1 orkpackage 3 Definition of 3 scenarios W orkpackage 3 Definition of 3 scenarios STEPS final meeting Gé Huismans, Albert Jansen, SenterNovem June, 15th.

1

Workpackage 3orkpackage 3Definition of 3 scenariosDefinition of 3 scenarios

STEPS final meeting

Gé Huismans, Albert Jansen, SenterNovem

June, 15th 2005, Gothenborg

STEPSScenarios for the Transport System and

Energy Supply and their Potential Effects Framework Programme 6, Call 1AThematic Priority 1.6.2, Area 3.1.2, Task 1.10Instrument: Co-ordination Action + Additional Research

2

Aim and tasks

Aim: develop scenarios to be modelled and calculated in Workpackage 4 and assessed in Workpackage 5.

Tasks: 1: Synthesis of trends into dimensions 2: Definition of the scenarios 3: Definition of regional impact 4: Building and formulating the scenarios 5: Essay form

3

Task 1

Synthesis of trends into dimensions Trends to variables From variables to dimensions Clustering in a matrix Definition of the scenarios

4

Task 1.1 > trends to variables

Subsystems

Social-economic and cultural system Spatial System Private transport system Freight transport system Transport Energy System

Energy supply and demand

5

EmissionsTechnology System

Distribution Fuel Car Technology Technology Technology

ENERGY DEMAND Energy Use

Energy-Efficiency

Socio-economic and cultural Fuel Fuel Energy Supply SystemSystem Private Distribution Production Energy Production

Transport Energy Transport System System

Fuel supply and distribution system

Spatial System Freight

ENERGY SUPPLY

6

Task 1.2 > variables to dimensions

7

Task 1.2 > variables to dimensions

8

Systemvariables (indicators) + WP2 Long list Clustering into two groups

(availability) (regulation of demand)

Task 1.3 > clustering into a matrix

Exogenous variables1. Globalisation 2. European integration3. Economic growth, (GDP)4. Demographics, 5. Technological progress6. Availabilty of Energy Resources 7. Spatial development8. Transport costs

Policies9. “Liberation” of the energy

market10. Environmental policy11. Spatial planning12. Technological Innovation policy13. Transport policy14. Fiscal Policy15. Energy Policy

9

Task 1.4 > definition of the scenarios

Clustering into two groups Exogeneous (availability) Policies (regulation of demand)

1. Energy Demand Regulation– BAU

– Technological/ investment

– Regulation/taxation

2. Energy supply– Trend forecast (IEA + EU) +2%/a

– Worst Case +7%/a

10

Task 1.4 > definition of the scenarios

Policies (energy demand)

BAU reference policies 2005

Investments:Technology +

Infrastructure

Demand Control:TaxationRegulations

En

ergy su

pp

ly

Generally accepted energy supply forecast

A0 A1 A2

Worst case energy supply forecasts: Scarcity

B0 B1 B2

11

C2

B2

A2

Demand Regulation (scenarios 2)

B3B1B0B-1Energy Scarcity

C3C1C0C-1Extreme fuelprice growth

A3A1A0A-1

Unrestricted energy supply

IntegratedPolicies

(scenarios 3)

Technology Investment

(scenarios 1)

Business as Usual (BAU)

No Policies

Additional scenarios (integration)

Additional scenarios

Main scenarios (integration)

Main scenarios

WP4: 15 scenarios/ WP3: 6 scenarios

12

Task 2 > definition of the scenarios

BAU: actual practiced policies, including expert guesses on feasable policy development towards 2030

BAU+INVEST: direct investments in infrastructure, technology and innovation systems (energy efficiency, skills/knowledge, production capacity alternative fuels and rolling stock)

BAU+DEMAND REGULATION: taxation of car use, taxation of fuel, regulation of urban development towards transit orientation and node development

13

Task 2 > definition of the scenarios: E-supply

Trend consumption + 60 % in volume (A) Worst case + 7 %/a rise in end-user price (B)

14

Task 3 > definition of regional impact

Two ways: Planning families Density and networks

15

planning families

- Germanic- Napoleonic- Scandinavian- East European- British

16

Urban density

17

networks

road

18

Networksrail

19

proximity

20

Task 3 > definition of regional impact

Four European Regions:

1. Northern: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, (Norway)2. Eastern: Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Slovak

Republic, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Hungary 3. Southern: Italy, Greece, Spain, Portugal, Malta,

Cyprus4. Western: Germany, Austria, United Kingdom,

Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Luxembourg

21

Task 4 > building and formulation the scenarios

Desciption of each scenario

General introduction: the basics of that specific scenario A more detailed qualitative description of the scenario, on

variable level (based on the 21 variables selected): On a EU-level: impact on the transport and energy system.

This qualitative description is the basis for the quantification of the variable

On a regional scale Scenario is finalised by summarising the scores of all relevant

variables within the scenario: this quanitified description is the basis for WP4

22

Task 4 > building and formulation the scenariosmeasures and indicators used

Variable Indicator Social-Economic and cultural Subsystem

Mobility management, including car-sharing Car ownership

Gasoline fuel tax/ litre

Diesel fuel tax/ litre

Motor Fuel Tax

Kerosine

Car (General car cost) Travel cost change due to fuel taxes

Air (General air cost)

Diffusion of Telework Commuting trips saved per year

23


Spatial system floor space index - change to base year

Residential Central

Inner urban

Outer urban

Services+business Central

Inner urban

Outer urban

(light) Industrial Central

Inner urban

Outer urban

24


PassengerTransport System

Investment in infrastructure for Trans European Rail Networks European rail base peed

Investments in regional rail networks Regional rail base peed

Investment in local public transport infrastructure Local public transport speed

Traffic calming in urban areas Average speed reduction for cars

Road pricing in urban areas Average cost of car km and road ton/km

Lower cost for public transport users Bus cost Train cost

25


Freight Transport System

Traffic calming in urban areas Average speed reduction

Road pricing in urban areas Average cost of car km and road ton/km

Optimisation of City Logistics freight average distance

Freight Load Factor Short Distances:

Improvement of rail infrastructures and services Rail base speed

New freight rail network d or cost

26


Transport Energy System

Improving energy efficiency for car Car fuel efficiency (gasoline fuel consumption/car)

Car fuel efficiency (Diesel fuel consumption/car)

Investments in alternative vehicle technologies Emission factors

car fleet

Car cost Improving energy efficiency for train Train fuel consumption rate [l/(vhc*km)] (diesel

trains), Electric Consumption Factors [kWh/km] Improving energy efficiency for ship Ship diesel consumption factor [kg/km]

28

Social-economic system > BAU

BAU: General:

– GDP, average incomes and demographics (1-P hh): drivers transport demand

– Car-use culturally and socially dependent: national, regional, local differences

Car-sharing – No special actions for car-sharing: car ownership increases (new

EU Member States and rural regions) Taxation on fuels:

– Excise rates grow, affecting New Member States.

– Change in taxation from purchase to use: in general tax burden more or less the same, softens the higher fuel prices

– Kerosine will be taxed

29

Social-economic system > BAU + DR

Demand Regulation: Car-sharing

– Legislative profits when car-sharing: Europe-wide, upto local levels

– Higher taxes when purchasing and using the car + restricted entrance for non-sharing cars

– Regional differences: ... Taxation on fuels:

– Excise rates grow rapidly and heavily, especially for the more pollutionate fuels

– Increased fuel prices are not compensated;

– Kerosine will be heavily taxed to create a level-playing-field between modes

– Regional differences: …

30

Social-economic System

Variabele Indicator Business as Usual Technologyinvestment

Demandregulation

Car-sharing Carownership

Annual increase of1%

BAU Annual decreaseof 0,6%

Gasolinefuel tax/ litre

Annual increase of0,7%

BAU Annual increase of4,7%

Diesel Diesel fuel tax perlitre increasesannually with 1,5%.

BAU Annual increase of4,7%.

Fuel tax

Kerosine Kerosine tax 50% offuel tax

BAU Kerosine tax 200%of fuel tax

Travel cost Car General car costincreases annuallywith 0,5%

BAU General car costincreases annuallywith 3%

Air General air costdecreases annuallywith 0,5%

BAU General air costdecreases annuallywith 3%

31

Spatial System > BAU

BAU: General

– Urban sprawl continued (residential, office, retail)

– No Daily Urban System + Minimum mixed-use

– Some central and nodal developments and browfield; rest greenfield

– Regional differences: ... Floor Space Destination incr/decr (fsi/ zone/land use)

– small/ no increment in central urban area: res/office/retail

– moderate increment inner urban: res/office/retail

– huge increment outer urban: res/office/retail

» biggest effects in new member states

– Regional differences: ...

32

Spatial System > BAU + DR

Demand Regulation

Floor Space Destination incr/decr (fsi/ zone/land use)

– Legislation to mix activities (all spatial levels), disables greenfield/hypermarket developments: tax on land take, land banks, …

– End to domination of urban sprawl (2015 onwards)

– Daily Urban System: more close, more dense, more local, more regional, more mixed, more slow modes based

– Inner cities and (inner urban) nodal developments extremely popular, just as new cities around rail near existing cities

– Brownfields (incl. former office locations): highly mixed, medium/high density


33


Demandregulation

fsi (floor spaceindex)

Change to baseline BAU

Residential Central +10% BAU +30%inner urban +30% BAU +70%outer urban +70% BAU +0%

Services+business Central +5% BAU +10%inner urban +15% BAU +50%outer urban +50% BAU +0%

(light) Industrial Central + 0%; BAU +0%;inner urban + 10% BAU +80%outer urban +80% BAU +5%

Spatial System

34

Passenger Transport System > BAU

BAU General

– no decoupling GDP / pass. Kms

– Growing incomes spent on transport

– Car major role in local and regional transport

– Aviation dominates intra-European travel

– Regional differences: …

Investment in local public transport infrastructure– Decrease (national, regional, local)

– End-user cost increase


35

Passenger Transport System > BAU (2)

BAU Investment in European Rail Networks

– Slight increase: Ten-T and TINA networks planned; construction unclear and dependent on extra investments


Investment in regional rail – Decrease (national, regional, local)

– End-user cost increase

– Slight shift towards rail due to congestion

– Private companies entering the PT-business


36


BAU Speed reduction

– Some cities and regions introduced speed reduction measures

– 10% of the EU-network speed reduction measurements Regional differences: ...

Road Pricing– Some cities and regions introduced road pricing


37


BAU Lower transport for PT users

– Some measures for lower cost: ‘free fares’ in parts of the urban area

– Increase of transport cost


Extending telework – Few initiatives taken EU-wide

– No significant change in commuting trips


38

Passenger Transport System > BAU + T

Investment in local public transport investment– increase investment 100%: free lanes, extended lines, new

(light weight material), ICT, service providers

Investment in European Rail Networks– Most of the planned lines built: bottlenecks eliminated,

new lines built or extended

Investment in regional rail– increase investment 100%: free lanes, extended lines, new

(light weight material), ICT, service providers

39

Passenger Transport System > BAU + DR (1)

Speed reduction– Legislation: 40% of the network speed reduction,

especially urban areas

Road Pricing– legislation: from 2009 on all cities > 80.000 inhabitants

introduced road pricing

– entrance permissions for specific cars only

40

Passenger Transport System > BAU + DR (2)

Lower transport cost for PT users– Legislative measures: exclusive (free) P+R facilities and

the use of certain streets in urban areas exclusively for PT

– Subsidies re-introduced (paid by congestion charging), e.g lower VAT when buying tickets

Extending telework– Half of EU-Member States started promoting telework

from 2009 onwards

ALL: Regional differences: ...

41

Passenger Transport System


Demandregulation

Investment in PTinfra and logistics

Publictransportspeed

Annual increase0,3% bus speed

annual increase of1,1% in local pt(bus, tram) speed

BAU

Investment ininfra for EU RailNetworks

Passenger:new railnetwork, railspeed orcost, flightscostRegional

Annual increase0,8% rail base speed

annual increase of2% European railbase speed

BAU

Investments inrail networks atthe regional level

rail speed orcost

Annual increase:0,4% rail base speed

annual increase:1,7% regional railbase speed

BAU

Speed reduction Averagespeedreduction

Average stepwisespeed reduction forcars with 1,5%every 5 year (or anannual decrease of0,4 % > 10% in 25years)

BAU Average stepwisespeed reductionfor cars with 4%every 5 year (or anannual decrease of1% > 27% in 25years)

42

Passenger Transport System (2)


Demandregulation

Road Pricing Average costof car kmand roadton/km

Annual increase ofcost per car km of2%

BAU Annual increase ofcost per car km of6%

Bus cost increaseannually with 0,8%,(where no ‘free’busservices areintroduced)

BAU Bus cost decreaseannually with1,7%

Lower transportcost for PT users

Publictransportcost

Train cost increasesannually with 0,8%

BAU Train costdecreases annuallywith 1,7%

Telework Commutingtrips savedper year

annual increase ofcommuting tripssaved: 0%

BAU Stepwise increaseof telework:annual increase ofsaved commutingtrips saved: 0,3%(2030: 7%)

43

Freight Transport System > BAU (1)

BAU General

– Increased GDP > More freight: no decoupling

– More trucking (100%)

– Better logistics: higher load factor Speed reduction

– Some cities and regions speed reduction measures

– On 10% of the EU-network speed reduction measurements, especially for freight

– Regional differences: ... Road Pricing

– Some cities and regions introduced road pricing


44

Freight Transport System > BAU (2)

City Logistics to improve efficiency of urban freight

distribution – Few cities and regions introduced freight distribution

policies, e.g restricted delivery times, weight etc Improving freight rail infra and services

– Few investments

– Increased road tax: more demand rail, not met by extra investments> higher prices

– Speed slightly higher Improving freight ship infra and services

– Few investments in inland waterways (small share) and short sea shipping (great share)

– Speed slightly higher

45

Freight Transport System > BAU + T (1)

City Logistics to improve efficiency of urban freight

distribution – huge investments in e.g. tracking+tracing, city logistics

centres, delivery/city boxes, other modes (bikes, small electric cars) for the last mile, coöperation between different logistic firms, budgets for marketing and implementation of these concepts to overcome market barriers

Improving freight rail infra and services– 100% extra investments: new and extra rail, electrification

of networks, new rolling stock (lightweight, aerodynamic)

– higher demand met with extra slots

– higher speed

46

Freight Transport System > BAU + T (2)

Improving freight ship infra and services– 100% extra investment: extra short sea and inland:

» improved ships

» More and improved infrastructure related to (inland) harbours, waterways: new and longer docks, deeper harbours, cranes, container facilities, techniques and infrastructure for easier passing locks, improved possibilities for intermodal freight

– Faster shipment

47

Freight Transport System > BAU + DR (1)

Speed reduction– Legislation: 40% of the network speed reduction,

especially in urban areas, supported by infra measures (drive slow go fast)

Road Pricing– Legislation: from 2009 on all cities over 80.000

inhabitants have introduced road pricing

– 3/4 of the EU-Member States charges toll for freight

– Entrance permissions for specific cars only, related to weight, emission factors, etc

48

Freight Transport System


Demand regulation

Speed reduction Averagespeedreduction

Average stepwisespeed reduction forcars with 1,5%every 5 year (or anannual decrease of0,4 % > 10% in 25years)

BAU Average stepwisespeed reduction forcars with 4% every5 year (or an annualdecrease of 1% >27% in 25 years)

Road Pricing Average costof car kmand roadton/km

Annual increase ofcost per car km of2%

BAU Annual increase ofcost per car km of6%

Freight AverageDistance: annualdecrease ofdistances of 0,2%

Annual decrease ofdistances of 0,5%

BAUCity Logistics toimproveefficiency ofurban freightdistribution

Freighttransportintensity andcost,accessibility,freightaveragedistance

Freight Load FactorShort Distances:annual increase of0.8%

Freight Load FactorShort Distances:annual increase of2,4%

BAU

49

Freight Transport System (2)


Demand regulation

Annual increase0,7% rail base speed

Annual increase 2%rail base speed

BAUImproving railinfrastructuresand services

new freightrail network,rail speed orcost Rail cost: annual

increase with 0,6%Rail cost: annualdecreases with 1,5%

BAU

Improving shipsinfrastructuresand services

Freight shipsspeed or cost

Annual increase0,6% ship speed

Annual increase1,3% ship speed

BAU

50

Transport Energy System > BAU (1)

BAU Improving energy efficiency for car

– Investments decrease

– Ongoing improvements in energy efficiency, e.g. direct injection, lightweight materials, and better aerodynamics - legislation on emissions (air quality) > slight annual decrease fuel consumption

Investments in alternative vehicle technologies– Investments decrease

– Decreased emissions (Euro; every 9 years 50% reduction)

– Slow decrease conventionals (75%), slightly growing share for alternatives:

51


BAU Investments in alternative vehicle technologies

» Hybrids: 15% share (2004 already small share, growing share due to marketing and lower prices)

» CNG: 10% share, implementation quite easy: already infra for gas distribution. Beneficial: air quality legislation

» Electric: max. 1% share; niche market (fleets local authorities, etc)

» Hydrogen: some 2% share, grow after 2020

52


BAU Improving energy efficiency for train

– no mayor investments, only fleet renewal

Improving energy efficiency for ship– no mayor investments, only fleet renewal

53

Transport Energy System > BAU + T (1)

BAU Improving energy efficiency for car

– Investments increased: government and (due to that) private companies > share 15% of sales

– Sped up improvements > direct injection, lightweight materials, modestly powered cars, better aerodynamics + legislation on emissions (air quality) > moderate annual decrease fuel consumption

Investments in alternative vehicle technologies– Investments +100% (also private companies): lightweight,

low noise, energy efficient cars, engines on biofuels, batteries fit for electric cars, fuel cell technology etc, ready to fit in modern logistic concepts….

54



– Sped up decrease of emissions (Euro; every 5yrs -50%)

– Faster decrease conventionals (55% share)

– Faster growing share for alternatives:

» hybrids: 20% share > 2005 small share; growing share due to marketing, lower prices, lightweight batteries, improved traction, improving recharging, accompanying legislations on emissions

» CNG: 15% share > implementation quite easy and sped up: already infra for gas distribution. Beneficial: air quality legislation

55



» Electric: 5% share > improved batteries, expanded niche market towards mainstream (fleets local

authorities, cars for local and regional use)

» Hydrogen: 5% share, faster growth after 2020

56


BAU Improving energy efficiency for train

– 100% extra investments, (lighter) materials for trains, engines, traction, use of low-energy consuming devices for passengers (light, heating), etc. Research on even better streamline, lay-out etc of the trains itself and on the most energy efficient mode (diesel vs electricity) and re-use of the braking energy > faster

Improving energy efficiency for ship– 100 % extra investments, research on other (lighter)

materials for ships, motors, traction, etc. Research on even better streamline, lay-out etc of the ship itself, ...

57

Transport Energy System (1)

Variable Indicator Business as Usual Technology Investment

Demand Regulation

Transport Energy System Annual change in %

Improving energy efficiency for car

Car fuel efficiency (gasoline fuel consumption/car)

- 0,5% - 2% - 0,5%

Car fuel efficiency (Diesel fuel consumption/car)

- 1% - 3% - 1%

Investments in alternative vehicle technologies

Emission factors - 8,1% - 16% - 8,1%

car fleet Conventional (gas/ dsl: -1% / share: 72% Hybrids: +12,5% / share: 15% CNG: +10% / share: 10% Electric +3% / share: 1% Hydrogen + 3% share: 2%

Conventional: -2,1 share: 55%

Hybrids: + 13,5 %

/ share 20% CNG: +12% /

share 15% Electric: +7% /

share 5% Hydrogen: +7,8% share 5%

Conventional (gas/ dsl: -1% / share: 72% Hybrids: +12,5% / share: 15% CNG: +10% / share: 10% Electric +3% / share: 1% Hydrogen + 3% share: 2%

Car cost + 0,8% + 3% + 0,8%

58

Transport Energy System (2)

Variable Indicator Business as Usual Technology Investment

Demand Regulation

Improving energy efficiency for train

Train fuel consumption rate [l/(vhc*km)] (diesel trains), Electric Consumption Factors [kWh/km]

- 0,8% - 5% - 0,8%

Improving energy efficiency for ship

Ship diesel consumption factor [kg/km]

- 0,4% - 1,6% - 0,4%

59

WP3: Scenarios

Thank you for the attention and discussion

1 orkpackage 3 Definition of 3 scenarios W orkpackage 3 Definition of 3 scenarios STEPS final meeting Gé Huismans, Albert Jansen, SenterNovem June, 15th.

Documents

scenarios measures

demand slide

energy policy slide

scenarios bau

scenarios clustering

wp4 slide

scenarios desciption

scenarios wp3