CRed carbon reduction 1 Energy Dialogue: Transport 20 th September 2006 Keith Tovey M.A., PhD, CEng, MICE, CEnv Energy Science Director: Low Carbon Innovation.

1

CRedcarbon reduction

Energy Dialogue: Transport

20th September 2006

Keith Tovey M.A., PhD, CEng, MICE, CEnvEnergy Science Director: Low Carbon Innovation Centre

School of Environmental Sciences, UEA

2


Energy Dialogue: Transport

• The Energy Review

• Historic Trends

• Technical Issues• Fuel Efficiency

• New Fuels

• The Social Dimension• How important is it?

• New Ideas

• Conclusions

3


• Just 3.2% of Review but Transport is 33.1% of energy demand

• Mostly what has been done

• Limited on future measures

• Has major omissions

The Energy Review

Band G covers a broad rangeBase taxation directly on carbon emission?

but much with a positive spin.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 100 200 300 400 500 600CO2 Emissions (g/km)

Em

issi

on C

ateg

ory G

FEDCBA

Petrol

0

2

4

6

8

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

CO2 Emissions (g/km)

Em

issi

on C

ateg

ory

Diesel

Data from Vehicle Emissions Database

4


Historic Trends: Personal Mobility

• Increase in personal mobility by ~400% in 50 years• Mostly by car journeys• Decline in bus travel (but trend now reversed )• Nearly 50% increase in rail travel since privatisation

– represents a saving of 1.5 - 2 millions tonnes of CO2 per annum compared to road.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1952

1956

1960

1964

1968

1972

1976

1980

1984

1988

1992

1995

1999

2003

bill

ion

pass

enge

r ki

lom

etre

s

buses and coaches cars and vans

other rail

air

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1952

1956

1960

1964

1968

1972

1976

1980

1984

1988

1992

1995

1999

2003

bill

ion

pas

sen

ger

kilo

met

res

Privatisation

If this travel is replacing road travel!!

Will investment in public transport necessarily reduce car journeys?

5


Historic Trends: Freight

• Distance each tonne has travelled has increased by:– 223% since 1960– 20% since 1990

• Is this increase in movement of freight conducive to optimum economic growth, energy security, and carbon reduction?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2003

Tra

nsp

ort

of g

oods

km

/ton

ne

6


Private Motoring

• Components of Energy Demand in personal transport.

• Desire for mobility exceeded fuel efficiency improvements until 1990.

• Since 2000 energy consumption approximately in balance.

• Need to reduce further increases in mobility if CO2 is to be reduced significantly.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

140019

64

1968

1972

1976

1980

1984

1988

1992

1996

2000

2004

Ene

rgy

(PJ)

Fuel Efficiency

vehicle ownership

distance travelled

Fuel Efficiency

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

MJ/

km

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Bill

ion

Veh

icle

km

Personal mobility

7


Energy Efficiency Trends

Average Engine Size of Cars

1500

1550

1600

1650

1700

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Eng

ine

Size

(ccs

)

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

<700 700 -1000

1000 -1200

1200 -1500

1500 -1800

1800 -2000

2000 -2500

2500 -3000

> 3000

Engine Size (ccs)

1994

2004

Vehicles available - 2006

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

A B C D E F G

Emission Classification

Diesel

Petrol

Data from Transport Statistics 2005. Table 2005.

Mean CO2 emissions – voluntary targets will not reach 140 g/km by 2008/09

Trends in car engine size

Consequence of increase in engine size is 2.9 Mtonnes extra of CO2. per annum.

8


Percentage of models available compared to social desire.

-ve means less models on market than people intending to buy.

Size of Car Engines in Market 2006

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

<1000 1000 -1300

1300 -1600

1600 -2000

2000 -2500

2500 -3000

> 3000

Engine Size (ccs)

Nu

mb

er o

f M

od

els

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

<1000 1000-1300

1300-1600

1600-1800

1800-2000

2000-2500

2500-3000

>3000

Engine Size (ccs)

per

cen

tage

Size of Choice according to survey

Data: Vehicle Emission DatabaseDepartment of Transport Report: “Assessing the Impact of Graduated Vehicle Excise Duty”

<1000 1000 - 1300

1003 - 1600

1600 - 2000

2000 - 2500

2500 - 3000

>3000

9


Fuel Consumption and Driver Behaviour

• Car: 5 door Toyota Yaris

• Real performance is best at ~ 50 mph. Saves up to 15% in fuel consumption cf 70 mph.

• Driver behaviour at low to moderate speeds can affect consumption by up to 10%%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Average Speed (mph)

(m

pg)

Driver 1

Driver 2

• A small car emits: equivalent of 1 party balloon every 60m.

• Driving just 1.6 miles emits as much carbon dioxide as heating an old persons room for 1 hour.

Raising Awareness

10


Technical Issues: New Fuels• Biofuels: one part of the solution in near term with Fuel Cells in longer

Term??

Depending on the pathway, biofuels can have a major impact in reducing CO2 from transport.

However, other studies give differing results and clarity and robustness of methodolgy is needed – including “Real Road Tests”

Biofuel Options• Biogas• Bioethanol (5% or 85%)• Biodiesel (5% to 100%)• Vegetable oil

• Benefit > Reduced CO2 and other emissions?

020406080

100120140160180200

biod

iese

l

beet

beet

+ h

eat

whe

at +

CH

P

Et:

was

te w

ood

Syn

dies

el

DM

E

coal

woo

d

win

d

nucl

ear

CO

2 em

issi

ons

(g/k

m)

hybridsconventional

petrol and diesel

bioethanol second generation fuels Bio-reactors

fuel cells

Overall CO2 emissions for different fuels/production methods/power trains.

Based on CONCAWE/JRC/EUCAR results as adapted by Andy Taylor

11


Launch of BioEthanol in UK: Norwich 15th March 2006

Planning is needed both for vehicles and infrastructure

12


Biodiesel Trials – Banham Poultry 2004

• Despite reduced calorific value of biodiesel, fuel consumption remained the same

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

23 May 22 Jun 22 Jul 21 Aug 20 Sep

km

/ltr

5% 20%

50% 35%

First trials ever of fuel economy ‘on the road’ using biodiesel8 Volvo FH12 Trucks: 5%, 20%, 35%, 50% biodiesel blends

13


0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

02/Jun 22/Jun 12/Jul 01/Aug 21/Aug 10/Sep 30/Sep

km/l

tr

Driver 1

Driver 2

• Driver behaviour can affect performance• Driver 2 uses 13.8% more fuel than driver 1

Biodiesel Trials – Banham PoultryDriver behaviour

14


• Trials demonstrated other benefits compounding to 60% saving– Using 50% uvo biodiesel (~40% saving)

– Advanced driver training (~15% saving): cumulative ~49%

– Better route/load planning (~10% saving): cumulative ~54%

– More fuel-efficient trucks (~10% saving): cumulative ~59%

Total CO2 saving ~59%

• However– Widespread availability of biodiesel at this concentration and new trucks will

take time

• Other actions could be taken in shorter time scale– Advanced driver training (~15% saving):

– Better route/load planning (~10% saving):

Total CO2 saving ~24%

Biodiesel Trials – Banham Poultry

15


• In UK it is 5% substitution of biofuels by volume. Should it be 5% by energy?

• Will the buy out money necessarily end up promoting UK projects as with Renewable Obligation?

• Significant quantities of wheat are exported which could be used for bioethanol.

• Land Area required for 5% by volume– ~10000 – 12000 sq km (similar to NFU figure of 1.2 Mha)

– or 4-5% of total land area of UK.

area of Norfolk, Suffolk, and part of Cambridgeshire combined

• Opportunities for use of co-products- animal feed/power generation

• What happens if RTFO is increased further? Is land area requirement sustainable?

Implications of Road Transport Fuel Obligation for 2010

16


Personal Mobility: Does Public Transport reduce car travel?

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000

annual car distance (km)

tota

l ann

ual d

ista

nce

(km

)

UK

D

More use of car > more total distance travelled.

Greater distance by train > greater use of car.

Compare UK with Germany

switch UK car journeys to public transport at German levels. saving by train 1.01 M tonnes saving by bus 0.74 M tonnesReducing mobility desire 9.22 M tonnesSuggests overriding issue is increased desire for mobility rather

than significant switching of mode of transport.

8000

8500

9000

9500

10000

10500

11000

600 700 800 900 1000

train distance (km)

car

dist

ance

(km

)

D

UK

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Train distance (km)

Car

dis

tan

ce (

km

)

D

UK

17


Investment in Public Transport• Invest in Public Transport and get people

out of their cars?

• Norwich Orbital bus scheme - £1.2 million

• Links railway station, hospital, University, City Centre with places near Ring Road.

• Not that popular yet. People still using their cars. Fare £1.65 return car park charges at hospital often considerably more.

Smart Dynamic Bus Routing? • Bus Service A > B• People at C not served• Divert route via C

– increased journey times less popular with A > B, particularly if people only occasionally get on at C.

• Dynamic Routing on demand extension of Trinidad Route Bus System

A

B

C

• Mobile phone SMS• Intelligent bus stops

18


Social Issues: Lift SharingOur congested roads are full of empty seats

The UK leader in lift sharing, Liftshare.comis based in Norfolk; Aim: CO2, Car Occupancy 2

52 million km shared each year.

Car travel (2004 statistics):• 679 billion passenger kilometres• 398 billion vehicle kilometres

Average occupancy 1.71.Raising this to an average of 2 would save

9.9 Mtonnes CO2.

Lift sharing/car pooling is very cost effective, can help combat social exclusion, and enhance the effectiveness of public transport.

Increasing average car occupancy is a very cheap way of saving CO2 and reducing car use.


Social Issues: First car share club in East Anglia

EDP, June 2, 2006

However, some research of Cambridge scheme by Prof. Crawford Brown suggests that much of use is additional use not replacement use.

20


Providing Public with more information

• Impact of carbon emissions

• Petrol receipt from Denmark

• Individuals often go for budget airlines for the cheap weekend break in Europe. Is this rational?

• e.g. Paris for weekend break

29th Sept - 2nd Oct 27th Oct - 30th Oct

BMIBaby EasyJet Eurostar BMIBaby EasyJet Eurostar

Return Tickets £95.00 £86.18 £124.00 £9.00 £56.58 £79.00

Airport Taxes £55.20 £14.50 £55.20 £14.50

London>Airport £8.00 £22.40 £8.00 £22.40

CDG > Gare du Nord £13.00 £13.00 £13.00 £13.00

Total £171.20 £136.08 £124.00 £85.20 £106.48 £79.00

Total Time 04:05 04:15 03:00 04:05 04:15 03:00

Prices as per respective WEB Sites on 19th Sept. 2006

21


Conclusions• Significant opportunities exist for reducing CO2 using biofuels.

• Government needs clearer statements on its commitments: e.g.RTFO.

• Why not a requirement of 5% by energy content?

• Where will buy out money go?

• Will it promote industry in UK?

• Land requirements in post 2010 ideas from increased RTFO?

• Issues of fuel efficiency need addressing more effectively

• Reverse trend towards large engine cars

• Revisit the banding system and related taxation

Lao Tzu (604-531 BC) Chinese Artist and Taoist philosopher

"If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading."

• Social Dimension must not be overlooked.– Better education/awareness - driver behaviour.– Address issue of continual increases in desire for mobility.

Could provide more rapid and cheaper method to reduce CO2?

CRed carbon reduction 1 Energy Dialogue: Transport 20 th September 2006 Keith Tovey M.A., PhD, CEng, MICE, CEnv Energy Science Director: Low Carbon Innovation.

Documents

cred carbon reduction

carbon emission

carbon dioxide

energy consumption

personal mobility slide

energy dialogue

personal transport

energy security