EUROPE'S WORLD DEBATING FORUM

Autumn 2008

by Susanne Böhler

RELATED ARTICLES:

---

Transportation accounts for 10% to 25% of global greenhouse gas emissions. In 2004, the EU-15 share of transportation related emissions was as high as 21%. North America is the largest pollutant of worldwide transport related emissions with a share of 37%. In the past, specific emissions were reduced significantly through technical improvements of vehicles. However, increased vehicle miles travelled abrogate the reductions. In the EU-15 countries greenhouse gas emissions increased from 1990 to 2004 by 26%, although specific industrial sectors achieved significant savings. Motorised transportation with a 93% share is the largest source of transport related emissions. Despite considerable efforts to shift transport from road to rail or water in all European countries forecasts predict a further increase of transportation and emissions.

These figures challenge the EU climate and energy objectives for 2020, especially when looking at the findings of the new annual “Term” report on transport from the European Environmental Agency (EEA). The report states that emissions from the transportation sector need to be reduced by further 50 million tonnes (Mt) of CO2-equivalent over the next decade to meet the goals. To achieve the objectives of the “Bali roadmap” would even require more drastic emission cuts. Whereas transport volume growth is expected to increase by 15% between 2010 and 2020, a 2% decrease in the overall growth of transport volume and a cut of 165 Mt CO2-equivalent emissions would be necessary. Consequently, the Term report critises EU transport policies. So far, there is no instrument that effectively contributes to the mitigation of global warming and the reduction carbon dioxide emissions. In this context the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as well stated that transportation trends diametrically oppose the objectives. For a better monitoring of transportation trends it is an absolute necessity to improve available transportation data bases. These need to have internationally harmonised standards and indicators in order to study the effects of national and international transportation policy.

In contrast to (international) climate policy, the scope of traditional transportation policies has a national or regional orientation. For this reason, there exists a number of concepts and instruments that aim at reducing local environmental problems like pollution or noise. However, transport policy strategies such as the reduction of vehicle miles travelled, modal shifts towards environmentally friendly transport modes, or efficiency improvements do also contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gases as an international aim. In this context national transportation policies in the EU had comparatively weak success. This led to an increased importance of EU policies in the transportation sector.

Whereas the EU climate policy acts on the international level as one unit, in the transportation sector the EU tries to coordinate the policies of the member states. This is necessary, because the markets of car manufacturers and air travel industry are organised on a EU-wide basis. Only few company groups dominate the European market and policies limited to national boarder can only create second best solutions. Examples for a successful regulation on the EU level are standards for maximum air pollution of cars (Euro-Norm).

Cars are responsible for 10 per cent of all CO2-emissions in Europe. Against this background, the EU introduced a resolution for a strategy to reduce CO2-emission from cars: in the year 2012 new cars should only emit 120 g CO2/km. In turn, the association of European car manufacturers (ACEA) offered a voluntary agreement to prevent the comparatively strict reduction in which the EU agreed upon: CO2 should be reduced until 2008 to 140 g CO2/km. In 2007 it became obvious that the agreement would fail and the commission introduced a new but more complex strategy: specific emission of new cars should be not more than 130 g CO2/km in 2012. This limit is applicable per manufacturer and refers to the average weight of the fleet. Bio fuels should additionally reduce 10 g CO2/km. This concept is discussed considerably controversial among politicians, car manufacturers, their lobbyists and environmental groups. Whereas the ACEA says that it is impossible to achieve the targeted reduction before 2015 environmentalists claim energy savings from 25 to 50%. This implies a limit of 120 g CO2/km in 2012 and 80 g CO2/km in 2020.

Scenarios for the development of the German road transportation discussed the consequences of the energy savings of the different proposals from the EU, ACEA, and the environmentalists. These show that the level of the limit and the year of its enforcement have tremendous effects on the reduction of greenhouse gases in the long run. According to the ACEA proposal the reduction potential of the emission limits in the German road transport sector is 2.7 per cent in 2020, whereas the proposal of the environmental groups could achieve 15.1 per cent. These findings underline that any compromise might intensify the conflict between objectives to tackle climate change and real politics.

The enforcement of bio fuel usage is another conflicting issue. Generally, bio fuels of the first and second generation differ according to their substances. Bio fuels of the first generation are made of specific biomass like weed or seeds and bio fuels of the second generation need any kind of biomass like floral remains. The latter are currently under research and development and are not available on the market, yet. Most criticised are the facts that tropical rainforests are devastated or original areas for food production are reduced in order to produce bio fuels. This is even more problematic if this happens to be in countries, which have difficulties in foot supply for other reasons. The production of more bio fuels has also contributed to a radical increase in prices of staple foot. The EU commission qualifies bio fuels to be the easiest strategy to reduce green house gases in the transport sector, although this is not in line with sustainability issues. Therefore, the general target should be the introduction and availability of bio fuels of the second generation. But due to its limited availability and the necessary sustainability standards the overall demand of energy of cars has to be reduced significantly.

CO2-emission limits of new cars are an important instrument to realise the technical possible reduction potentials and hence to partially reduce green house gas emission in the transport sector. Preconditions are dynamic adaptations of limits for 2020. But emission limits and the creation of a market for cleaner cars are by far not sufficient to achieve the climate objectives. In order to accelerate the renewable of the car fleet also additional incentives like tax relieves and a consumer oriented labelling are required in order car drivers will decide for smaller and cleaner cars. Eco-driving is another aspect of an integrated concept to reduce emission of cars.

Technical innovations of private cars and utility vehicles are essential but not sufficient for climate protection. Policies and measures have to tackle vehicle miles travelled as well as modal shifts. In order to achieve climate targets, to protect limited resources and to ensure mobility, only integrated concepts make a difference, as they imply structural changes of the transport sector. Therefore, the national and local policy level is still extremely important for sustainable transportation.