Local Air Quality / Climate Change
Air quality
Our report on air quality is at Annex A. Here, we draw attention to the fact that air pollution from cars has fallen considerably since the beginning of the 1990s despite traffic growth due to the enormous progress that has already been made over the last two decades in improving both engine technology and fuel quality.
We also highlight that we are now approaching the situation of diminishing returns as regards rising incremental investment costs compared to incremental benefits in engine technology. An SMMT paper at Annex B gives further details.
We understand that local authorities are likely to need to establish around 100 Air Quality Management Areas to tackle significant problems. Here we believe that improvements should be sought:
- through developing the most cost effective options for addressing problems and by looking at the degree of priority which needs to be given to emissions from each type of road vehicle, including lorries, buses, taxis and vans, rather than simply cars. We believe that there are important opportunities to be addressed in tackling particular emissions from lorries, buses, taxis and vans where, with suitable government incentives and support, business could continue to make an important contribution;
- through consideration being given to the implementation of other measures detailed in the CVTF Report (and which are set out in the SMMT paper).
We also call on local authorities to continue to work together with the oil industry, building on the progress beginning to be made there to establish a national chain of alternative fuels refuelling facilities.
Greenhouse gas emissions
Work for the AA by NETCEN/AEA shows that technological advance ensured that CO2 emissions from cars did not grow throughout the 1990s. Indeed, they are now forecast to fall as a result of the landmark EU/ACEA agreement. But the Forum is also aware of the Government view that further reductions in emissions may be needed in the next decade and beyond as the UK prepares to make more challenging emission reductions against the background of likely continuing traffic growth.
Our report on greenhouse gas emissions is at Annex C. In summary, we ask Government:
- to look at the evidence base and cost effectiveness of the action they are calling for across each sector of the economy and all types of transport, including for example, non-land based modes such as aviation;
- disaggregate the different environmental impacts of each road vehicle sector, with attention focussed on the older type of vehicle in each sector.
Once the relevant merits of the various cost-benefit frameworks have been established, action should be concentrated on those areas giving the greatest benefit.
Major reductions in CO2 emissions have already been agreed at a European level. We seek assurance that any future target set for vehicle environmental standards in the UK will mirror those set in Europe and that in the estimation of greenhouse gas projections, full account has been taken of the major changes to vehicle technology that will be occurring over the next few years.
Government action
We have also highlighted in Annex D the key areas where Government itself can help tackle greenhouse gas emissions. These include the introduction of focused tax changes to effect behaviour change, certainty about the future direction and timescales of such measures, the Government to ensure its own fleet comprises clean and fuel efficient vehicles and greater use of technology to lessen work related travel.
Annex A: Local Air Quality
Enormous progress has already been made over the last two decades in improving engine technology and fuel quality, resulting in a significant reduction in tailpipe and evaporative emissions from new vehicles. The introduction of Euro I standards for new cars in 1993 reduced regulated emissions from petrol engines by up to 90 per cent. Successive Euro standards have reduced regulated emissions to 40 - 50 per cent below the previously regulated level. To illustrate this progress, it now takes as many as 50 new compact cars to generate the same level of regulated emissions that just one 1976 equivalent model did when new.
The Forum expects these trends to continue in future. Indeed, vehicle manufacturers are already working to introduce cleaner vehicles to the market at the earliest possible opportunity. In 1999, for example, 22 passenger car models meeting stringent Euro III tailpipe emission standards were available in the market one full year ahead of the legislated introduction date (1st January 2001). Euro III for passenger cars will be followed by a further step (Euro IV) on 1st January 2006. When the Euro IV standards are introduced, it is anticipated that regulated emissions will have been reduced to 70 -80% from the 1993 (Euro I) level.
In order to help meet the stringent emission standards planned for 2005 and beyond, the automotive industry will continue to invest substantial sums in cleaner vehicle technology. However, the price that has to be paid for each vehicle emissions reduction step is growing whilst the contribution made by each step to air quality improvement is diminishing. For some European cities, the air quality standards will not be met even if the most stringent technically feasible vehicle emissions standards were to be introduced without regard to cost. Therefore the drive towards ever lower tailpipe emissions standards from new cars will need to be augmented by other measures if there is to be a realistic chance of meeting air quality objectives. To deliver the maximum air quality benefit to society in a cost effective way will require an increasing contribution from such other measures. Annex B, prepared by the SMMT, explores this matter in more detail.
The petroleum industry has also played a key role in establishing this country amongst the leaders in Europe in terms of the introduction of more environmentally friendly fuels. Ultra-low sulphur petrol (ULSP) offers environmental benefits over ordinary unleaded petrol when used in modern cars fitted with three-way catalytic converters. Research suggests that it can lead to a reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides of up to 6 per cent, carbon monoxide of around 11 per cent and hydrocarbon emissions of up to 14 per cent. ULSP also enables the use of new, fuel-efficient technologies such as Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) which can deliver substantial CO2 savings. By April 1, ULSP will be available in 81% of sites (corresponding to 93% of sales). By June 1, 98% of sites will be converted (corresponding to 98% of sales).
Ultra-low sulphur diesel (ULSD) now accounts for all diesel consumed by road vehicles in the UK. This has enabled the UK to meet the EU mandatory 2005 diesel specification more than five years ahead of schedule. ULSD provides particulate emission savings from existing diesel vehicles and allows the use of advanced emission-abatement technology such as particulate traps, which reduce emissions by up to 90 per cent.
Nevertheless, despite the reductions in emissions arising from improved engine technology and fuel quality, we understand that local authorities are likely to need to establish around 100 Air Quality Management Areas to tackle significant problems. In such areas, our view is that where further action is considered necessary this should be tackled by implementing the most cost effective options for addressing the problems and by looking at the degree of priority which needs to be given to emissions from each type of road vehicle, including lorries, buses, taxis and vans, rather than simply cars.
We believe that there are important opportunities to be addressed in tackling particular emissions from lorries, buses, taxis and vans - as, for example, in the Westminster LEZ strategy - as these modes make a disproportionately large contribution to NOx and PM10 emissions. Business can continue to make an important contribution here with suitable Government incentives and support.
It may also be appropriate to consider the implementation of other measures detailed in the CVTF Report (and which are set out in the SMMT paper).
Where it is considered appropriate to target cars, action should focus on retrofitting older ones. However, this will not be an easy option. Falling prices for older cars means it is unlikely that owners will bother to undertake a retrofit, even if it was free, without some other inducement, such as regulation or being barred from an LEZ.
The Forum's Chair has already sent Lord Whitty a copy of CfIT's Pollution from Older Vehicles Report. In response, the action the Government is taking in the Cleaner Vehicles Programme was pointed out together with the Government's intention to offer further incentives or allowances for scrapping older, more polluting lorries. In this respect, the Forum notes the Government's pre-budget announcement of its intention to set up a £100m ring-fenced fund to offer further incentives or allowances for scrapping older, more polluting lorries or encouraging cleaner lorries and technology. The Forum hopes that this injection of funding will lead to real results being delivered.
Finally, if motorists are to be encouraged to buy cleaner cars, running on alternative fuels such as liquefied petroleum gas, then a national chain of refuelling facilities needs to be established. Local authorities have a key role to play here and the Forum urges that the authorities should continue to work together with the industry, building on the progress beginning to be made there to ensure that refuelling facilities are readily available.
Annex B: The Cost Effectiveness of Measures to Lower Emissions from Mobile Sources - An SMMT Paper
Background
Within the European Union the Air Quality Framework Directive and associated Daughter Directives impose legally binding air quality limit values for SO2, NO2, PM and lead. - to be achieved by 1 January 2005 and by 2010.
In addition the European Union has set further vehicle exhaust emissions standards. The next step applying to new cars (Euro III) takes effect from 1 January 2001, followed by a further step (Euro IV) from 1 January 2006.
A National Emissions Ceiling Directive is proposed which will set ceiling levels for SO2, NO2 and certain other pollutants within Member States - to be attained by 2010.
Against this background, National Governments have a legal obligation to take action to improve air quality and to introduce legislation to comply with these Directives.
In compliance with these obligations the UK has established the Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The Industry Response
The motor industry has responded to these challenges, and, during the past decade, urban emissions of NOx from cars in the UK have halved from almost 300,000 tonnes pa in 1990, and are expected to halve yet again in the next decade to below 50,000 tonnes pa. (Ref 1a)
A study of UK urban vehicle PM10 emissions tells a similar story. 1990 levels (30000 tonnes pa - 8000 tonnes from cars) have halved to 15000 tonnes pa today ( 4000 tonnes from cars) and this total is expected to halve again in the decade ahead. (Ref 1b)
The motor industry will continue to make vehicles more environmentally friendly. The progress made so far will continue to be built on despite the growing number of constraints such as fuel economy and CO2, noise, safety (crash resistance), in-car comforts such as air conditioning etc.
Indeed the Motor Industry is committed to CO2 reduction with an Agreement which will see CO2 emissions from new passenger cars reduced by 25% from 1995 levels by 2008 achieving an average emission figure of 140g/km by that date and with individual models already achieving 120g/km or less.
A substantial sum is also being invested in technologies such as alternative fuels, fuel cells to provide emissions benefits in the medium to long term.
Table 6 shows the reduction in EU car exhaust emission standards in the past 25 years starting from a base index of 100.
Table 5 shows the reduction in road transport emissions in the past decade from a similar base.
The Price To Pay
However, there is a price to pay for this and the price is increasing whereas the benefits are decreasing.
Evidence has shown Table 3 and Ref 2 that the extra cost for a gasoline car to meet the Euro I (1992) car emissions standards was assessed at 250 Euro per vehicle. These costs correspond to the introduction of a three-way catalytic converter which results in 75% removal of NOx and VOC in the exhaust.
To meet Euro 2 (1996) standards cost an additional 50 Euro per vehicle corresponding to a further 12% reduction of NOx and VOC.
To meet Euro III - year 2000 standards (involving a further 6% reduction in NOx and VOC) costs an extra 400 Euro/vehicle. Thus the cost of removing that extra 6% from the exhaust is substantially more than the cost of removing the previous 87%.
Finally, getting an extra 4% reduction in NOx/VOC (to comply with Euro IV in 2005) increases the cost by a further 200 Euro - nearly as much as the cost of removing the first 75% NOx/VOC.
The European Auto Oil Programme produced similar evidence showing the costs associated with a reduction in emissions compared with a baseline defined by Directive 94/12.
To achieve a 20% emissions reduction from the requirements of Directive 94/12 would cost between 43 and 71 Euros per car.
A further reduction of 20% from the same baseline would cost between 113 and 172 Euros per car.
An additional 25% reduction would increase costs between 237 and 340 Euros per car.
So it can be seen that each succeeding emissions reduction step tends to cost more than the preceding step.
Are Technical Measures The Only Answer?
If the maximum technically available packages were introduced for new vehicles regardless of cost (estimated at nearly 10 billion ECU across the EU) the measures would still be insufficient to satisfy the air quality targets of cities like Athens, Madrid and Milan. In the case of Athens the maximum available technical measures would only go half way to achieving the target. (Ref 3)
It is clear, therefore, that technical measures will have to be augmented by other measures and that pursuing technical measures only (regardless of cost) may not be the most efficient use of resources to reduce vehicle emissions from the whole vehicle parc.
Supplemental Measures (Ref 4)
The Cleaner Vehicle Task Force convened by the UK Government has examined additional measures. Their report "Technical Solutions for Reducing Emissions from In Use Vehicles" recognises in the conclusions that reductions in pollution concentrations of NO2 and PM are much less than reductions in (exhaust) emissions.
The report lists and discusses the following options:
- Measures to encourage better maintenance eg.
- Test regime - tightening the MOT
- In-use compliance
- Selective targeting of gross emitters
- Retrofit (FISCAL) incentives for older vehicles where technically feasible - in particular pre-Euro I vehicles
- Scrappage incentives to encourage replacement of old with new vehicles
- Traffic management measures to address traffic congestion
- To note that some pedestrian safety measures such as traffic calming need to take account of the higher emissions that may result.
- To discourage un-necessary short journeys
Tables 1 and 2 show that average car age is increasing, possibly due to improved reliability and durability. Significant increases in the price of new cars (for example due to the costs of major emissions reductions) could see the demand for new cars soften further, increasing the average age of the car parc and delaying the environmental benefits from the latest car types.
Conclusions
Measures which add significantly to the cost of a new car have to be carefully evaluated since they may be counter productive and more cost effective options may be available.
F R Gerschwiler
19 September 2000
References
Ref 1a: The Air Quality Strategy - Technical Annex urban NOx Table A21 + Fig A14
Ref 1b: The Air Quality Strategy - Technical Annex urban PM10 Table A33 + Fig A21
Ref 2: Economic Evaluation of a Directive on National Emission Ceilings for Certain Atmospheric Pollutants - Part A Cost-effectiveness Analysis Final report Nov' 1996 table 2.16
Ref 3: The European Auto Oil Programme fig 15 and associated text
Ref 4: Cleaner Vehicle Task Force-Technology & Testing: - working group report March 2000
| Table 1: Average Vehicle Age for Great Britain |
|---|
| 1990 | 1995 | 2000 |
| small gasoline car | 6.6 | 8.2 | 8.8 |
| medium gasoline car | 6.2 | 7.5 | 8.1 |
| large gasoline car | 6.7 | 8.1 | 8.3 |
| medium diesel car | 3.8 | 4.1 | 5.5 |
| large diesel car | 5.1 | 4.6 | 5.7 |
| Source: Auto Oil II - Cost Effectiveness Study Part III Annex B9 United Kingdom - table 17 |
| Table 2: Age Profile of Cars in Use |
|---|
| 1990 | 1995 | 1997 |
| Years Old | % | % | % |
| 0 - 3 | 28.69 | 22.44 | 23.18 |
| 4 - 6 | 24.69 | 20.31 | 19.60 |
| 7 - 9 | 21.32 | 24.66 | 21.00 |
| 10 & over | 25.30 | 32.60 | 36.22 |
| Average | 06.23 | 07.10 | 07.30 |
| Source: private report SMMT |
| Table 3: Control options for NOx and VOC Emissions from Mobile Sources |
|---|
| Removal efficiency NOx/VOC % | Investment
Euro per vehicle | Operating and Maintenance % year |
| Gasoline 4 stroke cars and vans |
| 3-way catalytic converter - 1992 standards Euro I | 75/75 | 250 | 30 |
| 3-way catalytic converter - 1996 standards Euro II | 87/87 | 300 | 25 |
| advanced converter with maintenance schemes - year 2000 standards - Euro III | 93/93 | 709 | 11 |
| advanced converter with maintenance schemes - post 2000 (Euro IV) | 97/97 | 884 | 8 |
| Diesel cars and vans |
| combustion modification - 1992 standards | 31/31 | 150 | 34 |
| combustion modification - 1996 standards | 50/50 | 275 | 19 |
| advanced combustion modification with maintenance schemes - EU 2000 standards | 60/60 | 780 | 7 |
| NOx converter | 80/80 | 1027 | 5 |
| Source: Economic Evaluation of a Directive on National Emission Ceilings for Certain Atmospheric Pollutants. Part A: Cost Effectiveness Analysis. Final Report Nov' 1999 - table 2.16 |
Annex C: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The automotive industry is taking a leading role in efforts to address the possible risks associated with climate change. As you will know, in 1998 European motor manufacturers, represented by ACEA, entered into a unique and groundbreaking voluntary agreement within the European Commission to reduce CO2 emissions from new passenger cars by 25 per cent by 2008. The agreement was welcomed by the European Parliament and the European Commission and was recognised by the Council of Ministers as a model for other industries to follow. It represents continuing major technological, commercial and marketing challenges to the industry, and requires manufacturers to undertake substantial additional investments in research and development. The average CO2 emissions from new cars will fall from 186 grams per kilometre (g/km) in 1995 to just 140 g/km by 2008.
The Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), predict that the agreement will save at least three million tonnes of carbon emissions to atmosphere per annum by 2010. Within the EU this agreement is expected to contribute up to 15 per cent of the total reduction in CO2 emissions agreed to under the Kyoto agreement.
A recent study by UK Consultants AEA Technology has estimated that the ACEA agreement will cost European car makers up to three times more per tonne of CO2 saved than the average expense across the European economy.
The Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association (JAMA) and the Korean Automobile Manufactures Association (KAMA) have also negotiated an agreement with the European Commission, the objectives of which are similar to the ACEA agreement. Between ACEA, JAMA and KAMA, over 90 per cent of the European car market is covered by voluntary agreements to reduce CO2 emissions.
The Forum acknowledges that the transport sector is the only one where emissions are forecast to rise over the period of the strategy. The above gives a clear indication of the commitment of the automotive industry to help tackle the possible risks associated with climate change. The Forum is also keen to try to identify further sensible measures that could abate emissions from the sector. But before both the industry and the individual motorist are asked to do more, the Forum would like to see the government:
- look at the evidence base and cost effectiveness of the action they are calling for across each sector of the economy and all types of transport, including for example, non-land based modes such as aviation. The burden of cutting emissions should only be shared between the main sectors of the economy and transport modes after cost benefit analyses have been carried out on the action called for within each sector and transport mode. Once the relevant merits of the various cost-benefit frameworks have been established, action should be concentrated on those areas giving the greatest benefit.
Before leaving the cost-benefit point, the Forum is surprised to note that it appears some European legislation is not subject to cost benefit analysis. We should like to know what you propose to do about this.
- disaggregate between the different environmental impacts of each road vehicle sector, with attention focussed on the older type of vehicle in each sector. The Forum notes, for example, in the DETR's own Climate Change document that commercial vehicles accounted for around 38% of all carbon dioxide emissions from road transport in 1998 - this despite the fact that the lorry fleet comprises less than 2% of the vehicles on the road.
The Forum also believes the Government must look to tackle greenhouse gas emissions from other transport sectors, including the aviation industry. The Forum remains concerned that whilst the automotive industry has responded to the challenge of lower CO2 emissions, there appears to be no clear strategy in place for reducing aviation emissions.
The Forum acknowledges that international action is needed to tackle aviation emissions and that the global warming effect of all such emissions is a small proportion of all man-made sources. But equally estimates show that global traffic in the civil aviation sector is expected to double over the next 15 years. It is hard to persuade motorists that they should do more in this field (eg buying cleaner cars, driving more greenly) if other transport users are not being required to take proportionate action.
We understand that there may be calls for greater reductions in emissions than the present Strategy provides. But irrespective of whether there will be a need to reach existing or higher targets, the Forum would like to be assured on two points. Firstly, any future target set for vehicle environmental standards in the UK must mirror those set in Europe. Given that cars are now built to be sold in world-wide markets, you will appreciate that it would pose very real difficulties if different standards were to be applied in the UK to those appertaining elsewhere in Europe. And the Forum sees no reason why drivers here in the UK should be forced to adhere to higher standards than their European counterparts.
Secondly, it is not clear to the Forum that in the estimation of greenhouse gas projections, that full account has been taken of the major changes to vehicle technology that will be occurring over the next few years. Ford, for example, will have a fuel-cell vehicle on the road by 2004.
Annex D: Government Action to Tackle Greenhouse Gas Emissionsreenhouse Gas Emissions
The important role that Government itself can play in tackling greenhouse emissions should also not be overlooked.
The Forum believes that the Government should be looking to introduce focused tax changes to effect behaviour change. For example, anecdotal evidence suggests that Vehicle Excise Duty differentials, though small, are having a disproportionate effect in salesrooms, particularly on private buyers. This is evidenced by the increases in the number of new car registrations for smaller cars. This effect is likely to be even more widespread when the banding system comes into play.
As well as introducing such tax changes, there must also be certainty about the future direction and timescale of these measures. There is little to be gained, for example, by introducing reduced taxation on cleaner fuels in one budget, only for those reductions to be reversed in the next budget. Drivers need the confidence to know that should they purchase a smaller, cleaner vehicle, the benefits arising from such purchases will not be eroded by a change in Government policy.
On the question of taxation, the Forum believes that Government should also do much more to inform company car drivers of the new CO2 based system for company car taxation that is to be introduced in 2002. Again anecdotal evidence suggests that many company car drivers are unaware of the changes, or the significance of them.
Government should also take the lead by ensuring that its own fleet comprises clean and fuel efficient vehicles. This will not only help reduce emissions from the Government fleet but will also encourage other public and private sector fleets to follow. In this respect, the Forum is pleased to note the action Government is taking to encourage this development - as outlined in Lord Whitty's letter of 18 January to the Chair. However, more needs to be done and the Forum hopes that the Government will continue to give this matter the priority it deserves.
Finally, the Forum is aware that the Government is looking at greater use of the internet, e-commerce and teleworking. Studies conducted so far - including research initiated by the Forum in conjunction with the RAC Foundation - suggest that greater use of teleworking could reduce the amount of traffic congestion at peak hours and reduce travel to work and for work. The Forum is aware that DETR officials remain concerned about the overall benefits of such moves but potentially these could be significant. Again the Forum urges the Government to lead by example. Government should develop and encourage homeworking by its own employees. Pilot schemes should be encouraged in Government Departments that could help refine the impact of new technology on travel and congestion.
