Low Emission Zones in Europe Lucy sadler

Lucy SadlerSadler Consultants Ltd

Edinburgh, 17th July 2014

LEZs in Europe

CSadler

onsultants

Specialists in air quality policy

CSadler

onsultantswww.lowemissionzones.eu : www.airqualitypolicy.co.uk

Where did it all start…?• 1996 3 LEZs in Sweden

• 2002 North Italy, with winter LEZs, Mont Blanc tunnel restrictions & cost variations

• 2008, London, Berlin, Cologne, Netherlands, Milan Ecopass started

• Meanwhile ~ 200 LEZs planned / in operation

• ~1760 local authorities, 13 countries

2

CSadler


LEZs in Europe

~200 LEZs

~1760 auths

13 countries

+ Japan, Beijing…

From www.lowemissionzones.eu or www.urbanaccessregulations.eu – Info on European LEZs, run by us (CLARS)

8(3)

2(1)

1

1

1

1270(1)

5

1630

6

(1)Antwerp

1

3

http://www.lowemissionzones.eu/

http://www.urbanaccessregulations.eu/

CSadler


Why did it all start?• Air quality, health, EU limit values

• Ecopass also due to congestion

• CO2 & climate change was not an issue with LEZs– Little traffic reduction observed for ‘normal’ LEZs– Fleet changes vehicle rather than stop journey

• However– now realised climate change importance of black carbon

– Combination with congestion charge

– ULEZ restricting far more vehicles

• Make LEZs more relevant to climate change than previously thought

4

CSadler


LEZ Overview• A wide range of LEZs, Variations on a theme,

• Vehicles: from all vehicles → lorries only

• Sizes: from ~2000km2 → Lisbon Zone 1

• Emissions standards: Petrol Euro 1 → Diesel Euro 4, (Euro VI)

• Enforcement: camera, sticker, checking papers, (transponder)

• Most PM focused - eg Euro 4(PM)• Allows greater emissions impact for lower cost

• Diesel particulate filter allows PM10 reduction, now also de-NOx

• Most phased introduction

• NO2-focused schemes investigated + London buses

• LEZ investigations / plans continuing – Norway, UK, Belgium, France, Czech Republic, Portugal…

5

CSadler


Germany

• National framework, local decision & implementation• All vehicles except 2 & 3 wheelers

– Class 2: All diesel vehicles Euro 2(PM); petrol Euro 1– Class 3: All diesel vehicles Euro 3(PM); petrol Euro 1– Class 4: All diesel vehicles Euro 4(PM); petrol Euro 1

• eg Berlin from 1.1.2008, from 2010Freiburg from 2010, from 2012, from 2013

• Baden-Württemberg co-ordinating 20+ towns - those with PM10 problem start March 2008; NO2 problem 2010.

• Manually enforced with sticker, fines & points on your driving licence

• Tax incentives for retrofits & cheaper loans for new vehicle purchase to help compliance

6

CSadler


The Netherlands• 13 LEZs with national framework• Lorries only >3.5T

– 2008-2010• Euro 1 and less banned• Euros 2 & 3 require filter• Euro 4, 5, 6, EEV, gas, hydrogen, E85 allowed in

– 2010 - July 2013• Euro 2 and less banned• Euro 3 require filter & must be <8 years• Euro 4, 5, 6, EEV, gas, hydrogen, E85 allowed in

– After July 2013• Only Euro 4, 5, 6, EEV, gas, hydrogen, E85 allowed in

– From 2015 vans in >= 1 city– Had ‘covenant’ before national legislation

7

CSadler


Milan (Ecopass)Congestion Charge & LEZ

• More polluting vehicles chargedfor entry 7:30-19:30 – Free: Class 1

• AFV; gas, electric, hybrid

– Free: Class 2 • Petrol: cars Euro 3+• Diesel: cars & GV Euro 4+ or with filter

– 2€/day: Class 3• Petrol Euro 1, 2

– 5€/day: Class 4• Petrol: cars Euro 0; GV Euro 1, 2; • Diesel: cars Euro 3; GV Euro 3; buses Euro 4 & 5

– 10€/day: Class 4• Diesel: cars Euro 0; GV Euro 0-2; bus Euro 0-3

• Resident & multiple entry discounts (non-commercial vehicles only)• In addition to LEZ controls• Reduced traffic & pollution• In operation 1.1.2008 - 31.12.2011. Now simple charge plus ban for pre-

Euro 4 diesel, pre-Euro 1 petrol (‘Area C’)

8

CSadler


Norway

• In planning / consideration for 3 towns

• NO2 focused

• Would work on an ‘Environmental Tax’ basis– Building on existing AutoPASS entry charges

• Vehicles <Euro 6/VI pay– Lower Euro standard → higher cost– Priority → Euro VI/6, banning could only be done later (+ culture of

environmental tax)

• Camera and transponder enforced– As are AutoPASS & studded tyre charges

Oslo9

CSadler


Retrofit certifications• LEZ-based certifications

– So far, each country has had its own certification scheme, similar but slightly different

– All bring the vehicle to a higher Euro standard for PM

• New ISO Standard– For both PM10 (↓90%) and/or NO2 (↓60%)

– Can be used from end 2014– Should also enable new standards

• eg Euro III / Euro II + full DPF or • Euro VI / Euro V + de-NOx

– Means a separate certification is not needed• France has new certification based on draft ISO → final ISO when published

10

CSadler


LEZ impact• Will depend on city eg

– LEZ• Standard• Size• Vehicles affected• How well enforced• How people comply (new vehicles, retrofit, 2nd hand vehicles)

– Pre-LEZ vehicle fleet• Vehicle fleet age & vehicle types

– The pollution problem• How bad problem is• % traffic pollution• % local vs external pollution• Geography of the city• Weather

• Weather changes each year– Care needed to compare concentrations before & after– Calculations needed

11

CSadler


Non-AQ impacts• Traffic flows have remained fairly constant

– Exception is the Milan• Little negative business impacts reported

– Many forecast, including job losses– DE & NL have ‘hardship’ exemptions, few have been taken

• Gothenburg haulier & supplier LEZ survey was positive – 21% very good 'overall rating‘, 28% fairly good, only 20% negative

• LEZs cost both to run and comply with– Again, exemption is Milan Ecopass in terms of running cost

• But improve health and save money• Health and financial benefits

– Copenhagen's 1st phase estimated to reduce 90 premature deaths and save the community 10m€

– 2nd phase estimated to reduce 150 deaths, 150 relevant hospital admissions, 750 bronchitis attacks, 8,000 asthma attacks & 90,000 days of restricted activity

• Worth remembering: diesel emissions are carcinogenic, with more health impact than simply PM10 (WHO announcement)

12

CSadler


Impact of LEZ in Stockholm (in 2000)

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

No zone With zone2000

Full Zone

Illegal vehicles

Motor exchange

Exhaust aftertreatment

Other legal vehicles

Ton /year

Vehicle category

-40%

-50%

Zone 2000: 0.5 - 9 %

Full zone: 0.5 - 12 %

Emissions of PM10 Emissions of NOx

Concentrations of PM0.2

0

50

100

150

200

250

No zone With zone2000

Full Zone

Illegal vehicles

Motor exchange

Exhaust aftertreatment

Other legal vehicles

Ton /year

Vehicle category

-10%-20%

Enforcement improved since this assessment

13

CSadler


Impact of London LEZ – post-implementationPollutant Of total emis Of traffic emis

NOx -2% (529T)

NO2 +2.6% (+116T)

CO2 +0.06% (4243T)

PM10 -1.9% (28T) -3%

PM2.5 -2.4% (-26T) -3.7%

NO2 Average concs reduced by 0.12 μg/m3, Peak reductions up to 0.16 μg/m3

Rigid HGVs phase 1 Euro 3(PM) Artic HGVs phase 1

No LEZ No LEZWith LEZ With LEZ

97% compliance:

PM10 Average concs reduced 0.03 μg/m3

Peak reductions up to 0.5 μg/m3

+ reductions from TfL buses ~ ↓90% 2000-2010 yet 32% more km [= ↓ 280%]

Black Carbon Reduced by 40-50%

14

CSadler


* base

d o

n th

e ve

hicle

f lee

t of F

ran

kfurte

r All e

e

Berlin15

CSadler


Impacts of Milan’s Ecopass• Primarily aimed at PM – Po valley• Concentration reduced

– PM10 annual average 4%, exceedences 13%

• Emissions from traffic (as well as traffic) reduced– PM10 19%, NOx 11%, CO2 9%

• During Area C operation 7:30-19:30 traffic emissions reduced– PM10 18%, NOx 10%, CO2 22%

Date at which 35 exceedences reached…Annual NOx emissions

16

CSadler


PM metric & ‘safe levels’

• Diesel particulate, Black Carbon, Soot all reduced more than PM10 or PM2.5

• These are the metrics WHO now confirming as most harmful to health

• Even of PM10, there is no ‘safe level’, and all reduction in concentrations improves health

17

CSadler


How achieve most impact• Decide if most impact, or most impact for least cost / CBA• Determine aims

– Health, CBA, LV compliance

• Most important sources first– Assess what makes sense for AQ ; what possible & when

• Standards & retrofit– Euro 4 or 6 (IV/VI), with retrofit, either dpf only, or dpf & scr →

nearly Euro VI

• Timing– Priority more Euro VI, reducing move to Euro V– Phasing to allow adjustment & compliance

• but avoid phasing with pre-Euro VI HDV standards

• Good enforcement, communication, high penalty• Complementary measures, funding

18

CSadler


Factors affecting LEZ choices• Standards, size, vehicles

– Large / strong enough to make impact, yet affordable

– For NO2 → Euro VI or Euro V + de-NOx as soon as possible

• Vehicles included– Impacts, economics, politics

• Enforcement– Other schemes, cost, culture, LEZ size, impact

• Retrofit– ↑ impact (especially heavy duty vehicles), ↓ cost , ↑ acceptability,

• Pre-planning– Give advance notice; often needed within poltical term or by 2015 for EU

• Area– Ring road or known boundary

• City vehicles– Eg London had large impact with own buses

19

CSadler


Needs careful assessment• Appropriate metrics needed• Difficult to separate LEZ from other factors

– But can be done

• Modelling to assess likely impact before implementation– Include pre-LEZ fleet, how comply, compliance rates etc– CBA useful, not only LVs, but health vs implem. costs

• Methods for post-implementation assessment include– Comparing ave AQ monitoring inside LEZ with comparable outside

– Source apportionment combined with conc. reductions to ascribe these to the traffic & therefore LEZ

– Monitored vehicle emissions standards pre- & post LEZ

– Statistical procedures, eg ‘meteorological normalisation’, to remove influence of variability from non-local sources; or identify the traffic component

20

CSadler


Good Practice summary

• National framework if >1 city in the country- ↑ clarity, ↑ acceptance, ↓ to city, easier to understand & communicate

• Based on vehicle emission Euro standards– Retrofitting DPF reduces the cost of reducing especially PM

– Full filters significantly increase PM reduction, especially ultrafines

• Phase in scheme– Vehicles, area– Later phases had greater effect; earlier enabled drivers to adjust

• Plan ahead– Give enough warning to drivers ~ 1-2 years, set out future stages – Where less warning, more temporary exemptions (not as good)

• LEZ be large & strict enough to have impact– Stricter schemes have more impact AQ & affect more people

21

CSadler


Good Practice summary (2)• Clear, simple, effective rules • Good communication, spread information

- Information spread around Europe if foriegn vehicles affected

• Few carefully chosen exemptions– More exemptions = less air quality impact– ‘Hardship’ exemptions in German & Dutch LEZs eg if no

retrofit available & prove newer vehicle will cause bankruptcy

• Good enforcement- Better enforcement, more air quality improvement and

fairness

• Part of a package of measures

22

CSadler


Main Mechanisms

• Bus LEZs: Traffic Commissioner regulation, Green Bus Fund £

• General LEZ: TRO / Congestion Charge (CCS)

• ULEZ in central area combined with CCS– Combining with CCS is an opportunity rather than a

challenge, see Area C, London enforcement

• LEZ for captive fleets– Bus, dustbin lorries, council fleet

23

CSadler


National Framework

• Needed for LEZs other than bus LEZs– UK Government & DfT ‘seem reluctant’

– Scottish Government could have a Scottish framework, which English authorities then also adopt?

• National framework resolve many issues, potentially with some variations for cities to choose, eg DE

• More details in DfT report

24

CSadler


CostsBetter enforcement

= ↑ impact

→ ↑ implementation/running £

(= ↑ affected → slightly ↑ compliance £)

Stricter standard

= ↑ impact = ↑ affected → ↑ compliance £

More affected

= ↑ impact = ↑ compliance £ • (Good) Manual enforcement

– ↓ £ implementation ↑ £ running– Enforce / require parking, ↓£

• Camera enforcement – ↑£ implementation ↓£ running

– With CCS, enforcement comes ‘free’

25

CSadler


Sharing experience

• CLARS Platform membership

• See www.urbanaccessregulations.eu/public-authorities • European Commission funded, membership is FREE and

provides access to:– A large collection of relevant information, guidance, advice and

links– Ask questions of the secretariat and other LEZ/ARS authorities– A forum to ask questions, discuss issues, post information– Periodic emails with news, updates and issues– EC considering guidance for LEZs & urban road charging.

CLARS would be used for informal consultation– The Platform is here to provide what you need, so let us know

what else you need!

26

http://www.urbanaccessregulations.eu/public-authorities

CSadler


Some Best Practice cities

• Berlin– Manual enforcement, assessments, other measures,

approachable…

• Milan– CCS & LEZ, camera enforced

• London– You are probably already in contact

• Stockholm– Long experience & with CCS

• Netherlands have negotiation with hauliers– Very Dutch approach – & amazing! (expensive too in grants)

27

CSadler


For more information on LEZs

Lucy Sadlerwww.lowemissionzones.eu

or www.urbanaccessregulations.eu

Lucy.Sadler @ airqualitypolicy.co.uk00 49 7641 9375 335

28, last slide

Low Emission Zones in Europe Lucy sadler

Environment

diesel euro

cars euro

diesel vehicles euro

filter euro

pre euro

buses euro

bus euro

pm petrol euro