(Source:  Government Accountability Office)

Aircraft emit greenhouse gases and other emissions, contributing to increasing concentrations of such gases in the atmosphere. Many scientists and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)–a United Nations organization that assesses scientific, technical, and economic information on climate change–believe these gases may negatively affect the earth’s climate. Given forecasts of growth in aviation emissions, some governments are taking steps to reduce emissions.

In response to a congressional request, GAO reviewed:

(1) estimates of aviation’s current and future contribution to greenhouse gas and other emissions that may affect climate change;

(2) existing and potential technological and operational improvements that can reduce aircraft emissions; and

(3) policy options for governments to help address commercial aircraft emissions.

GAO conducted a literature review; interviewed representatives of government agencies, industry and environmental organizations, airlines, and manufacturers, and interviewed and surveyed 18 experts in economics and aviation on improvements for reducing emissions from aircraft. GAO is not making recommendations. Relevant agencies provided technical comments which we incorporated as appropriate and EPA said emissions standards can have a positive benefit to cost ratio and be an important part of policy options to control emissions.

According to IPCC, aviation currently accounts for about 2 percent of human-generated global carbon dioxide emissions, the most significant greenhouse gas–and about 3 percent of the potential warming effect of global emissions that can affect the earth’s climate, including carbon dioxide. IPCC’s medium-range estimate forecasts that by 2050 the global aviation industry, including aircraft emissions, will emit about 3 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions and about 5 percent of the potential warming effect of all global human-generated emissions. Gross domestic product growth is the primary driver in IPCC’s forecasts. IPCC also made other assumptions about future aircraft fuel efficiency, improvements in air traffic management, and airport and runway capacity. IPCC’s 2050 forecasts for aviation’s contribution to global emissions assumed that emissions from other sectors will continue to grow.

If other sectors make progress in reducing emissions and aviation emissions continue to grow, aviation’s relative contribution may be greater than IPCC estimated; on the other hand, if other sectors do not make progress, aviation’s relative contribution may be smaller than estimated. While airlines currently rely on a range of improvements, such as fuel-efficient engines, to reduce emissions, some of which may have limited potential to generate future reductions, experts we surveyed expect a number of additional technological, operational, and alternative fuel improvements to help reduce aircraft emissions in the future. However, according to experts we interviewed, some technologies, such as advanced airframes, have potential, but may be years away from being available, and developing and adopting them is likely to be costly.

In addition, according to some experts we interviewed, incentives for industry to research and adopt low-emissions technologies will be dependent to some extent on the level and stability of fuel prices. Finally, given expected growth of commercial aviation as forecasted by IPCC, even if many of these improvements are adopted, it appears unlikely they would greatly reduce emissions by 2050. A number of policy options to address aircraft emissions are available to governments and can be part of broader policies to address emissions from many sources including aircraft. Market-based measures can establish a price for emissions and provide incentives to airlines and consumers to reduce emissions. These measures can be preferable to other options because they would generally be more economically efficient. Such measures include a cap-and-trade program, in which government places a limit on emissions from regulated sources, provides them with allowances for emissions, and establishes a market for them to trade emissions allowances with one another, and a tax on emissions. Governments can establish emissions standards for aircraft or engines. In addition, government could increase government research and development to encourage development of low-emissions improvements.

Click here to download the entire report.

(Source: R744.com &1234facts.com)

In the middle of this fiasco, Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel has raised his voice to warn the German automotive industry against a “highly risky economic and technical adventure” with an untested, flammable, and toxic refrigerant 1234yf. Moreover, manufacturers should not expect the EU R134a phase-out schedule to change, but rather choose CO₂ now as the most energy-efficient and safe alternative available.

In an interview with ACE, a leading automotive club representing the interests of 550.000 Germans, the Environment Minister Sigmar Gabriel has taken a clear stance in favour of CO₂ in the currently hotly debated question of which refrigerant to choose for future car air conditioning systems:

“Fact is: With CO₂ there is an environmentally friendly alternative to R134a available, and it has been proven in real life,” Gabriel stated. “The VDA has to know what it does to strengthen its credibility or not,” he referred to the clear commitment to CO₂ already issued in 2007 by all carmakers united in Germany’s automotive association VDA. The Environment Ministry would continue to support CO₂ (R744) as not only the most ecological option, but also that with a significantly higher energy efficiency, as measurements by the Federal Environment Agency have proved.

Untested chemical “high adventure”
Gabriel also issued a clear warning to the automotive industry to not use untested alternative refrigerants. The currently discussed flammable and toxic chemical 1234yf would be a completely new substance not yet fully investigated by public authorities for its ecological and health risks. As a consequence, manufacturers deciding for 1234yf would embark on a “high economic and technical adventure”, Gabriel concluded.

The Minister warned the German automotive industry against a further use of R134a in cars after 2011. According to Gabriel, the EU MAC Directive, prescribing the use of refrigerants with a Global Warming Potential of below 150 in future passenger cars, will not be changed. Carmakers should acknowledge that he would hold on to the agreed phase-out schedule starting in 2011, with a gradual ban of R134a until 2017. As a result, from 2011, the deprivation of type approval for cars using the climate-damaging refrigerant would be enforced as originally scheduled.

(Source: AFP via Yahoo & Science Daily)

Image Courtesy: IOP - Energy consumption and GHG emissions per PKT (The vehicle operation components are shown with gray patterns. Other vehicle components are shown in shades of blue. Infrastructure components are shown in shades of red and orange. The fuel production component is shown in green. All components appear in the order they are shown in the legend.)

Do you worry a lot about the environment and do everything you can to reduce your carbon footprint? Are you the one who frets about  tailpipe emissions, greenhouse gases and climate change?

If yes,  you must be the one who prefers to take the train or the bus rather than a plane, and avoid using a car whenever you can, faithful to the belief that this inflicts less harm to the planet.

Well, there could be a nasty surprise in store for you, for taking public transport may not be as green as you automatically think, says a new US study published in Environmental Research Letters, a publication of Britain’s Institute of Physics.  Often unknown to the public, there are an array of hidden or displaced emissions that ramp up the simple “tailpipe” tally, which is based on how much carbon is spewed out by the fossil fuels used to make a trip. Environmental engineers Mikhail Chester and Arpad Horvath at theUniversity of California at Davis say that when these costs are included, a more complex and challenging picture emerges.

The pair give an example of how the use of oil, gas or coal to generate electricity to power trains can skew the picture.

Boston has a metro system with high energy efficiency. The trouble is, 82 percent of the energy to drive it comes from dirty fossil fuels.  By comparison, San Francisco‘s local railway is less energy-efficient than Boston’s. But it turns out to be rather greener, as only 49 percent of the electricity is derived from fossils.

The paper points out that the “tailpipe” quotient does not include emissions that come from building transport infrastructure — railways, airport terminals, roads and so on — nor the emissions that come from maintaining this infrastructure over its operational lifetime.

The researchers also touch on the effect of low passenger occupancy and show that we are naïve to automatically assume one form of transport is more environmentally friendly than another. They conclude from their calculations that a half-full Boston light railway is only as environmentally friendly, per kilometre traveled, as a midsize aircraft at 38 per cent occupancy.  From cataloguing the varied environmental costs the researchers come to some surprising conclusions. A comparison between light railways in both Boston and San Franciso show that despite Boston boasting a light railway with low operational energy use, their LRT is a far larger greenhouse gas (GHG) emitter because 82 per cent of the energy generated in Boston is fossil-fuel based, compared to only 49 per cent in San Francisco.

Total life-cycle energy inputs and GHG emissions contribute an additional 155 per cent for rail, 63 per cent for cars and buses, and 32 per cent for air systems over vehicle exhaust pipe operation.

Journal reference:

• Mikhail V Chester and Arpad Horvath. Environmental assessment of passenger transportation should include infrastructure and supply chains. Environmental Research Letters, 2009; 4 (024008) DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/4/2/024008

(Source: ABC News & Autobloggreen)

I had an opportunity to take a ride today in a new electric car that has perhaps one of the best shots at being the U.S. answer to Japan’s popular Toyota Prius.

Image Courtesy: Autobloggreen

Designed by Santa Monica, California-based Coda Automotive, the four-door sedan isn’t powered by gas. The electric battery can plug into any standard AC outlet.

Coda says a 40-mile commute takes about 2 hours to charge.

Right now, the car and it’s battery are manufactured in China. But the company has applied for tens of millions of dollars worth of stimulus funding through the Department of Energy to build an electric battery plant in a factory in Enfield, Connecticut to fuel it’s vehicles.

“The U.S. has zero,  absolutely no mass battery manufacturing in the United States.  So we’re going to China where they can mass produce the batteries to get these cars to market in the U.S. fast until we can get these produced here” said Kevin Czinger, president and CEO of Coda Automotive.

Coda plans to partner with aerospace battery designer Connecticut-based Yardney Technical Products to create and mass produce the first U.S. electric car battery.

The company says the plant could employ 600 people at first, and then possibly grow. Beginning next June, Coda plans to have the capacity to build 2,700 cars and 20,000 a year in 2011. By comparison, Toyota sold about 159,000second-generation Toyota Prius hybrid cars last year in the U.S.  The price tag? $45,000 — but buyers could receive a federal tax credit worth $7,500 and other state incentives that Coda says could drive the price down to $32,500.

Image Courtesy: Autobloggreen

Click here to see more hi-res pictures of the Coda sedan.

(Source:  Autoblog & Detroit Free Press)

The U.S. House approved the “cash for clunkers” legislation earlier today, paving the way for consumers to snag up to $4,500 for trading in their older vehicles for new, more fuel efficient transport.

The bill, which passed 298-119, drew overwhelming support from automakers, local business groups and dealers who claimed the passage could boost sales – further aiding GM and Chrysler’s “reinvention” – during the economic downturn.

The House bill sets aside $4 billion to pay for electronic vouchers given to owners of older vehicles toward new models. With auto sales running at their lowest rate in four decades, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill could spur sales of about 625,000 vehicles; backers are hoping for 1 million.

The act “will shore up millions of jobs and stimulate local economies,” said Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Ohio. “It will improve our environment and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.”

The government’s interest in goosing the vehicle market extends to its ownership inGeneral Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, both of which are counting on a healthier U.S. market in the coming years for survival.

“The auto industry is going through a tremendous restructuring,” said Rep. Sander Levin, D-Royal Oak. “If there is not increased demand, that restructuring cannot succeed.”

Under the plan, owners of cars and trucks that get less than 18 m.p.g. could get a voucher of $3,500 to $4,500 for a new vehicle, depending on the mileage of the new model.

(Source: Streetsblog & Rotor.com)

The House is poised this week to take up the so-called “cash for clunkers” bill, which aims to boost the slumping U.S. auto market by giving out tax credits of $3,500 and up to anyone who trades in a gas-guzzling car for a more efficient model.

With the Senate Majority Leader threatening to make Senators work five days a week to speed up work on legislative priorities, lawmakers expect to finish a war supplemental bill this week that would include a provision for cash for clunkers and then Congress will turn its attention to healthcare and climate change legislation.

House Democrats must settle the issue of whether to include in the war supplemental a provision that would give car buyers a voucher worth up to $4,500 for trading gas-guzzlers for more fuel-efficient vehicles.  There is tremendous bipartisan support for this proposal, especially with the recent bankruptcy of General Motors.

The likely passage of Sutton’s bill this week could be bad news for a stronger “cash for clunkers” plan that’s being promoted by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), who displayed welcome candor last month in calling the Sutton plan “the auto industry’s version” of “cash for clunkers” and “unacceptable” to American drivers.

Feinstein’s proposal would require drivers to achieve a 25 percent fuel-efficiency increase before receiving a tax credit for ditching their clunkers. But Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) is pushing for a trade-in tax credit that’s very similar to Sutton’s — truck owners would only have to increase their fuel efficiency by 2 miles per gallon to be eligible.

Feinstein’s proposal would require drivers to achieve a 25 percent fuel-efficiency increase before receiving a tax credit for ditching their clunkers. But Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) is pushing for a trade-in tax credit that’s very similar to Sutton’s — truck owners would only have to increase their fuel efficiency by 2 miles per gallon to be eligible.

(Source: Business Standard & Green Car Congress)

Image: REUTERS/Zainal Abd Halim via Boston Globe

The international airline industry is committed to achieving carbon-neutral growth by 2020, said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s Director General and CEO in his State of the Industry address at the 65th IATA Annual General Meeting and World Air Transport Summit in Kuala Lumpur.

Two years ago we set a vision to achieve carbon-neutral growth on the way to a carbon-free future. Today we have taken a major step forward by committing to a global cap on our emissions in 2020. After this date, aviation’s emissions will not grow even as demand increases. Airlines are the first global industry to make such a bold commitment.

—Giovanni Bisignani

The commitment to carbon-neutral growth completes a set of three sequential goals for air transport: (1) a 1.5% average annual improvement in fuel efficiency from 2009 to 2020; (2) carbon-neutral growth from 2020 and (3) a 50% absolute reduction in carbon emissions by 2050.

To achieve these goals, the air transport industry is focusing on a cross-industry four-pillar strategy on climate change consisting of improved technology; effective operations; efficient infrastructure; and positive economic measures.

In 2009 the carbon footprint of air transport is expected to shrink by 7%. Of this, 5% is due to the recession and 2% is directly related to efficiency gains.

Bisignani said a cross industry four-pillar strategy on climate change focused on improved technology, effective operations, efficient infrastructure and positive economic measures was delivering results noting that in 2009 the carbon footprint of air transport was expected to shrink by 7 per cent.

Bisignani attributed 5 per cent to the recession and 2 per cent to efficiency gains from IATA’s four-pillar strategy.

“No other industry is as united and no other industry can point to such good results and progress,” Bisignani claimed.  He noted that the airlines’ commitment needed to be matched by governments. “We are ambitious, but our success will be contingent on governments acting effectively.”

“International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) must set binding carbon emissions standards on manufacturers for new aircraft. A legal and fiscal framework to support the availability of sustainable biofuels must be established.

“Governments must work with air navigation service providers to push forward major infrastructure projects such as a Single European Sky, NextGen in the US or fixing the Pearl River Delta in China,” Bisignani added.

(Source:  Office of Planning, Environment and Realty Federal Highway Administration)

Recent Events

House Energy and Commerce Committee Approves HR 2454. On May 21, 2009, after several days of deliberation, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved HR 2454 “American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.” This includes a proposal for a cap and trade program and several provisions related to the transportation sector. It includes requirements to establish transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions goals and inclusion of a plan to achieve those goals in some metropolitan long-range transportation plans and transportation improvement programs. The legislation also calls for greenhouse gas emission standards on new vehicles including heavy duty on-road and non-road, marine, locomotive, and aircraft engines. The bill will now be referred to up to eight other House committees with jurisdiction over parts of the proposed legislation. The Senate has indicated it will take up climate legislation as well, but the timeline in the Senate is unclear.

EPA and DOT to Conduct Joint Rulemaking on GHG and CAFE Standards. EPA and DOT/NHTSA filed a joint Notice of Intent in the May 22 Federal Register to propose a coordinated greenhouse gas and fuel economy program. The program would apply to light-duty vehicles (cars, SUVs, minivans, and pickup trucks) for model years 2012-2016. Standards for model years after 2016 would be developed in a future rulemaking. EPA is considering a standard that would ramp down to an average 250 grams/mile CO2 (155 g/km) for model year 2016. Regarding fuel economy, President Obama announced on May 19 that a combined fleet average standard of 35.5 miles per gallon would apply by the 2016 model year. Preliminary analysis indicates that the combined program would lead to a reduction of approximately 890 million metric tons CO2 equivalent emissions and 1.8 billion barrels of oil for the model years covered. The Federal Register Notice is available here: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/E9-12009.htm. A press release from the White House is available here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/President-Obama-Announces-National-Fuel-Efficiency-Policy/

EPA Announces 2008 Clean Air Excellence Awards. On May 13, EPA announced the recipients of its awards, including several transportation related entries. Stonyfield Farm, the yogurt maker, received an award in the category of Transportation Efficiency Innovations for strategies that led to a net 37 percent reduction of CO2 emissions in one year, despite company growth. For details on all of the 2008 award recipients see:http://www.epa.gov/air/caaac/recipients.html.

Robert Ritter Named FHWA Sustainable Transport and Climate Change Team Leader. Robert Ritter, currently a Team Leader in the FHWA Office of Planning, will be the Team Leader for FHWA’s Sustainable Transport and Climate Change Team beginning late June. Rob has been leading Phase II of the DOT Gulf Coast Study, which will further study the impacts of climate change on transportation infrastructure and operations and develop risk assessment tools. Prior to joining FHWA in 2003, Rob worked for the Eno Transportation Foundation.

State News

New York City Climate Change Risk. The New York City Panel on Climate Change released a report on climate change projections and potential risks to the city’s critical infrastructure. Global climate model projections are provided for temperature, precipitation, sea level rise, and extreme events for the New York City area. The document also includes information on the likelihood of risks associated with these impacts and their potential implications for New York City infrastructure. An appendix includes a breakdown of implications for several infrastructure categories, including transportation. The full report is available here:http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2009/NPCC_CRI.pdf

Impacts of Climate Change in Washington State. Two studies were released discussing the impacts of climate change in Washington State. The studies were commissioned by the Washington State Legislature. The Climate Change Impacts Group at the University of Washington studied potential impacts of climate change using global climate models scaled to the Northwest, and the Climate Leadership Initiative at the University of Oregon looked at potential economic costs to Washington’s families, businesses and communities. The studies show that without action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, impacts in the state will be “profound.” For more information and links to the reports, see: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0901006.html.

Reminders

DOE Funding Available for Transportation Projects that Conserve Energy. The America Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 appropriated $3.2 billion for The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program. Transportation strategies are eligible for funding. Applications for the funding must come from states, Indian tribes, or local governments. Grant application deadlines are May 26 for states and June 25 for local governments and tribes. For more information, contact Diane Turchetta at 202-493-0158 or Diane.Turchetta@dot.gov, or see: http://www.eecbg.energy.gov.

2009 Transportation, Planning, Land Use and Air Quality Conference to focus on Climate Change. The conference, sponsored by the Transportation Research Board, FHWA, and others, will explore the latest research in the coordination of transportation, land use and air quality with a specific focus on climate change strategies. The conference will be held in Denver, CO July 28 and 29, 2009. For more information, see:http://www.ucs.iastate.edu/mnet/tpluaq/home.html.

If you have any suggestions for inclusion in future issues of Transportation and Climate Change News, or if you would like to receive it directly in the future, please send your suggestions or request to Becky Lupes at Rebecca.Lupes@dot.gov.

(Source: LA Times)

At a recycling plant in San Pedro and five other similar operations around California, giant shredding machines annually reduce 1.3 million junk cars, refrigerators and other appliances into fist-sized chunks of metal.

(Source: Financial Times)

Reducing America’s reliance on oil by raising petrol prices to European levels through increased taxes or regulation is not politically feasible, says Steven Chu, US secretary of energy.

The admission comes as Congress considers a cap- and-trade system that opponents say will substantially increase petrol prices just as oil prices soar to their highest level in six months.

In the past Mr Chu, a Nobel laureate, has argued that, if the US wanted to reduce its carbon emissions, policymakers would have to find a way to increase petrol prices to levels in Europe. But in an interview on Wednesday with the Financial Times, Mr Chu said: “At this moment, let me be frank, it is not politically feasible.”