020 and 2030 respectively. The figures show that the potential is greatest and the costs lowest for energy efficiency measures and measures that reduce emissions from the individual means of transport through the use of biofuel and electrification. There is also considerable potential associated with a change in the distribution of means of transport (development of collective transport supplemented by taxes on car traffic and development of goods transport by rail), but the costs are quite high. Note that by 2030 the potential for energy saving has largely been exhausted, so that in some respects these measures have become more expensive than biofuel and electrification. There is assumed to be a very high potential for biofuel in 2030. This presupposes a sufficient supply of and development of second generation fuel. The calculations have been carried out by different methods, and the costs are not directly comparable.
5 2020
More expensive to 4000 drive, cheaper and better public transport
3000
2 CO 2000
1000 Biofuel and electrification NOK/Tonne
Energy saving 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 measures
of
‐1000 Small
Cost profitable ‐2000 potential
‐3000 Emissions reduction 1000s of tonnes
Biodiesel mix road ‐ base Biodiesel mix construction ‐ base Biodiesel mix coastal wessels ‐ base Biodiesel mix rail ‐ base Biodiesel mix rail ‐high Biodiesel mix fisheries ‐ base 2. gen. biofuel aviation ‐ base Ethanol mix road Flexifuel Phase‐in and E85 ‐ high Increased efficiency passenger cars Increased efficiency delivery vans Ecodriving Car tyres Aviation measure ‐ ASAP Speed reduction/optimisation ships Electrification of passenger cars Electrification railway Electric power sypply from shore to ships Hydrogencars Gas ferries Double fuel/toll road price, half price publ. trans. (5a+5c) Double charge toll road (5a3) Increased parking prices (5a4) 5a1+20% incr. fuel price cars (5a1‐20) 5a1+60% incr. fuel price cars (5a1‐60) 5a+25% incr. freq. public transport (5a1‐25fr) Double fuel price cars (5a1)
Figure 10-1: The estimated potential emission reduction and costs of measures that are considered in the sector analysis, 2020 (measures under NOK 4000/tonne). Transport modelling shows different combinations of packages and instruments, and hence does not show the effects of one measure in isolation. The simulations are highly uncertain and different methods have been used to carry them out. The costs are therefore not directly comparable.
6 2030 4000
3000 More expensive 2 to drive, cheaper CO and better public 2000 transport Energy saving
1000 NOK/Tonne
0 Biofuel and electrification measures
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 of
‐1000 Small
Cost profitable potential ‐2000
‐3000
Emissions reduction 1000s of tonnes
Double fuel/toll road price, half price public trans. (5a+5c) Double fuel price cars (5a1) Double charge toll road (5a3) Increased parking prices (5a4) 5a1+20% incr. fuel price cars (5a1‐20) 5a1+60% incr. fuel price cars (5a1‐60) 5a+25% incr. freq. public transport (5a1‐25fr) Ethanol mix road ‐ base Biodiesel mix road ‐ base 2. gen. biofuel aviation ‐ base Biodiesel mix coastal wessels ‐ base Biodiesel mix fisheries ‐ base Biodiesel mix construction ‐ base Flexifuel Phase‐in and E85 ‐ high Biodiesel mix road ‐ high Biodiesel mix rail ‐high 2. gen. biofuel aviation ‐ high Biodiesel mix coastal wessels ‐ high Biodiesel mix fisheries ‐ high Biodiesel mix construction ‐ high Increased efficiency passenger cars Electrification of passenger cars Hydrogencars Increased efficiency delivery vans Car tyres Electrification railway Aviation measure ‐ ASAP Speed reduction/optimisation ships Electric power sypply from shore to ships Gas ferries Ecodriving
Figure 10-2: Estimated potential emission reduction and costs of measures and packages of measures that are considered in the sector analysis, 2020 (measures under NOK 4000/tonne). Transport modelling shows different combinations of packages and instruments, and hence does not show the effects of one measure in isolation. The simulations are highly uncertain and different methods have been used to carry them out. The costs are therefore not directly comparable.
7 10.2 Scope of the analysis
10.2.1 Target and scope In line with the transport target in the “Climate report” (Report no. 34 2006-2007 to the Storting) the transport sector analysis is intended to show how emissions from the sector can be reduced by at least 2.5-4 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent compared with the baseline scenario for 2020, and preferably exceed this goal. This is an ambitious goal, and the purpose of the analysis has been to evaluate measures and instruments that can be used to achieve large emission reductions in the transport sector. The social consequences of a number of the measures and instruments may be significant, but a thorough analysis of these consequences has not been made here.
The sector analysis for transport includes railway, civil aviation, shipping, road traffic, fisheries, offshore transport and other mobile sources (tractors, motorised equipment etc.). It is restricted to domestic transport, i.e. travel starting and ending in Norway. In addition, only Norwegian emissions are considered. For example, no account is taken of the fact that energy consumption saved in Norway could replace polluting coal power in other countries.
Emphasis is placed on covering a broad range of measures and instruments in the analysis. Attempts have been made to quantify all major benefit and cost components as far as possible, including user benefit /consumer surplus (for example time and vehicle costs). However, because of inadequate knowledge and statistical data and the high complexity of the interplay between a broad spectrum of measures and instruments there is considerable uncertainty associated with the emission and cost figures. Some of the assumptions that have been chosen have a considerable bearing on the calculation results. The figures should be used with caution.
10.2.2 Assumptions and method In this section, we discuss specific assumptions underlying the transport analysis. Other assumptions follow the methodology of Climate Cure 2020. Reference is also made to a more detailed description in the background documentation Sector analysis for transport, measures and instruments for reduced emissions of greenhouse gases from transport (the Norwegian Directorate of Roads et al., 2010 (in Norwegian)).
Demand for transport services increases with economic and population growth. Without new or stronger instruments, baseline scenario projections show that greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector can be expected to increase from the present 17 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent to about 19 million tonnes in 2020 and 21 million tonnes in 2030. Assumptions concerning a significant increase in energy efficiency are already incorporated in the baseline scenario, which is of great importance to the extent of the measures analysed, particularly for aviation. In addition to measures and instruments in the baseline scenario, the effect of the investment projects in the National Transport Plan 2010-2019 (NTP) is included (Report no. 16 (2008- 2009) to the Storting) and a quota system for aviation in the basis for comparison against which the measures in the analysis are measured. Figures 10-3 and 10-4 show the distribution of mobile combustion emissions and projections by sector. The figures cover both civilian and military aviation, but only civil aviation is 8 considered in the sector analysis. Rail transport and emissions from motorised equipment such as tractors, mechanical shovels etc. are included in the category “Other mobile combustion”.
Road traffic: 10.3 million tonnes (59%)
Aviation, civil: 1 million tonnes (5%)
Aviation, military: 0.1 million tonnes (1%)
Shipping: 2.3 million tonnes (13%)
Fisheries: 1.1 million tonnes (7%)
Other mobile combustion: 2.5 million tonnes (14%)
Figure 10-3: Distribution of greenhouse gases from mobile sources in 2007 (Statistics Norway and the Norwegian Climate and Pollution Agency).
9
Figure 10-4: Distribution and projected emissions of greenhouse gases from mobile sources 1990-2030 in Perspectives Report 2009 (Report no. 9 (2008-2009) to the Storting by Statistics Norway and the Norwegian Climate and Pollution Agency). The figure covers both civilian and military aviation, and higher traffic growth is assumed than in the NTP.
A tax cost for public sector expenses/income is included in the calculations. The size of the tax cost strongly influences the results. It is furthermore assumed that all income from the increase in the fuel price accrues to the government in the form of indirect taxes. This also has a major bearing on the results.
The calculations do not take into account the fact that reduced fuel consumption as a result of the energy efficiency measures in the vehicle fleet will lead to somewhat more travel and/or an increase in other consumption (rebound effect). Account has been taken of the fact that a better collective transport service will
10 result in increased traffic. Nor have iterations been made of the various measures and packages of measures to “optimise” the results and to dimension the instruments.
Transport sector measures are often mutually interdependent, and the costs and effects will vary very substantially depending on the nature of the measures and dimensioning of the instruments. Transport modelling was used to calculate what it would mean for costs per tonne if the emissions from every single vehicle were lower, because the technical measures on the vehicles were applied before the measures simulated with transport models were applied. The effect of the measures on the emissions is then smaller, and the costs per tonne increase. The cost increase is estimated at 22-27 per cent in 2020. However, a combined phase-in of technical measures and measures that lead to shifts and changes in the amount of transport are a probable scenario for triggering the potential of the sector.
Emission reduction and costs are partly simulated for individual measures and partly for packages of measures and instruments with the aid of regional and national transport models. A strategic planning model has been used for measures associated with collective transport in the biggest cities. The cost calculations for railway-related measures have been carried out both separately and with the aid of transport models. The modelling was carried out to provide as much knowledge as possible about relationships and competition interfaces between forms of transport and the aggregate effects of the various measures and instruments. The results of the transport model simulations form input data in their turn for calculations using the user benefit module. This makes it possible to quantify as many as possible of the benefit and cost components, including the consumer surplus.
In some of the analyses, the transport models and modules for socioeconomic calculations are used at the extreme limits of what they are intended for. There is accordingly great uncertainty concerning the results from the transport model and socioeconomic calculations. The analyses nevertheless provide good indications of the strength of the instruments that must be used to bring about a transition to less emission-intensive forms of transport.
10.3 Technological status
In the transport sector, there is great potential for increasing energy efficiency, new fuels and new technology. Customers demand these improvements, and we will see growing competition among technology producers to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from their own products.
As this analysis shows, there is also a great potential in the transition to new energy-carriers. The most relevant energy-carriers in the future, alongside the fossil fuels, petrol and diesel, are electricity, biofuels and hydrogen. Which of these measures results in the lowest greenhouse gas emissions depends on the mode of production and use. Apart from in the railway sector, electricity is primarily relevant for the roads sector, for both purely electric cars and plug-in hybrid cars. Biofuel is relevant for all sectors, but aviation cannot use first generation biofuel. With the exception of some uses in ships, natural gas has limited potential for
11 reducing emissions and will therefore not be discussed further. In the longer term, new revolutionary technology is expected in aviation, but it is unlikely to be available as early as in 2020.
10.4 Measures that have been analysed
An overview of the measures that have been analysed is shown in the table below. The costs and emission reduction of all measures have not been calculated.
Table 10-1 Measures examined in the transport sector analysis
Road transport:
Vehicle technology:
increased efficiency of petrol and diesel passenger cars and delivery vans introduction of electric cars, plug-in hybrid cars and hydrogen cars car tyres for passenger cars ecological driving in passenger cars
Change in distribution of means of transport and reduction in the amount of transport:
a better collective transport service in the six biggest cities with and without restrictions on road traffic long-distance buses reduced road traffic as a result of an increased fuel price, congestion charging, parking restrictions and lower collective transport fares a doubling of the share going to bicycles (investment, operations/maintenance, signposting/information) coordinated goods transport reduced speed
Railway:
intercity trains high-speed trains (Oslo-Trondheim and Oslo-Bergen) goods strategy on the railway (tripled capacity) electrification of diesel stretches
Shipping:
shore power reduced speed 12 cleaning of hulls and propellers various measures to increase energy efficiency gas ferries
Aviation:
re-organisation of airspace over Eastern Norway (Oslo ASAP) reduced traffic as a result of increased prices
Measures across the transport sector:
biofuels mobility management more environmentally friendly land use co-modality in the transport sector intelligent transport systems
Measures that are calculated individually will be presented first in this chapter, then the results of transport modelling.
13 10.5 Emission reductions and the costs of individual measures that result in reduced emissions from means of transport
This section presents the analysed measures that have been calculated individually. The biofuel mix is discussed first, then technical measures relating to vehicles, and finally other measures that reduce emissions from the individual vehicle. Emission reductions and costs and the assumptions on which the calculations are based are described. For further details, see the background documentation (Directorate of Roads et al., 2010). Figure 10-5 shows the calculated potential for emission reductions in 2020 and 2030 for all analysed measures that result in reduced emissions from means of transport. Figure 10-6 shows the estimated socioeconomic costs of the same measures.
Potential emission reduction, measures that result in reduced emission from means of transport
5000
s 4500
4000
3500
3000 2020 2500 2030 2000
1500
1000 Emission reductions, 1000s of ton of 1000s Emission reductions, 500
0 Car tyres Car Gas ferries Gas Hydrogen cars Ecological driving Aviation fuel - fuel Aviation high Shore powerships Electrification railway Measures aviation: ASAP Mix biodiesel railway Mix biodiesel -high Mix biofuel fisheriesMix biofuel -basic Speed red/optimisationships Speed Electrification passenger cars Mix petrol roads ethanol - basic Biofuel mix fisheriesBiofuel - fleet high Mix biodiesel roadsdiesel Mix biodiesel - high coastalMixbiodiesel - fleet high Phase-in - and E85 flexifuel high Mix biodiesel roadsdiesel Mix biodiesel - basic coastalMixbiodiesel - fleet basic Mix biodiesel railwaydiesel Mix biodiesel - basic Increased efficiency delivery vans Increased energy efficiency, ships Mix 2nd gen. biofuel aviation -Mix 2nd gen. biofuel basic Increased efficiency passenger cars Mix biodiesel constructionMix biodiesel diesel - high Mix biodiesel constructionMix biodiesel diesel - basic Measure
Figure 10-5: Estimated potential emission reductions due to measures that result in reduced emissions from means of transport. Basic and high options are shown for biofuels. Electrification of railways is an alternative to biofuels.
14 2020 Costs, measures that result in reduced emisions 2030 from means of transport 5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0 Costs, NOK/ton
-1000 tyres Car Gas ferries Gas Hydrogen cars Ecological drivingEcological Aviation fuel - fuel high Aviation Shore power ships
-2000 Electrification railway MeasuresASAP aviation: Mix biodiesel railwayMix biodiesel - high Mix biofuel fisheriesMix biofuel - basic Speed red/optimisation Speed ships Electrification passengercars Biofuel mix fisheriesBiofuel - fleet high Mix ethanol petrol roadsMix ethanol - basic Mix biodiesel coastalMix biodiesel - fleet high Mix biodiesel diesel roadsdiesel Mix biodiesel - high Phase-in flexifuel and E85 -Phase-inand E85 high flexifuel Mix biodiesel coastalMix biodiesel - fleet basic -3000 roadsdiesel Mix biodiesel - basic Increased efficiencydelivery vans Mix biodiesel diesel railwaydiesel Mix biodiesel - basic Mix 2nd gen. biofuel aviation - aviation basic Mix2nd gen. biofuel Increased efficiencypassenger cars Mix biodiesel construction Mix biodiesel - diesel high Mix biodiesel construction Mix biodiesel - diesel basic -4000
Measure
Figure 10-6: Estimated costs of measures that result in reduced emissions from means of transport. Basic and high options are shown for biofuels. Electrification of railways is an alternative to biofuels. There is a high degree of uncertainty associated with the calculations.
10.5.1 Biofuels It is estimated that phasing in biofuels would potentially result in reductions of 1.7-1.9 million tonnes in 2020 and 3.8-7.7 million tonnes in 2030. The basic alternative assumes a 10 per cent biofuel mix for all types of transport in 2020 and 20 per cent in 2030. In the high alternative, the mix is assumed to have increased to 40 per cent in 2030. The only exception is for railways, where a mix of 5 per cent is assumed in the basic alternative and 50 per cent in the high alternative. The high alternative also includes an assumed phase-in of E85 (85 per cent ethanol) for light passenger cars, which are assumed to constitute 20 per cent of the market in 2020 and 90 per cent in 2030. A higher mix than 10 per cent is also possible in some sectors, for example heavy vehicles, which are best suited for such a move. The level of ambition in the basic alternative takes into
15 account that Norway is not supposed to exceed the average expected availability of bioethanol and biodiesel and the level of the biofuel mixes internationally.
Table 10-2 Estimated emission reduction potential and net socioeconomic costs per tonne of reduced CO2 for biofuels.
Measures Tonnes CO2/year NOK/tonne CO2
Biofuels 2020 2030 2020 2030
Basic level of ambition
Ethanol mix in petrol road traffic 130 000 240 000 1 300 800
Biodiesel mix in diesel road traffic 983 000 2 270 000 1 000 300
Biodiesel mix railways 2 000 2 000 1 300 1 300
Mix. second generation biofuel aviation 125 000 290 000 800 300
Biofuel mix coastal fleet 222 000 473 000 1 000 300
Biofuel mix fisheries fleet 133 000 262 000 1 100 800
Biodiesel mix construction diesel 160 000 318 000 1 000 300
Total basic 1 755 000 3 855 000
High level of ambition
Phase-in of flexi-fuel vehicles and ethanol petrol E85 299 000 791 000 1 400 800
Biodiesel mix in diesel road traffic 983 000 4 538 000 1 000 300
Biodiesel mix railways 23 000 23 000 1 300 1 300
Aviation fuel 125 000 580 000 800 300
Biofuel mix coastal fleet 222 000 946 000 1 000 300
Biofuel mix fisheries fleet 133 000 524 000 1 100 800
Biodiesel mix construction diesel 160 000 318 000 1 000 300
Second generation BTL produced in Norway - - 1 300 800
Total high 1 945 000 7 720 000
The costs vary from NOK 800-1400/tonne in 2020 and from NOK 300-1300/tonne in 2030. It is important to note that in these estimates of CO2 gains, it is assumed that 100 per cent of the biofuel is imported. CO2 emissions associated with the production of raw materials and biofuel will then take place in the country of origin. This manner of calculation is consistent with that in the method report of Climate Cure 2020, and means that the measures will result in a 100 per cent CO2 gain for Norway. Assumed emissions in other countries are described in the measures forms. If these were to be taken into account, the effect of mixing in second generation biofuel would be reduced by some 10 per cent, while the effect of mixing in first generation biofuel would be reduced by about 30-50 per cent, depending on which raw material was used. It is assumed that only certified biofuel is used in the future. This means that sustainability and climate potential requirements would be made of the fuel. These requirements, which are being formulated by the EU, are 16 intended to ensure that the conflict between food production and threatened species of animals and high- nature-value areas are kept to a minimum.
The high mix scenario in 2030 is assumed to bring about an overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of 7.7 million tonnes in 2030, of which almost 7 million tonnes stems from the use of second generation biodiesel. Second generation biofuel is in an early phase of technological development. It is very uncertain whether it will be possible to industrialise this fuel to any particular extent before close to 2030.
Other measures associated with vehicles and fuels
Table 3 shows the emission potential for other vehicle and fuel measures.
Table 10-3 Estimated emission reduction potential and net socioeconomic costs per tonne of reduced CO2 for measures relating to private vehicles. The measures are additive.
Measure Tonnes CO2/year NOK/tonne CO2/year
2020 2030 2020 2030
Increasing efficiency of passenger 397 000 1 170 000 185 490 cars
Car tyres 106 000 98 000 1 280 1 970
Electrification of passenger cars 203 000 793 000 1 180 -45
Hydrogen cars 11 000 191 000 3 810 1 090
Increasing efficiency of delivery vans 65 000 300 000 1 130 1 900
Total 782 000 2 552 000
10.5.2 Increasing the efficiency of passenger cars
The potential emission reduction is estimated to be 397 000 tonnes CO2 over and above the increase in efficiency already incorporated in the baseline scenario. The estimated cost is NOK 185/tonne. The greater increase in energy efficiency is made possible by the EU law on CO2 emissions from passenger cars, whereby emissions must be reduced from about 160 g/km in 2008 to 130 g/km from 2012-2015 (phase-in), and further to 95 g/km in 2020. It is assumed that a certain percentage of electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid vehicles and possibly hydrogen vehicles will have to be sold in 2020 to bring the average emissions from passenger cars in Europe down to 95 g/km. The average emissions from new passenger cars with combustion engines are accordingly assumed to come down to about 106 g/km in 2020 in Europe, and it is assumed that this will also be the average in Norway. However, this presupposes continued active differentiation of the purchase tax according to CO2 emissions. Some of the reduction that this implies is already incorporated in the baseline scenario. A possible increase in energy efficiency of about 1.0 per cent per year is estimated between 2020 and 2030. In addition the measure contains small technical requirements with respect to increasing the energy
17 efficiency of various car components that will be implemented through a number of EU directives and laws. In 2030, the average car with a combustion engine will emit about 90 g/km, which is the same as the 2010 model of the Toyota Prius. This is a level that the International Energy Agency, among others, considers could be realised by 2030.
10.5.3 Car tyres The measure entails car tyres with lower rolling resistance than is required by general car safety regulations.
The potential emission reduction in 2020 is estimated at 106 000 tonnes of CO2. The costs are estimated at NOK 1 280/tonne. A somewhat lower potential and higher costs are expected towards 2030 because cars will become more efficient, which reduces the value of the smoothly rolling tyres. An increase in the energy efficiency of passenger cars is expected to take place first. The measures will affect the whole vehicle fleet, both existing and new. As a result of the use of winter tyres, the reduction is expected to be somewhat less in Norway than in the EU.
10.5.4 Electrification of the vehicle fleet The measure involves introducing an increasing number of electric cars and plug-in hybrid cars into the vehicle fleet. It is based on the two technologies being developed and commercialised by several large car manufacturers and will be manufactured in large quantities with falling costs, with launching in 2011-2012. Assuming that the increase in efficiency and car tyre measure take place first, the potential emission reduction is estimated at 203 000 tonnes CO2. Estimated costs are NOK 1 180/tonne in 2020, and a higher potential and rapidly falling costs are expected towards 2030. Short-range electric cars will have the greatest need for a public recharging infrastructure. For the plug-in hybrids, better access to a public recharging structure will increase the proportion of electrical operations. A scenario has been developed for the introduction of a recharging infrastructure which assumes that there are public recharging stations for 15 per cent of the plug-in cars that are sold up to 2020 and 2030 and a limited high-speed recharging network.
Costs are very sensitive to the assumptions that have been made, and there is therefore a substantial uncertainty interval surrounding the estimated cost effectiveness.
10.5.5 Hydrogen in the passenger car fleet Assuming that the increase in efficiency and the car tyre measure take place first, the potential emission reduction is estimated at 11 000 tonnes CO2, and the estimated cost is NOK 3 810/tonne in 2020. A substantially greater potential is expected and a falling cost towards 2030. A slow market introduction is assumed from 2016. This corresponds to the car manufacturers’ launch strategies. A number of car manufacturers announced in September 2009 that they will start launching cars in 2015 and that during the first few years a few hundred thousand will be produced globally. This means that that the volume that can be expected in Norway up to 2020 is very limited. After 2020, growth is expected to remain slow until costs reach an acceptable level and growth is assumed to pick up. The measure is based on the assumption of a
18 breakthrough on the last remaining problems for hydrogen cars, i.e. that the life of the fuel cells will increase to the life of the car while costs will fall to the level outlined in this measure. The greatest challenge to the hydrogen measure lies in the fact that costs in the 2015-2030 perspective will be substantially higher than the costs of electrification, given the assumptions made here. However, the biggest advantage hydrogen has over electricity is the rapid filling speed coupled with range, which makes hydrogen an option in all passenger cars.
There is great uncertainty associated with technological development in the future, and which of the alternatives will win in the end is by no means given.
10.5.6 Increased efficiency in delivery vans and heavy vehicles The EU regulation on emissions from delivery vans means that there will be an increased number of delivery vans with low emissions available. New instruments may be necessary for this to bring about a similar reduction in the Norwegian delivery van fleet. The potential emission reduction is estimated at 65 000 tonnes
CO2, and the estimated costs at NOK 1 000 – 2 600 /tonne in 2020. A greater potential is expected towards 2030, but higher costs. The increased efficiency for heavy vehicles projected in the baseline scenario is so ambitious that there does not seem to be scope for further technological improvements in new vehicles. In the perspective report it is assumed that fuel consumption, and hence CO2 emissions, will be reduced by 1 per cent per year.
CO2 emissions are measured as a standard test for type approval of light vehicles, passenger cars and delivery vans, and it is a requirement that the CO2 emissions be quoted to car buyers and in advertisements. This means that the CO2 emissions can be used for calculating taxes. There is no requirement that the CO2 emissions of heavy vehicles be measured or stated. The great diversity of heavy vehicles, with small production volumes for each variety and high costs for testing complete vehicles makes it difficult to introduce a requirement that measurements be taken. If specific instruments are to be established to boost the sale of heavy vehicles with low emissions, the emissions from each vehicle will have to be known.
The EU is developing a system for labelling the CO2 emissions of heavy vehicles that entails a mixture of measurement and calculations. Labelling the vehicles’ emissions will make it possible to use incentives to increase sales of vehicles with low emissions and make vehicles with high emissions less attractive. If such a labelling scheme is used, it will be possible to introduce instruments to reduce the emissions from heavy vehicles. Until then, taxes on diesel will be the principle means of influencing vehicle buyers.
Other measures that reduce emissions from the individual means of transport
Other measures that result in reduced emissions from means of transport are described below. Table 10-4 shows the estimated potential for emission reduction and socioeconomic costs. Different methods are used in the calculations.
19 Table 10-4 Estimated emission reduction potential and net socioeconomic costs per tonne of reduced CO2 for other measures for means of transport in various parts of the transport sector.
Tonnes Tonnes NOK/tonne NOK/tonne
Measure CO2/year CO2/year CO2/year CO2/year
2020 2030 2020 2030
Ecological driving 32 000 -200
Electrification of track 45 000 4 500
Gas ferries 22 000 400
Speed reduction/optimisation ships 97 000 106 000 -2 800
Shore power ships 155 000 198 000 1 300 700
Increased energy efficiency ships 180 000
Oslo ASAP 10 000 96
Total 534 000
10.5.7 Ecological driving Ecological driving is a style of driving that can reduce fuel consumption through simple adaptation to the characteristics of the combustion engine with respect to efficiency under different operating conditions. It is assumed that taking an ecological driving course is voluntary. It is assumed that annual public campaigns will each year prompt 1.5 per cent of driving licence holders (3 million in all) to take an ecological driving course. 35 per cent of them are assumed to actually use ecological driving in practice, with 90 per cent of the theoretical effect, which is assumed to be a 10 per cent reduction. In other words, a reduction of about 3 per cent is assumed for the average motorist who completes an ecological driving course. In 2020, 450 000 motorists will have completed the course, and if it is assumed that each of them has a car that has a somewhat higher annual mileage than the average car in the vehicle fleet, emissions in 2020 will be reduced by about
32 400 tonnes with a socioeconomic gain of about NOK 200/tonnes CO2. There is also potential for ecological driving of heavy vehicles, but this has not been estimated.
10.5.8 Electrification of stretches of railway The measure entails electrifying stretches of railway that operate on diesel today, i.e. the Røros, Solør, Rauma, Nordland, Trondheim-Steinkjer and Meråker lines. Costs and effects have been calculated for all these lines collectively. The potential emission reduction is estimated at 45 000 tonnes CO2, and the estimated costs at NOK 4 500 /tonne in 2020. There is relatively substantial variation between lines, and the lines with the greatest traffic base are probably the most profitable to electrify. The measure is an alternative to biofuel.
10.5.9 Ferries with natural gas Replacing conventional ferries with ferries run on natural gas (LNG) would yield a general reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of about 15-20 per cent on average compared with conventional fuel. The 20 Norwegian Public Roads Administration has calculated what would be achieved by converting to natural gas on 17 of the main ferry routes with a total of 30 ferries. These routes were selected because they have relatively heavy traffic, extensive scheduled traffic and long distances and consequently relatively high fuel consumption. The potential emission reduction is estimated at 22 000 tonnes CO2 and the estimated costs at NOK 400 /tonne in 2020.
10.5.10 Lower ship speeds Propulsion machinery has generally been designed so that it will operate with the lowest specific fuel consumption [g/kWh] at about 80 per cent of maximum capacity. If the machinery efficiency is reduced, the ship will use more grams of fuel per produced kW, but at the same time a reduction in speed will cause a drastic reduction in the kW necessary, and consequently an environmental and cost gain. Possible negative consequences for the ship may be increased vibration and sooting. The CO2 reduction potential is estimated at 97 000 tonnes, and a gain of NOK 2 800/tonne is estimated. Thus the measure is profitable given the assumptions forming the basis for the calculations. The optimal speed will differ from ship to ship, so speed limits for specific ship types are not relevant as an instrument. However, it can be arranged on entering into contracts that shipowners have incentives to operate the ship in the most energy-efficient way possible. In ferry tenders, maximum speeds can also be specified for the ships servicing the route.
10.5.11 Shore power Ships that lie in port must often produce power by means of their own auxiliary generator. Although requiring that harbours and quay facilities supply shore power presents a number of challenges, it is relatively simple today in purely technical terms. The CO2 reduction potential is estimated at 155 000 tonnes, and the estimated cost is NOK 1 300/tonne given the assumptions forming the basis for the calculations. A greater potential and lower costs are forecast towards 2030. Work is in progress internationally to standardise the supply of shore power to ships in harbours. Norway may use such an international standard, or require through the Harbours and Fairways Act that shore power must be supplied to Norwegian harbours and stipulate which technical requirements must be satisfied.
10.5.12 Energy efficiency measures for ships The measures include: weather routing (choosing the route that offers the best weather conditions), just in time arrival (optimal speed for avoiding waiting in connection with arrivals), optimal trim (optimal quantity and location of cargo and bunkers), ballast adjustment, optimal propeller and inflow to propeller, optimal use of rudder and autopilot, maintenance of propulsion machinery, recycling of heat lost through exhaust and improved capacity utilisation (co-shipping, transport centre etc.). The CO2 reduction potential is estimated to be at least 180 000 tonnes. The figure is obtained from studies of ships in international shipping, and is not necessarily representative of the coastal fleet. Costs have not been calculated, but some of the measures are regarded as socioeconomically profitable. A requirement that all ships should have a ship-specific energy
21 efficiency management plan (SEEMP) will probably be adopted by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in the next few years. The requirement can also be implemented in Norway independently of the IMO, for example by requiring an energy efficiency plan in connection with purchases.
10.5.13 Oslo ASAP (advanced sectorisation and automation project) The measure involves developing and implementing a new airspace structure in Eastern Norway and acquiring and implementing an AMAN system (automatic sequencing system). According to plan, Oslo ASAP will be implemented in spring 2011. The introduction of AMAN will provide a better planning tool than we have today, so that any delays can be absorbed at an early point in time and at a higher altitude. Sequencing takes place at medium altitudes, and the need for levelling off during approach is reduced. It makes continuous climbing after take-off possible, resulting in less fuel consumption. The CO2 reduction potential for domestic traffic is estimated at 10 000 tonnes and the cost at NOK 96/tonne.
10.6 Emission reductions and costs for individual measures that result in changed distribution of means of transport/reduced amount of transport
Figures 10-7 and 10-8 and Table 10-5 show the estimated emission reduction potential and costs of measures that result in changed distribution of means of transport and also, to some extent, a reduced amount of transport. The figures show that improved collective transport, measures for cyclists, coordinated goods transport and measures for goods transport by rail (2030) are estimated to be socioeconomically profitable, while the development of intercity and high-speed trains has a relatively high cost per tonne. The costs of restrictive instruments are not included in these calculations, but in the model simulations described subsequently. Some traffic costs are included. Different methods and models have been used to calculate the
CO2 effect, and the socioeconomic effects of the various measures. Individual measures are discussed later in this chapter. Restrictive instruments for road traffic that are necessary to achieve some of the modelled effects are discussed in section 10.10.
22 Potential emission reduction, individual measures that result in a change in modal split s 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 2020 40 2030 20
Emission reductions, 1000s of ton of 1000s Emission reductions, 0 cycles High-speed trains instruments instruments Goods strategyrailway Double share Double of bi increased fare increased subsidies limit to subsidies Inter-cityinner/outer extra with Inter-city inner/outer extrawithout Collective transport 6 cities, in 10% Coll 6 cities,Coll 1% subsidy, fare optimal Coll 6 cities,Coll subsidy,without max. 9% Coordinated goods transport road-road Collective transport 6 cities, in no upper Coordinated goodstransport road-rail/sea
Measure
Figure 10-7: Estimated potential emission reduction for measures that result in changed means of transport distribution and also some reduction in the amount of transport. The railway measures are also simulated using transport models. Different alternatives that cannot be summarised are shown for collective transport, intercity trains and coordinated goods transport. Restrictive instruments applied to road traffic in the form of increased fuel taxes etc. are assumed for some of the measures.
23 Costs, measures that result in a change in modal split 50 50 000 n
cycles 2020 2030 High-speed trains optimal fare optimal road-road Costs, NOK/to Costs, road-rail/sea instruments extra instruments Goods strategyrailway Double shareDouble of bi 6 cities,Coll 1% subsidy, max.9% increased fare 10% increasedsubsidies no upper limit to subsidiesno upper limit Inter-city inner/outerwithout Coordinated goodstransport Coordinated goodstransport Coll 6 cities,Coll without subsidy, Collective transport 6 cities, in Collective transport 6 cities, in Inter-city inner/outer extra with
Measure -100 000-100 000 -50 0
Figure 10-8: Estimated net socioeconomic costs per tonne of reduced greenhouse gas emissions for measures that result in changed distribution of means of transport and also some reduction in the amount of transport. There is a high degree of uncertainty associated with the simulations. Restrictive instruments applied to road traffic in the form of increased fuel taxes etc. are assumed for some of the measures.
Table 10-5: Estimated emission reduction potential and net socioeconomic costs per tonne of reduced CO2 for measures that result in changed distribution of means of transport. Restrictive instruments applied to road traffic in the form of increased fuel taxes etc. are assumed for some of the measures.
Measures Tonnes Tonnes NOK/tonnes NOK/tonnes CO2/year CO2/year CO2/year CO2/year 2020 2030 2020 2030 Collective transport in six cities: - No upper limit on subsidy 65 000 -25 000 - 10 per cent increased subsidy 24 000 -52 000 - Unchanged subsidy, max. 9 per 69 000 -38 000 cent increased fares* - 1 per cent increased subsidy, optimal fares* 77 000 -38 000
Coordinated goods transport Scenario 1 Scenario 2 5 000 4 000 -20 000 -30 000 23 000 21 000 - 20 000 -30 000 Doubling of share of bicycles 143 000 -3 000- -12 600 Intercity train without extra 43 000 79 000 44 000 21 700 instruments Intercity train with extra 49 000 93 000 38 900 18 200 instruments High-speed trains 75 000 164 000 32 700 22 500 Goods strategy railway - 165 000 - -4 700 Total 290 000- 367 000 *Assuming 25 per cent lower parking coverage in the centre and 50 per cent higher vehicle-related costs.
24 10.6.1 Improved collective transport in the six largest cities The measure involves increased frequency, lower fares and a change in carriage size. Investment in infrastructure is not included. The effects are simulated with different economic parameters, where fare level /government subsidy vary. The estimated emission reduction without an upper limit to government subsidies for this option is 65 000 tonnes. A socioeconomic gain of NOK 25 000 /tonne is estimated (option 1), which is largely due to the benefit of a better offer for existing users of collective transport. The increase in government subsidy is estimated here at about NOK 3 billion/year. With an upper limit of 10 per cent to the increase in subsidy, the effect of the emissions is reduced, but the benefit increases. With restrictions on car traffic (reduced parking coverage and higher vehicle-related costs), emission reductions increase somewhat, while the benefit is estimated at NOK 38 000/tonne. The cost per tonne is higher in the packages of measures and instruments that are simulated using transport models, partly because these cover collective transport throughout Norway, including major investments.
10.6.2 Doubling of the share of bicycles The measure involves building an interconnected main network for bicycle traffic in towns and built-up areas with more than 5 000 inhabitants, improved operation and maintenance, and information and campaigns. The transfer potential from car to bicycle is estimated to be 1.1 billion person-kilometres per year. An assessment of the size of an interconnected main network for cycle traffic in towns and built-up areas has been made on the basis of plans for such a network in the southern counties. The emission reduction potential is estimated at
143 000 tonnes of CO2, and the estimated socioeconomic gain at between NOK 3 000 and 12 600/tonne, i.e. a socioeconomically profitable measure. The time costs have been very roughly estimated on the basis of an average transferred trip. This estimate has a major bearing on the results. The gain largely takes the form of a health benefit.
10.6.3 Coordination of goods transport Increased coordination of goods transport from competing and/or complementary goods terminals to customers can lead to a reduction in the number of kilometres driven to deliver the same quantity of goods, and hence to reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The measure is particularly appropriate in districts with scattered habitation and long distances. A larger share of the gain on cooperation between transport purchasers (co-loaders and wholesalers) will accrue to those who cooperate than is the case for urban areas. Increased coordination results in lower socioeconomic costs, lower corporate costs and an improved supply of transport to users. Obstacles to implementation in outlying districts are inadequate IT systems and IT systems that do not communicate, different measuring units for goods, different organisation (regionally or centrally controlled), different types of goods that cannot be transported together and delivery time requirements that make route planning difficult. Two scenarios for transport of general cargo and food products have been studied using the logistics model for the National Transport Plan: the current situation with the existing terminal structure, and a more coordinated terminal structure for ship, railway and road
25 where the infrastructure is designed for this coordination. Emission reductions of 5 000 and 23 000 tonnes respectively were estimated for the two alternatives, and a socioeconomic gain in 2020 of NOK 20 000/tonne.
The potential emission reduction is greater if the measure is also applied in urban areas. In addition to the driving distance, there are costs in urban areas associated with the use of land for unloading. Co-loaders can cooperate on driving and on a consolidation centre (city terminal) on the outskirts of the city. This is probably difficult to achieve without government contributions such as pilot projects, subsidies for city terminals and stringent rules for driving into the centre. In large cities, the measure is most appropriate for limited central areas, not whole urban areas. Possible instruments in cities include pilot projects and government support for the operation of city terminals.
10.6.4 Goods transport by rail The railway’s goods strategy consists of developing capacity for goods transport by rail on the stretches Oslo- Stavanger, Oslo – Bergen, Oslo – Trondheim, Oslo – Bodø and Oslo – Kornsjø, by building and extending passing tracks, expanding terminal capacity, doing the groundwork for other terminals in connection with railway terminals etc. The measure paves the way for increased transport of general cargo between the major Norwegian cities. The National Transport Plan 2010-2019 includes a doubling of capacity, while the measure analysed here is intended to result in a tripling of capacity in 2030. Assuming restrictions on road traffic, an emission reduction of 165 000 tonnes is estimated by 2030. A socioeconomic gain of NOK 4 700/tonne is also estimated. See also the comments relating to the transport model calculations.
10.6.5 Development of intercity trains It is assumed that infrastructure will be developed in the inner (2020) and outer (2030) intercity area with sufficient capacity to double the number of trains provided. The basis for the calculations comes from the Institute of Transport Economics (2007) and a revised review of all costs (National Rail Administration). Development of some intercity trains in some inner areas is incorporated in NTP 2010-2019. This is not included in the calculations. Emission reductions in 2020 are estimated at 43 000 tonnes without and 49 000 tonnes with extra instruments. Costs are estimated at NOK 44 000 and NOK 38 900/tonne respectively. See also the comments relating to the transport model simulations.
10.6.6 Development of high-speed railway The measure consists of building a completely new double-track line for speeds of 200-300 km/h in two corridors: Oslo-Trondheim, to be completed in 2020, and Oslo-Bergen, to be completed in 2030. The high speed coupled with fewer stops along the way will sharply reduce travel time, so that trains will be real competition for air travel. The background to the choice of these two corridors is that it is here that the customer base is greatest and that there is greatest potential for transferring passengers from road and air travel. The simulations are to be regarded as examples of how this can be done. A high-speed railway will play a part in providing a foundation for new use of land, business development, housing and labour market
26 etc. at the selected stops in the corridors. Such long-term ripple effects are not included in the basis for calculation. Emissions and energy consumption from the building of the track are not included, as is the general rule in Climate Cure 2020.
The basis for calculations is the German VWI group’s feasibility study, which was performed on assignment for the National Rail Administration1. However, there are a number of weaknesses in the assumptions of the VWI group, and the National Rail Administration is doing further work on studies and analyses for Norwegian conditions. The concept for high-speed trains has not been chosen. Some independent companies have also made studies of their own accord, for example Norsk Bane AS. These reports have been commented on, but no reality check made, partly because of inadequate documentation. Emission reductions have been estimated at 75 000 tonnes in 2020 and 164 000 tonnes in 2030. Costs are estimated at NOK 32 700 and NOK 22 500/tonne, respectively. See also the comments relating to the transport model calculations. Here the estimated emission reduction is less, due to less transfer from other means of transport than in the separate calculations.
If high-speed trains are to become a reality, very strong political prioritisation is required, both economic and with respect to management of the planning processes that are necessary pursuant to the Norwegian Planning and Building Act. In economic terms, it is a question of extra appropriations of at least NOK 5-6 billion per year for the next 20 years over the government budget if both stretches are to be developed. The planning process could be shortened by applying government regulation and reducing deadlines for comments arising from consultation rounds. Expertise and capacity must be drawn in from other sectors or, if necessary from other countries.
10.6.7 Long-distance buses Long-distance buses, or through-going bus routes, are an important alternative to passenger cars. In order to establish a good long-distance bus route it is necessary to invest in infrastructure in the urban areas and improve arrangements for boarding and disembarking in rural areas. Today’s licensing policy allows relatively free establishment of long-distance bus routes. When it comes to alternative fuels, biofuel is regarded as the most relevant for long-distance buses. In the transport model calculations, the frequency of long-distance buses that run hourly today has increased by 25 per cent in 2020. It is assumed that the same increase in frequency for long-distance buses that do not run hourly is included in the National Transport Plan for 2010-2019. The effect of the long-distance bus is simulated together with other measures and instruments.
1 VWI group: Feasibility Study Concerning High-Speed Railway Lines in Norway, Phase 2, October 2007 (Oslo- Trondheim, Oslo-Gothenburg) VWI group: Feasibility Study Concerning High-Speed Railway Lines in Norway, Phase 3, October 2007 (Oslo-Bergen/Stavanger, Oslo-Kristiansand). 27 10.7 Measures where the emission potential and costs have not been assessed
There is insufficient information to quantify costs and emission reductions for some of the measures that have been studied. The measures may nevertheless be of considerable importance to greenhouse gas emissions, and are discussed below.
10.7.1 More climate-friendly use of space Environmentally efficient siting of workplaces and houses is designed to limit and reduce energy consumption and environmental problems associated with urban and regional transport. Large distances between functions increase the need for transport. Siting jobs and residential areas in a manner that facilitates transport may help to reduce the loss of valuable land (for example agricultural land or natural and recreational areas) outside the present urban boundaries. At the same time, the measure must be designed to allow the preservation of important residential qualities and as much as possible of the green areas within the built-up area. To reduce the total transport volume and share of travel that is carried out by car, municipalities may use zoning to pave the way for:
transport-reducing location of jobs and service functions
a concentrated development pattern in towns and built-up areas based around collective transport interchanges, to boost the competitiveness and market shares of collective transport
It is difficult to find figures for the potential emission reduction and socioeconomic costs of these measures.
10.7.2 Paving the way for pedestrians The Norwegian Public Roads Administration has been assigned by the Ministry of Transport and Communications to develop a strategy for pedestrians. The objective of the strategy is to make walking more attractive. The shortest distances travelled, from one to two kilometres, can be transferred from driving to walking. Measures outlined in the preliminary draft of the pedestrian strategy (NPRA 2009) involve upgrading pedestrian and cycle paths along school routes, general plans for paths and for linking together important functions and city spaces, resting places for pedestrians in places used by many, pedestrian path inspections along the same lines as cycle path inspections and bearing pedestrian accessibility in mind when upgrading existing roads.
10.7.3 Active mobility management Mobility management is a collective concept for measures that promote environmentally friendly transport and restrict the use of cars. It is particularly concerned with soft measures to change attitudes and travel behaviour through information, organisational means and coordination of the activities of the various players involved. Measures of this type are seen to be effective in other countries, but the knowledge base is too weak to enable effects in Norway to be quantified. It will often be necessary to supplement by applying restrictive measures to car traffic, to prevent improvements in traffic flow being swallowed up by newly created traffic.
28
10.7.4 Cleaning of hulls and propellers Over time, the hulls of all ships become fouled, with the result that the load on the engine has to be increased to maintain the same speed, and bunkers consumption increases accordingly. Regular cleaning of the hull with the aid of remote-controlled mini-robots/mini-submarines while the ship is in dock is assumed to be able to reduce fuel consumption by up to three per cent. There are no satisfactory Norwegian figures for the total potential of this measure and associated costs. Possible instruments are statutory requirements, subsidies or tax exemption.
10.7.5 Modular semi-trailer 25.25 metres long For transport where volume is a limiting factor, three of today’s semi-trailers can be replaced by two modular semi-trailers. A trial is in progress to allow these semi-trailers on selected stretches of the highway in Norway. We need to know more about whether the measure is in conflict with the aim of transferring transport of goods from road to railway. Transport model simulations indicate that the measure leads to some transfer of goods from railway to road transport, and hence increased greenhouse gas emissions. The assumptions coded into the goods transport model make the simulation very uncertain.
10.7.6 Lower speeds on roads Because greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles depend on fuel consumption, which in turn depends on speed, a review of the literature performed by the Institute of Transport Economics (TØI, 2009) shows that emissions from road traffic are generally lowest between 50 and 90 km/h. Reference is made here to calculations from the International Energy Agency (IEA) which show that reducing speeds from 100 to 80 km/h results in a 22.7 per cent reduction in fuel consumption for American passenger cars and 11.4 per cent for heavy vehicles. These figures apply to steady driving, and on the assumption that the speed really is reduced by 20 km/h. Simulations using NPRA’s VLUFT model on a sample stretch show that reducing the speed limit from 90 to 80 km/h can in practice reduce emissions by an estimated 1-2 per cent. Possible measures may be to introduce lower general speed limits (40 and 70 km/h instead of today’s 50 and 80 km/h) and measures to get more drivers to observe speed limits such as police radar traps, automatic traffic controls or speed regulators in cars. The potential for speed reduction is not known. Whether the measure is socioeconomically profitable or not will probably depend on whether time loss costs are factored in.
10.7.7 Upgrading/development of roads Practicability and traffic safety measures on roads may take the form of both large and small improvements in existing roads and development of new roads. Improvements may consist of increases in width, the establishment of islands, eradication of curvature, upgrading of the road pavement, shortening of the road alignment, replacement of traffic-light-regulated crossings with roundabouts and removal of exits. In isolation, these measures may result in less fuel consumption and hence lower climate gas emissions
29 (SINTEF 2007). However, the emissions may also increase because the speed limit is often raised at the same time. The upgrading may also lead to increased traffic as a result of increased capacity. Research also indicates that substantial energy consumption is associated with the building of new roads (FOI 2009). NPRA is developing a tool for calculating greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption during the construction phase. The transport agencies are cooperating on the methodological basis for these tools.
10.7.8 Intelligent transport systems (ITS) In the context of climate, these include measures that permit better traffic flow and hence lower greenhouse gas emissions with the aid of information technology. The measures can be broken down into information to travellers, traffic and fleet management, driver support systems and navigation, surveillance and control, operation of infrastructure and payment systems. Examples of such measures are control of traffic light intersections, diversion of traffic in the event of queuing, regulation of access to motorways, travel planners and emissions calculators, prioritisation of collective transport and fleet management of goods traffic. No reliable figures have been found for costs and emission reductions resulting from such measures.
10.7.9 Co-modality Co-modality is about optimising the use of the various means of transport so that resources are utilised in the best way possible while at the same time society’s requirements concerning greenhouse gas reduction are observed. One prerequisite for achieving greater co-modality is that sea and rail transport replace road transport to a greater extent than before. This will require investment in the road network, coastal channels and terminals. It will also be important for the indirect taxation systems to contribute to a sensible distribution of goods transport between road, sea and railway. More railway terminals can be established and co-loaders and wholesalers can be located so that it is simple to use the railway, while at the same time the number of kilometres by road between railway terminals and logistics companies and between logistics companies and end-users is minimised. One of the alternatives simulated under co-ordinated goods transport deals with this topic, but the potential for the whole package of measures will probably be greater than this.
30 10.8 Emission reductions and costs for packages of measures/instruments calculated using a transport model
Simulations have been carried out using national and regional transport models for passenger transport and the National Goods Transport Model. All measures have been analysed as “packages”, in which a number of different measures and economic instruments are combined. It is assumed that collective transport and railway networks will be expanded to provide an option when restrictions are placed on the use of cars and air travel. However, this also means that the isolated effects of the individual measures, for example a change in the petrol price alone, do not show up. A substantial investment in the railway forms the basis for all options, which also means that these investment costs form the basis for all “packages” that have been calculated. There is great uncertainty surrounding the transport models and socioeconomic calculations. Simulations with different gradations of instruments and investment have not been carried out to find the optimal use of instruments. The analyses nevertheless provide good indications of the strength of the use of instruments that is necessary to bring about a transition to less emission-intensive forms of transport. Table 10-6 shows which packages of measures and instruments have been modelled.
Table 10-6 Packages of measures/instruments that have been calculated with transport models
Passenger transport Simulation 3A: Baseline scenario including NTP 2010-2019, Simulation year 2020 25 per cent increase in the frequency of long-distance buses for departures without an hourly frequency, increase in the frequency of ships as in the action programme 2010-2013 and air transport according to the route coding in the NTM5 model. Simulation 3B: Baseline scenario including NTP 2010-2019, Simulation year 2030 Simulations 4A-C and 4B-D: Better collective transport 2020 and 2030 4A: Completion of inner intercity area, 25 per cent higher frequency of long-distance buses with hourly departures 4B: Same as 4A, but with high-speed train Oslo-Trondheim 4C: Same as 4A, but with completion of inner and outer intercity area 4D: same as 4B, but with high-speed train Oslo-Bergen Simulations 5 A-C and 5B-D: Better collective transport and restrictions on car traffic 2020 and 2030 5A and 5C: As 4A but with 100 per cent increase in the fuel price for passenger cars, 50 per cent reduction in collective transport fares, and doubling of the charge in certain toll rings. 5B and 5D: as 4B but with economic instruments as in 5A. 5A1: as 4A, but with 100 per cent increase in the fuel price for passenger cars 5A3: As 4A, but with doubling of charge for the toll ring in Oslo, Bergen, Stavanger and Kristiansand 5A4: As 4A, but with restrictions on parking 5A1-20: as 4A, but with 20 per cent increase in the fuel price for passenger cars 5A1-60: as 4A, but with 60 per cent increase in the fuel price for passenger cars 5A-25 freq: as 5A, but with a 25 per cent increase in the frequency of bus routes for local traffic
31 Simulation 6: tripling of fuel price and doubling of the air fare in 2020 6A: As 5A, but with triple fuel price instead of double 6B: As 5A, but with double air fare in addition
Goods transport
Basic 2020: Baseline scenario
Simulation 1A: Increased rail capacity due to longer goods trains (600 metres) 2020 Train capacity increased by 50 per cent Simulation 1B: Increased rail capacity due to longer goods trains and increased capacity on lines 2020 Together this approximately doubles the rail capacity. Simulation 2: Semi-trailer 25.25 metres 2020
Basic 2030: Baseline scenario
Simulation 3: Increased rail capacity because of longer goods trains (600 m) and further increased capacity on lines 2030 Together this approximately trebles the rail capacity.
The results of some simulations are not presented here. The numbering of the various simulations is therefore not consecutive. Figure 10-9 shows the estimated emission reduction and Figures 10-10 and 10-11 the estimated socioeconomic costs of packages of measures/instruments that have been simulated using transport models. Table 10-7 provides an overview of simulations, emission reductions and the various cost components.
32 Potential emission reduction, measures that result in a change in modal split. Transport model calculations s
2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 2020 800 2030 600 400 200 Emision reductions, 1000s of ton of Emision 1000s reductions, 0 Double airfareDouble (6b) Parking prices (5a4) Triple price fuel (6a) (4a+4c) 60) 20) (4b+4d) (5b+5d) Double fuel price fuel Double cars (5a1) Double charge Double ring(5a3) toll
Measure Increasedfrequency IC trains+ inner Double fuel, half coll double toll (5a+5c) toll coll double half fuel, Double 5a+25% increased5a+25% freq(5a1-25freq) coll 5a1 +60% increased price fuel cars (5a1- High-speed trains Oslo-Trondheim/Bergen High-speed trains Oslo-Trondheim/Bergen 5a1 + 20%5a1 + increased price fuel cars (5a1-
Figure 10-9: Estimated potential emission reductions for various packages of measures that result in a change in the distribution of means of transport and which have been simulated using a transport model. Simulations 5 and 6 comprise restrictions on road and/or air traffic, including a doubling of the price of fuel and airfares.
Passenger transport: better collective transport
Simulation 4a+c models the development of the inner (2020) and outer (2030) area for intercity trains and more frequent long-distance buses. 4b+d models the development of high-speed trains from Oslo to Trondheim (2020) and Oslo to Bergen (2030). Thus the simulations show the effect of only improving collective transport without imposing restrictions on road traffic. The development of inner inter-city trains and high-speed trains requires substantial investment and the emission reduction is small. Net socioeconomic costs per tonne of CO2 reduction are very high in all options. Compare with Figure 10-10.
33 Costs, measures tht result in a change in modal split. Transport model calculations Costs, NOK/ton
2020 2030 0 50 000000 100 000 150 200 000 250 000000 300 (4b+4d)
Measure Trondheim/Bergen High-speed trains Oslo- + IC trains+ inner (4a+4c) Increased bus frequency
Figure 10-10: Estimated socioeconomic costs of alternative packages of measures that result in a change in the distribution of means of transport and which have been simulated using a transport model. Option 4: development of intercity trains inner (2020) and outer (2030) area and more frequent long-distance buses. There is a high degree of uncertainty associated with the simulations.
34
4a + 4 b+ 4a + 5a + 20% 5+ + 60% 5a + 25% double double double car car car freq car, half car, half 5a + triple 5a + triple Inner IC Inner IC + coll. coll. 4a + 4a + park fuel price fuel price 2020 hst 2020 double toll double toll double toll restr. cars aviation SIM SIM SIM SIM 4A SIM 4B SIM 5A SIM 5B SIM 5A1 SIM 5A3 SIM 5A4 SIM 6A SIM 6B 5A1-20 5A1-60 5A-25fr 1 000 90 600 365 766 1290 CO2, 1000 tonnes / year 5 15 1 200 1 300 1 900 1 400 524 524 524 524 524 524 Investment costs (NOK m) 524 2 855 524 2 855 524 524 Change subsidy needs coll. 1 233 94 1 031 (NOK m) 56 587 10 273 11 362 10 494 10 460 277 746 10 628 19 492 1 868 11 366 Change user benefit (NOK m) -182 -482 6 425 5 595 21 657 17 499 3 837 11 756 3 703 -15 267 -2 361 -9 771 Change toll and ferry income + tax income (NOK m) 13 41 -15 298 -15 219 -24 964 -15 570 -3 182 -9 408 -14 910
Tax exp. (NOK m) 121 710 790 1 496 -946 -91 -524 -40 -1 315 -100 -535 890 13 -3 -10 -2 3 105 Change in cost NOx (NOK m) 0,3 0,5 104 104 165 46 -34 -3 -19 -13 -26 6 Change in cost particles (NOK m) 0,7 5 9 14 20 11 -413 -40 -226 -156 -316 -278 Change in cost noise (NOK m) -0,8 0,2 -268 -268 -399 -386 Change in cost accidents (NOK -640 -52 -312 -232 -483 -354 m) 4 34 -329 -465 -300 -290 Change in cost wear and tear 165 13 95 37 98 801 (NOK m) 11 66 799 874 1 263 677 4 129 -52 2 155 990 2 359 1 124 TOTAL, per year (NOK m) 558 3 817 3 030 6 525 8 255 1 197 4 000 -600 3 700 2 700 3 100 900 NOK per tonne CO2 115 000 261 000 2 450 5 200 4 400 10 100
Table 10-7 Results of transport model and cost simulations for packages of measures/instruments, 2020. Emission reductions in 1000s of tonnes and all costs in millions of NOK. A positive sign means cost and a negative means gain.
34B Passenger transport: better collective transport combined with different measures
Simulations 5A-B model the same developments in intercity trains, high-speed trains and increase in the frequency of long-distance buses as Simulation 4. In addition fuel prices and fees in selected toll rings are doubled, and collective transport fares halved. This results in a far greater reduction in greenhouse gas emissions than Simulation 4, because of the transition from car to collective transport – 1.2 million tonnes for Simulation 5A. The total transport work in 5A increases by about 1.5 per cent, because collective transport options are increased. The improvement in collective transport entails a substantially increased need for government subsidies. A significant loss in user benefit is caused by increased fuel and toll fee expenses and very large income/transfers to the state from toll fees and fuel taxes. The combined options result in costs per tonne of reduced emissions of NOK 2 450 and NOK 5 200/tonne respectively. The costs are lower per tonne of CO2 than if investment took place only in railway infrastructure. However, costs are higher than if improvements in collective transport did not entail major investment (see the measure “improved collective transport in six cities”).
In Simulations 5A1-5A4 restrictions on car traffic are calculated individually: double fuel price (5A1), double toll ring fees (5A3) and in addition increased parking charges (NOK 30 for all parking at work throughout the country and tripled charges for parking associated with the various travel purposes for selected parts of town) (5A4). Simulations have also been made for halved collective fares only (5A2), but because of uncertainties in the calculated need for subsidies, it has been decided not to present cost figures for this simulation. Double fuel price (5A1) results in a large emission reduction – 1 million tonnes – and parking charges (5A4) also result in a substantial reduction – 0.6 million tonnes. However, this requires strong instruments. Both options result in major losses in user benefit and high income to the government, and a socioeconomic cost of about NOK 4 000/tonne. Simulation 5A3 results in a slight gain (NOK -600/tonne).
Simulations have also been carried out for 5A1 with a 20 per cent and a 60 per cent increase in the price of fuel for cars instead of a doubling (5A1-20 and 5A1-60), and for 5A with a 25 per cent increase in frequency for collective transport (5A-25 freq). These show emission reductions of 365 000, 766 000 and 1 290 000 tonnes respectively. However, high user costs have also been calculated, particularly for 5A1-60, and high subsidy requirements, particularly for 5A-25 freq. Income to the government increases, particularly for 5A1- 60 and 5A-25 freq. Socioeconomic costs have been estimated at NOK 2 700/tonne for 5A1-20, NOK 3 100/tonne for 5A1-60 and NOK 900/tonne for 5A-25 freq.
Simulation 6A models a tripled fuel price for cars, and 6B models a doubled airfare in addition to a doubled fuel price for cars. Both additionally include long-distance buses, intercity trains, halved collective transport fares and double toll fees as in 5A. Both result in very large emission reductions: 1.9 and 1.4 million tonnes, respectively, but the loss in user benefit is very large. Income to the government increases to a similarly large extent. The need for subsidies for collective transport also increases significantly. If a comparison is made between scenario 6B with double airfare and scenario 5A, so that the airfare is the only difference between the two, the difference in emissions is 200 000 tonnes. The cost in 6B is estimated at NOK 4 600/tonne, but this is uncertain.
35 Goods transport
Modelling with the National Goods Transport Model shows that goods transport work increases by 17 per cent from basic 2020 to basic 2030. The simulation with a tripling of railway capacity for goods shows that total transport work increases by 2 per cent from basic 2030, and that transport work on roads and at sea is reduced by 9 per cent and 5 per cent, respectively. Transport work on railways increases by 50 per cent. It is stressed that the growth factors do not include growth from 2006, and therefore cannot be compared directly with the National Rail Administration’s goal of tripling goods transportation by 2030. The simulations are also uncertain, and based on a preliminary version of the National Goods Transport Model from December 2009.
Larger lorries that will have lower emissions per tonne/kilometre than other vehicles as long as the extra capacity is used have been introduced into the scenario with 25.25 metre long semi-trailers. This means that average emissions of CO2 per tonne/kilometre must be reduced in this scenario. However, the emission factors have not been changed in the model, and a 5 per cent increase in CO2 emissions is therefore estimated which is due to the transfer of goods from railway to road. For road transport CO2 emissions are increased by
11 per cent, for sea transport there is no change and for railway CO2 emissions are reduced by 28 per cent. It is estimated that the reduced emissions per tonne/kilometre would account for an emission reduction compared with road transport of an estimated 2.5 per cent.
36 Costs, measures tht result in a change in modal split. Transport model calculations Costs, NOK/ton
2020 2030 -1 000 0 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000 6 000 7 000 8 000 Double airfareDouble (6b) Parking prices (5a4) Triple price fuel (6a) Double fuel price fuel Double cars (5a1) Double charge Double ring(5a3) toll Double fuel, half coll double toll (5a+5c) toll coll double half fuel, Double Measure increased5a+25% freq(5a1-25freq) coll 5a1 +60% increased price fuel cars (5a1-60) 5a1 + 20%5a1 + increased price fuel cars (5a1-20) High-speed trains Oslo-Trondheim/Bergen (5b+5d)
Figure 10-11: Estimated socioeconomic costs of alternative packages of measures/instruments that result in a change in the distribution of means of transport and which have been simulated using a transport model. Scenarios 5 and 6: development of intercity trains inner (2020) and outer (2030) area and increased frequency of long-distance buses, combined with different instruments: increased fuel price for cars and aircraft, halved collective price, double fee in toll rings and increased parking prices. There is a high degree of uncertainty associated with the simulations. Technical measures are assumed not to be applied before decisions that change the distribution and scope of transport. If these are applied first it is estimated that the costs per tonne increase by approximately 22-27 per cent in 2020.
37 10.9 Uncertainty
The uncertainty associated with the measures calculated individually is generally high, but varies from measure to measure. Assumptions and uncertainty are described under each measure in the background documentation. Sensitivity calculations for various assumptions were carried out in the vehicle analysis.
The transport models used are the best tool we have for assessing the overall effects of various packages of measures for a given instrument. There is a great deal of uncertainty associated with the simulations nonetheless, mainly because a number of the measures are extreme examples of what it was envisaged using the models for when they were simulated, and they have not been verified against empirical examples of this type of measure. The most important uncertainty factors are described below. See also background documentation.
The transport models have been estimated on the basis of travel behaviour surveys and considerable quantities of input data. These consist largely of population data, prices and other financial data and the coding of the availability of the various types of transport. In developing the models, assumptions have also been made along the way that could affect the ability of the models to reproduce the effects of measures. Small changes in the assumptions underlying some of the measures could cause major changes in the results. In the analyses that have been carried out, strong measures have been coded in in some cases. There are no empirical examples corresponding to some of the measures against which the models can be verified.
The simulations do not take account of how car ownership will change as a result of the major tax changes that are tested in Climate Cure 2020. In the same way, an extensive tax policy may lead to households moving home in order to be closer to their place of work. Adjustments of this kind are not included in the model. There will also be a strong increase in demand for some forms of transport that may provide grounds for improving the supply, while others may have far fewer passengers and reduce the supply. On balance, this points to underestimation of the scope of the changes in travel markets, and the costs of running the transport programme that is necessary may be highly uncertain. Prices and the value attached to time present a similar problem. Income developments will mean that people value saved travel time more highly than before. Similarly, prices and driving costs will change because of technological changes and future tax policy.
The transport sector in its entirety is considered in the cost modelling. All effects in markets elsewhere in the economy are disregarded apart from the fact that tax costs should summarise the effects of government budget changes on efficiency in the labour market and other markets. The size of the tax costs is uncertain.
In the simulations with a sharp rise in fuel prices, toll fees and/or parking, it is assumed that the price increases will result in substantial income to the state in the form of taxes.
The consumer benefit simulation for car traffic in the regional models may also be very sensitive to even very small measures in the road network.
There is also uncertainty associated with the estimated changes in subsidies to collective transport companies. The collective transport module that could have been used to simulate these does not automatically allow for the fact that in the event of major changes in the volume of passengers it will be necessary to change the 38 transport offered or increase the rolling stock. To simplify matters, a change in subsidy requirements has therefore been calculated on the basis of average subsidy rates per person-kilometre, instead of simulating this with the collective transport module. There is great uncertainty surrounding these average rates.
10.10 Assessment of policy instruments, transport
A large number of instruments that affect emissions of CO2 in the transport sector are already in use, including a CO2 tax on fuel, a government order to market biofuel, vehicle taxes, emission control requirements from the EU, the Norwegian Planning and Building Act, the reward scheme, Transnova and the
NOx fund. See Part A and background documentation for a more detailed account. Trend projections nevertheless indicate an increase in emissions to 2020. In order to reduce emissions, today’s use of instruments must be stepped up, and/or new instruments employed. The use of instruments shall contribute to a change to lower emission intensity in the transport sector. Emissions of greenhouse gases in the transport sector take place as a result of the choices of a very large number of individuals in connection with the amount and means of transport available. It is difficult to change the habits of users. For them to be persuaded to undertake long-term investment to reduce emissions, they must be confident that the policy is stable, also in the long term. Existing and new instruments that can bring about the measures described in Chapter 10.5- 10.8 are reviewed in this chapter. The instruments are divided into three main groups:
economic instruments regulatory instruments information, expertise and R&D (research and development)
Some of the measures can be activated through individual instruments, and in some cases only through a combination of instruments. For example, use of biofuel can be brought about by an order to market the fuel (regulatory instrument) or by taxes (economic instrument). Moreover, some of the measures studied will affect one another: for example, a large proportion of low/zero emission vehicles will lead to various measures to reduce passenger car traffic having less effect on emissions. The effects of the instruments will vary through the introduction phases of the measure and on into an operations phase, and will be influenced by market and technological developments, so that there may be a need to adjust the use of instruments along the way.
10.10.1 Economic instruments
Fuel prices (fuel and CO2 taxes)
The price of fuel influences the users’ choice of type of transport, the amount of transport and the composition of the vehicle fleet. The price of fuel depends on the level of taxes on petrol and diesel and on international oil prices. The CO2 tax accounts for only a part of the price of fuel, and therefore has to be substantially changed to give it enough effect on price to influence behaviour. Depending on their size, taxes 39 may contribute to reduced transport activity, a switch to other forms of transport, and may influence the composition of the vehicle fleet.
Table 10-8 Fuel taxation, 2010 (Ministry of Finance, customs and excise decision 2010)
Type of fuel Fuel tax CO2 tax
Petrol Petrol tax (NOK 4.54/l for sulphur-free petrol and CO2 tax (NOK 0.86/l) NOK 4.58/l for low-sulphur petrol)
Petrol with ethanol mix Petrol tax (NOK 4.54/l for sulphur-free petrol and CO2 tax (NOK 0.86/l) Exemption for share of NOK 4.58/l for low-sulphur petrol) ethanol in petrol
E85 (85 per cent by volume ethanol and None None 15 per cent by volume petrol)
Auto diesel Auto diesel tax (NOK 3.56/l for sulphur-free CO2 tax (NOK 0.58/l) mineral oil and NOK 3.61/l for low-sulphur mineral oil)
Auto diesel with biodiesel mix Auto diesel tax (NOK 3.56/l for sulphur-free CO2 tax (NOK 0.58/l). Exemption for share of mineral oil and NOK 3.61/l for low-sulphur biodiesel in mineral oil mineral oil) Half tax for share of biodiesel in mineral oil
Biodiesel Half auto diesel tax NOK 1.78/l None
Natural gas (CNG) NOK 0.1 per Sm3 None
Biogas None None
Auto gas (LPG) NOK 0.37 per Sm3 None
Hydrogen None None
Hytan (mixture of hydrogen and natural None None gas)
Electricity Electricity tax (11.01 øre/kWh) None
Calculations shown in the background documentation show that increasing the price of fuel for cars and possibly aircraft has a positive effect on emissions, but also high costs. The social consequences of very high price rises have not been considered. The rise in price may for example be achieved by sharply increasing the current CO2 tax. The CO2 tax is a cost-effective instrument, since it gives all sources the same incentive to reduce emissions. The administrative costs are low because the collection system already exists. However, even with a far higher CO2 tax than the current level, calculations show that the CO2 tax will constitute a small share of overall user costs. Because of popular resistance, it may be difficult to substantially increase the fuel price. Other tax systems could also be introduced, such as kilometre-based tax (“road tax”) for heavy vehicles, but this would be more costly (Vista analysis AS 2008). In the Netherlands, tax systems of this kind are also being considered for the other vehicle classes. To reduce air traffic or transfer it to less emission- intensive forms of transport, airfares can be increased by raising fuel or landing taxes to reduce the incentive to fly.
40 The level of CO2 tax that is necessary to achieve the national emission target varies in the different menus of instruments for all sectors combined, as presented in part D, from NOK 1 200 to over NOK 3 000/tonne of
CO2, depending on the sectors to which the tax is applied.
Vehicles: The transport model simulations model increases in fuel prices (20, 60, 100 and 200 per cent) which will substantially increase the costs of driving. Higher fuel taxes represent a large potential, but give rapidly increasing costs per tonne, estimated at between NOK 2 500 and NOK 5 200/tonne, which is relatively high compared with other measures in the sector. A doubling of the fuel price by means of the CO2 tax is equivalent to a tax some 20 times as high as today (or a crude oil price of over USD 300/barrel at the current tax level). Clear signals should be given before any stepping up of the tax is initiated, so that those affected have time to adapt to a new tax level.
The effects of increasing the fuel tax on the composition of the vehicle fleet and emissions from each vehicle have also been calculated. A higher fuel tax or CO2 tax will make it profitable to invest in petrol and diesel vehicles with lower specific emissions and possibly also to speed up the replacement of older vehicles. The results show a significant effect for a 60 per cent rise in fuel prices.
Air travel: more expensive airfares (for example by increasing the CO2 tax or landing tax) may curb use of air travel and/or influence passengers to choose less emission-intensive means of transport. A doubling of airfares is estimated to be roughly equivalent to an emission reduction of the order of 200 000 tonnes. The cost is estimated at approximately NOK 4 600/tonne, but this estimate is uncertain. However, the transport model calculations indicate that a substantial increase in the tax level will be necessary for the measure to be effective. Demand for leisure travel is relatively price sensitive, while demand for travel paid for by employers is less so. In principle, a high fuel price will also give airlines incentives to achieve more efficient operations, and may influence the fleet composition.
Shipping: increased fuel prices could lead to a transfer from sea to road transport, which is not desirable. However, it could also lead to increased efficiency. These effects have not been estimated.
Purchase tax
A stronger shift towards purchase of petrol and diesel vehicles with lower emissions could be achieved through further differentiation of the purchase tax. So far experience of this differentiation has been good, and simulations show that further differentiation, coupled with high fuel taxes, will contribute to more rapid introduction of more efficient vehicles into the Norwegian market. As a result of the EU’s new requirements regarding emissions from new passenger cars, however, the effects of further differentiation of the purchase tax will wane in the years ahead, because when the average emission is reduced there will be less difference between cars’ emissions.
An expected increase in the efficiency of the vehicle fleet is forecast to contribute to an emission reduction of about 400 000 tonnes of CO2 at a cost of less than NOK 200/tonne. This is very cost-effective compared with other measures in the sector. In addition, the introduction of better car tyres, which is also a move to increase efficiency, will lead to further reduction, to slightly over 100 000 tonnes.
41 In isolation, lower purchase prices for petrol and diesel cars will make it relatively less profitable to introduce vehicles based on alternative fuels. Further reductions in purchase taxes could be given to plug-in hybrid vehicles and vehicles based on biofuels in order to maintain the competition between petrol and diesel vehicles. This may be necessary to ensure rapid introduction of these vehicles into the market.
Kilometre/road tax
A type of kilometre/road tax is one possible alternative to a fuel tax if the aim is to limit general use of cars. This instrument could be introduced by Norway independently of other countries. The Ministry of Finance is considering a road tax for heavy vehicles, where the burdens the vehicles impose on the environment in the form of noise, air pollution and accidents are weighted differently depending on whether they happen inside or outside of towns.
Road use/congestion charging
The term “congestion charging” is used for a tax system designed to regulate rush-hour traffic and hence reduce congestion problems, improve the traffic flow and create a more agreeable urban environment. Congestion charging is most relevant in cities with a lot of traffic and congestion problems and is a variant of road-use charging. Congestion charging has not been introduced into Norway as yet, but is being considered in several cities. Toll fees are being collected at a number of places in Norway to finance various transport projects. The provision in Section 7a of the Road Traffic Act relating to road-use charging has not yet been put into force. It provides that road use charging can only be introduced if the municipalities and counties concerned are in favour. In special cases, the ministry can order the municipalities and counties concerned to introduce road use charging, but this must be approved by the Storting.
Local use of a rush hour tax to reduce the queues in the bigger cities may be an effective means of reducing traffic queues and the associated disadvantages (cf. experience with road use charging in Stockholm). Such a tax may also contribute to reducing CO2 emissions, since it reduces traffic and does not merely shift the traffic towards times of the day with smaller queues. If a high CO2 tax on fuel is considered to have unacceptable negative effects in rural areas, an alternative solution may be a system with a lower fuel tax combined with road use charging in central areas where there are alternatives in the form of collective transport.
In this analysis, the effect of doubling fees in the toll rings combined with inter-city trains and long-distance buses is simulated (cf. discussion of transport model simulations). The potential for emission reduction is estimated at 90 000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. However, this probably does not represent the full potential of the measure.
Investments and subsidies, including subsidies for more environmentally friendly transport options
Subsidies and government investment can make environmentally friendly transport options more easily available and cheaper. As subsidies help to lower transport prices, this may lead to more travel, which in isolation may contribute to higher emissions.
42 Cyclists and pedestrians: In isolation, an increased CO2 tax will make it more profitable to walk and cycle, while building pedestrian and cycle paths will make it more attractive. Simulations show that the share of cycling can be doubled by building an interconnecting main network for cycles in towns and built-up areas with more than 5 000 inhabitants, improved operations and maintenance and information and campaigns.
This could yield an emission reduction of the order of 145 000 tonnes CO2 in 2020, and is estimated to be socioeconomically profitable.
Vehicles: subsidies or tax relief are potential means of promoting the introduction of vehicles with lower emissions.
Collective transport Subsidies for collective transport make this option cheaper so that more passengers may elect to switch to collective transport instead of driving private cars. The reward scheme has become an important incentive for municipalities to develop collective transport and cycle paths, where there is a simultaneous requirement that car traffic be reduced in order for resources to be granted. The scheme can be expanded. Investment in collective transport lanes, transport interchanges, bus stops etc. can be increased.
Railway: Rail is the most energy-effective means of transport, and a transition from other means of transport to rail has a positive effect on greenhouse gas emissions. Extensive development of the railways is assumed in the transport model simulations. It requires substantial investment, far beyond the limits in NTP 2010-
2019. However, the simulations show that developing options only results in minimal reductions in CO2 emissions in isolation, unless it is combined with restrictions on motor vehicles/aircraft. A transition to biofuels or electrification of stretches that at present are run using diesel are possible measures for reducing today’s emissions from the railways. Electrification is dependent on government allocations for realisation.
Goods transport: Higher road transport costs as a result of an increased CO2 tax will make it more profitable to transfer goods traffic from the road to the sea or railway, but various obstacles in the form of terminal capacity and track capacity mean that this potential cannot be realised without extensive investment. Developing the railway network can increase the capacity of the track and make it easier to transfer goods transport from road to rail. NTP 2010-2019 contains a doubling of the capacity of goods transport by rail. The present analysis includes a tripling of capacity by 2030. The development of terminals etc. for transferring goods from road to rail/sea and managing land use will also be important in the longer term for getting more goods over to rail and sea.
Better coordination of goods transport could reduce overall transport requirements. Relevant instruments for preparing the ground for this are:
subsidies to projects for developing cooperative solutions
R&D funding for standardisation of transport documents and the flow of information between operators in the transport business
aid for introducing new technology for measuring and reporting of vehicle-kilometres and load utilisation
strong county or central government management of land use in the municipalities 43 Economic instruments to stimulate technological development and implementation
Vehicles: A higher CO2 tax will make it more profitable for operators in the industry to introduce vehicles based on electricity, biofuels or hydrogen and to build up supply systems for them. If the costs of introducing the alternative fuels are higher than the CO2 tax, the measure will not be implemented in most cases, because it will not be competitive. There may therefore be an initial need for economic support to build up the distribution of new fuels and to reduce the extra costs to vehicles. Introduction can be speeded up by subsidising the building of recharging stations, and reinforcing the power grid if or when fast charging is available. Similarly, supply chains for pure biofuel and hydrogen can be built up more rapidly if the government provides economic support. Hydrogen may be difficult to introduce without government support for developing infrastructure.
Air travel: The implementation of technical measures in this sector is largely dependent on technological development internationally. The development of more energy efficient aircraft and the possibility of mixing in biofuel are important examples of this. New technology will mainly be developed independently of the use of instruments in Norway, and when companies buy new aircraft, they will choose the most recent technology available, irrespective.
Shipping: Various energy-saving measures such as speed reduction, cleaning of hulls and propellers, and the use of shore power in harbours are relevant for shipping. Collectively these measures are estimated to offer potential emission reductions of some 400 000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent or more. Some of the measures are profitable given the assumptions made here, and targeted information or other instruments should therefore elicit them.
Investment will be required to supply shore power. There will also be costs associated with equipping ships and harbours for the use and delivery of shore power. Most small vessels can already receive low voltage shore power, and no major investments are required to enable these ships to receive shore power. However, one complicating factor is that no standards have been developed for shore power and connecting up to shore, so that choosing standards and adjusting existing equipment may require further investment. A requirement that shore power be used may be introduced, but should wait until there is agreement on international standards for shore power connections.
An order for energy efficiency measures and cleaning will be too difficult to enforce. However, a requirement for SEEMP (Ship Energy Management Plans) is possible, but making special requirements of Norwegian ships is not desirable. Other possible instruments are subsidies/tax exemption and contractual requirements.
Abolition of the present exemption from the mineral oil tax would have to be studied in more detail with respect to the consequences of transferring goods from the road to the sea. A CO2 fund is possible for shipping as well as for other forms of transport.
Quota regulation
It has been decided that aviation is to be included in the EU’s quota trading system. A number of factors, including the quota price, will determine how great an emission reduction effect this will have. Quota
44 regulation of international shipping is being discussed, and may be introduced regionally or nationally, for example in the EU or in Norway. Quota regulation is an economic instrument that in principle can ensure cost efficiency and management efficiency in order to achieve environmental policy targets. Because of the administration costs that a purely Norwegian quota system for the entire transport sector would entail, this instrument may not be the most appropriate for reducing emissions.
10.10.2 Regulatory instruments
Use of direct regulations in the transport sector
Emissions from vehicles are influenced by the fact the EU stipulates requirements through regulations. However, it is difficult in practice to influence the amount of transport and distribution of means of transport through direct regulations. Restricting the travel of individuals through the use of restrictions, personal quotas or similar is very demanding to administer in practice, and would rapidly be seen as an unreasonable incursion into individual freedom of choice.
Government order to market biofuel
As detailed in part D, macro-calculations indicate that the CO2 tax must be between NOK 1 200 and NOK 3 000/tonne in order to achieve the national emission target in 2020. This is close to the level of the cost of introducing biofuel into the Norwegian market. Operators in the business may thus find it profitable to introduce biofuels without requirements about mix requirements, particularly if they have expectations of high crude oil prices. However, if we want to ensure a substantial introduction of biofuel in the transport sector with a high degree of certainty, a requirement that it be marketed is an effective control instrument. By requiring that 10 per cent biodiesel be marketed in diesel for road traffic, an emission reduction of almost 1 million tonnes CO2 could be achieved in 2020. An emission reduction of approximately 130 000 tonnes could moreover be achieved by mixing ethanol in petrol for road traffic. The costs associated with this are around
NOK 1 000 and NOK 1 300/tonne CO2 for biodiesel and ethanol respectively. By phasing in flexi-fuel vehicles and E85 (high alternative) an emission reduction of approximately 300 000 tonnes of CO2 could be achieved at a cost of about NOK 1 400/tonne in 2020. If the marketing requirement is extended to include mixing biodiesel in fuel for the coastal and fishing fleet, construction diesel, railway and aviation (second generation biofuel), the combination is estimated to result in emission reductions of the order of 650 000 tonnes CO2 at costs of between NOK 800 and NOK 1 300/tonne CO2.
Government procurement
Pursuant to the Norwegian Act relating to government procurement, account shall be taken of the environmental impact during the planning of each individual procurement. The procurement of transport services and means of transport are examples of important product groups where central government and municipal authorities can require low-emission solutions.
45 Regulation of parking
This is both an economic and a regulatory instrument. Parking policy is primarily a local responsibility, mainly regulated through the Planning and Building Act. Studies show that regulation of parking in towns and built-up areas in the form of limits to the number of parking places that are made available, pricing and/or taxation of free parking on employer’s premises are effective instruments for curbing private car traffic. Regulation of private parking places and taxation of parking at places of work require statutory amendments. Maximum parking places can be used more by municipalities, the regional parking policy can be coordinated better, and higher and/or differentiated parking charges can be fixed. The central government can introduce a legal base for the introduction of parking charges on private parking places, tax dispensation on collective transport paid for by employer and taxation for the advantage of parking subsidised by employer (being considered). Parking restricted to residents of an area is being tested in Oslo, with positive results. It is also possible to introduce parking cash out, where employees are offered the choice of accepting a taxable cash amount instead of free or subsidised parking places at work.
Parking regulation may be generally oriented or differentiated depending on user, type of vehicle, time period and geographical area. In the transport model simulations a parking charge of NOK 30 is assumed for all work-related travel throughout the country, with a tripling of parking costs for the various travel purposes in the transport model for selected towns, combined with inter-city trains and long-distance buses. An emission reduction of 600 000 tonnes is estimated, and a cost of NOK 3 700/tonne.
Land-use planning
Municipal land-use planning can constitute an instrument for reducing transport requirements, changing the distribution of means of transport and thereby reducing CO2 emissions. This entails siting residential areas, workplaces, service functions and collective transport interchanges in such a way as to reduce transport needs locally and regionally. In the short and medium term, the siting of residential areas and activities is a given, and in practice changes take place only through siting of new buildings and new infrastructure. Such changes will therefore only have an effect towards 2030. Land use that is effective with respect to minimising transport and increasing the share of collective transport may require a centralisation of habitation, which may come into conflict with political goals to retain decentralised habitation. It may also come into conflict with other goals. The requirements and possibilities in the Planning and Building Act can probably be followed up by municipal and county governments to a greater extent than they are today. The central government can follow up municipalities, among other things by means of clear guidelines through national expectations.
10.10.3 Information, expertise and research and development (R&D) Aiming information directly at users has been found to be a good means of influencing the choice of means of transport. Information about the effects of reducing emissions can also to some extent increase the effect of other instruments such as taxation. Information and expertise can for example be an important means of
46 triggering measures associated with ecological driving, active mobility management and coordinated goods transport.
Individual measures in the field of active mobility influence include the following: campaigns to create awareness of own travel behaviour, car-sharing, co-driving, bus travel for employees, regulation of parking at workplaces, flexible working hours, compressed working week, working at home, video conferences, e- trading and transport plans for businesses. For such measures to be effective, support or subsidies for cooperative projects, R&D funding of new solutions and financing of pilot projects will be necessary.
In most cases the Norwegian market alone will be too small to provide adequate incentives for technological development. However, Norway has a number of research and development communities that are developing environmentally friendly technology in the field of transport and communications and other areas. The development of second-generation biofuel is one such example. It is difficult to foresee which technologies or areas will prevail. The allocation of support should be determined on the basis of a broad assessment of all relevant environments, across sectors. Transnova provides subsidies to market-oriented projects in the fields of vehicle technology, fuels and environmentally friendly transport. The Norwegian Research Council provides support for research in the same areas.
47