The European Union Continues on Its Course to Lower GHG Emissions

The European Union confirms the next milestone along its energy Roadmap. The nations of the world are working toward establishing a new climate treaty by late 2015 that would lower future greenhouse gas emissions (among other provisions). Independently, the European Union (EU) agreed to a significant goal in reducing emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) on October 23, 2014.  The EU is a supranational organization of 28 member nations.  As detailed below, it has had policies in place for almost a decade to reduce GHG emissions.  The new pronouncement extends its timelines and codifies goals it had already established earlier.  Specifically, the EU agreed to lower GHG emissions by 40% below the emission levels of 1990 by 2030.  The goals also include achieving a 27% share of energy from renewable sources, and increasing energy efficiency by 27%.

Emission Trading Scheme. The EU began implementing policies to reduce GHG emissions as the Kyoto Protocol (KP) became effective.  Even before KP entered into force the EU created its Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) in 2005 in preparation for entering under its emissions restrictions.  The ETS is a cap-and-trade regime covering over 11,000 major fixed sources of GHG emissions, both governmental and corporate.  Unfortunately, for much of the time since then the ETS has failed effectively to set a market price for GHG emissions that would succeed to lower emissions.  Initially, too many allowances for emission were issued, so that their price tumbled.  As this was corrected, the Great Recession reduced economic activity, lowering demand for energy, again pressuring the price for allowances to fall.  As recently as 2013 the European Parliament temporarily suspended marketing new allowances.

The deliberations leading to the new declaration also had contentious issues .  Reducing emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂), the most prevalent GHG, affects coal-burning generating plants most severely because use of coal emits almost twice as much CO₂ as does burning a fuel such as natural gas.  Countries in the EU heavily reliant on coal for electricity, such as Poland and other eastern European countries, were concerned that the excessive burdens of complying with the new constraints would hinder their economic growth.  The United Kingdom objected to goals for installing renewable power because of its new-found energy wealth in natural gas.  Germany has shut down its nuclear power plants after the Fukushima disaster, placing a greater burden on its existing coal-fired plants.

The new declaration keeps the EU within its overall timeline for long-term, major reductions in GHG emissions according to its energy Roadmap (see below).  But several environmental scientists and commentators consider the plan to be inadequate to achieve the stringent Roadmap objective in 2050.  They are concerned that the plan would leave too much of the intended reduction in emissions to be achieved later, in the two decades between 2030 and 2050, an achievement that may challenge the best technologies and policies available.  For example, Richard Black, the director of the British Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, a nonprofit organization, doubted that this plan would “allow the E.U. to meet its long-term target of virtually eliminating carbon emissions.”

Background

The countries of the world currently face highly disparate energy situations and climate environments.  Their different conditions color their outlook as the world faces the problem of global warming brought on by humanity’s use of fossil fuels for energy.  In developed nations, which have benefited from the industrial revolution since its early days, citizens are comfortable with the lifestyle that abundant energy affords them.  Many are reluctant to change their ways to reduce emissions.  

Developing nations, on the other hand, have been applying energy-intensive technologies to expand their economies only in recent decades, desiring to catch up to the developed countries in relatively unconstrained fashion.  Their people too are reluctant to move away from fossil fuels to fulfill their growing energy needs. 

Impoverished countries and island nations experience the harms brought on by global warming for which they have not been responsible.  Their citizens hunger for the benefits that wider energy use could provide; those in island nations face encroaching seas as land-based ice sheets continue melting.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has scheduled periodic global climate reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 1990.  The UNFCCC led to negotiation of the Kyoto Protocol (KP) in 1997.  KP required developed countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but excluded developing and impoverished countries from coverage.  KP entered into force in 2005 after the requisite number of countries ratified it (the U. S. never did, so it was not governed by its restrictions).  Most nations acceding to KP agreed to reduce emissions by varying amounts, generally less than 10%, below emission levels of 1990 by 2012. 

 

The  European Union issued a Roadmap for greenhouse gas emission reductions in 2011, intending to reduce annual emission rates by 80-95% below the level of 1990 by 2050 (see the following graphic). 

Source: “A Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050”,  broken down by economic sector. European Commission, March 8, 2011;

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/DOC/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0112&from=EN

  
 

Interim milestones were established for reductions in emission rates of 7% by 2005, 20% by 2020, and 40-44% by 2030.  The European Environment Agency determined in 2013 that the EU is on track to achieve the 2020 milestone.  Renewable fuel use had climbed to 14% of total energy consumption.  About two-thirds of this originates from burning biomass and waste; in Sweden and Austria hydropower is also an important renewable source of electricity.  Wind and solar power contribute relatively small amounts to generation except for Denmark and Portugal (wind) and Cyprus and Spain (solar).
 

The EU is the most proactive region among developed countries in establishing policies to lower emission rates of GHGs.  The U. S., in contrast, has no legislated national energy policy directed toward mitigating GHG emissions.  In light of this failing executive actions of the Obama administration have imposed major limits on fossil fuel use in the transportation sector, have limited emissions from new electric power plants, and are proceeding similarly to lower emissions from power plants already in service.
 

Emissions from the developed countries of the world considered as a group have been relatively unchanged in recent years, and are projected to continue that trend (see the graphic below).



Annual rates of energy usage for China, the U. S. and India.  Actual use up to 2010; projected usage thereafter.  1 quadrillion = 1 million billion.  Btu, British thermal unit.
Source: U. S. Energy Information Administration; http://www.eia.gov/pressroom/presentations/sieminski_07252013.pdf (slide 5).

 

Energy use by developing countries will continue growing up to at least 2040, in contrast to the projected behavior of industrialized countries.  In the graphic above, expected energy use by China and India, which exemplify developing countries, expands dramatically in future years.  As noted earlier, energy use for the U. S., an example of a developed country, grows only very modestly to 2040.
 

Conclusion

The declared intention of the European Union to continue meeting its milestones under the energy Roadmap to 2050 is a major contribution to mitigating worldwide GHG emissions.  Similarly the executive actions taken by the U. S. have set it along a similar path, even if not enshrined in law.  These examples show “leadership by example” for the rest of the world as negotiations proceed toward a new worldwide climate treaty intended for completion at the end of 2015.  The continued expansion of fossil fuel use by major developing countries such as China and India, among others, stands in marked contrast to the examples of the EU and the U. S.  If left unaltered, policies of developing countries could potentially impede negotiation of a meaningful treaty.  Yet significant progress toward mitigation of GHG emissions must be made in order to keep the world’s long-term average temperature from increasing more than 2ºC (3.6ºF) higher than the prevailing temperature before industrialization.  This is the upper bound adopted at the Copenhagen (2009) and Cancun (2010) conferences of the UNFCCC.  The nations of the world must succeed in these negotiations.

© 2014 Henry Auer



The U. S. Needs a Unified Global Warming Agency, As Other Nations Have

Summary. The previous post detailed the distributed administrative structures dealing with global warming in the U. S. government.  It identified several problems and difficulties arising from this situation.

Here, ministries and departments dealing with global warming in the European Union and selected  countries around the world are examined.  Among the countries examined, those in the developed world have a single ministry, or at most two, dedicated to the global warming issue and related concerns.  These structures effectively focus administrative effort on this topic in these countries.

It is concluded that the U. S. should revise its scattered administrative structure for dealing with global warming by establishing a cohesive cabinet-level department or agency.  The new entity would beneficially address global warming effectively: characterizing its worsening effects, and developing policies for mitigation and adaptation to its impacts.

Introduction.  The previous post presented details showing that disparate activities related to the issue of global warming are strewn among fourteen offices housed in thirteen federal departments and agencies of the U. S. government.  The post showed that this arrangement presents many problems and concerns.  In order to overcome these difficulties, it was proposed to unify all or most of these activities in a single cabinet-level department or agency.

Here, this post presents administrative information on energy and environment ministries and departments drawn from a selection of a regional transnational authority (the European Union (EU)), and sovereign nations from the EU and elsewhere around the world.

Global Warming Ministries in The European Union and Selected Nations Around the Globe

Ministries and similar agencies from the EU and nine nations were chosen to be described here.  Developed and developing countries from Europe, Asia and South America are considered.  (The choices that were made followed this writer’s inclinations and so are not random.  Every nation chosen is presented below; none was eliminated from presentation because of information developed during searching.)  Their ministries are summarized here.  More comprehensive descriptions appear in the Details section at the end of this post.

Developed Countries

The European Union

The EU is a political compact among, currently, 28 member nations.  Its executive organization is the European Commission, which interacts with the European Parliament to enact legislation and policies.

The European Environment Agency (EEA), an agency of the EU, provides information on the environment to other bodies of the EU so that relevant, unbiased background is available for policymakers and the public.

The European Commission has several subordinate Directorates-General, among which are those for Climate Action, Energy, and the Environment.  For example, the Directorate-General for the Environment developed the EU’s greenhouse gas mitigation policy (see Details).

Four EU nations were chosen for discussion here.

 

Germany has a cabinet-level Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety.  Among its responsibilities is development of national environmental policy.

 

Germany also has a a Ministry of Economics and Energy whose responsibilities include promoting the security of the country’s energy supply and the environmental compatibility of its energy.

The United Kingdom (UK) has a cabinet-level Department of Energy and Climate Change concerned with developing its energy supply, promoting energy efficiency, and overseeing the UK’s diplomacy related to international climate policy.

The UK also has a Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whose areas of practice include climate change and sustainability of resources.

Sweden has a Ministry of the Environment whose responsibilities include climate policy and environmental legislation; as well as a Ministry of Enterprise, Energy and Communications whose tasks include providing energy security for the nation.

Norway has a Ministry of the Environment that includes Departments for Climate Change, and Nature Management, among others.  It also has a Ministry of Petroleum and Energy responsible for energy production.

 

Japan has a cabinet-level Ministry of the Environment.  Its motto is to work “towards a lifestyle that could be passed on to generations 100 years from now.”  Japan recognizes that global warming is a long-term problem.  It believes the experience gained in its recent economic development can be applied internationally to mitigate greenhouse gas  emissions.

Japan’s Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources includes responsibility for developing energy and mineral resources in an environmentally sound way.

Australia’s Ministry of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency promotes policies for the mitigation of and adaptation to global warming from greenhouse gases, as well as developing the country’s policies in international negotiations on warming.

Its Ministry of the Environment focuses on preserving Australia’s natural environment.

Developing Countries

The nations from the developing world discussed below were chosen for consideration because some of them are among the nations with the highest annual rates of emission of greenhouse gases in the world, and/or the highest rates of growth in those emissions. 

China’s administrative structure (on the English language website) did not readily show a ministry or department related to the issue of global warming, nor for energy.  The China Renewable Energy Scale-Up Program participates in international efforts in this area.  Its Ministry of Environmental Protection works under the State Council to develop policies for environmental protection, including protection from environmental pollution and for development of natural resources.

India has a National Action Plan on Climate Change, issued in 2008, having eight committees, or Missions, with specified tasks.  The missions report directly to the Prime Minister.

India has a Ministry of New and Renewable Energy.  There is also a Ministry of Power overseeing production and distribution of power.

Brazil has a Ministry of the Environment, devoted to protecting and preserving the nation’s environment, and sustainable use of its resources. 

The Ministry of Mines and Energy has the objective of promoting sustainable environmental policies while assuring the supply of energy and natural resources.

Indonesia has a Ministry of Forestry that includes the Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation.

Generalizations from this worldwide selection of nations suggest that nations in the developed world have well-defined administrative structures devoted to, or involved in, assessing global warming and its effects, as well as developing and implementing meaningful policies for mitigation of and adaptation to global warming.  In general the ministries and departments examined here concentrate all or most of the administrative functions needed for addressing global warming into a single, or in some cases two, ministries or departments.

(The developing countries considered here appear not to have as well-developed administrative structures, at least apparent to the internet researcher,  as do those for countries in the developed world.  Furthermore, they appear not to have strong mechanisms for developing and implementing policies that mitigate their greenhouse gas emissions.) 

Conclusion

The previous post detailed the distributed administrative structures in the U. S. federal government involved in various aspects of global warming research, climate policy development, and implementation of rules and programs governing greenhouse gas emissions and energy efficiency.  The post identified several critical problems and difficulties arising from this arrangement, and concluded that a single cabinet-level department or agency should be created solely devoted to most or all aspects of the global warming issue.

The cases of the European Union and nations from the developed world presented here provide examples of single, or at most two, cabinet-level ministries dealing with global warming and its impacts on society.  Their integrated administrative structures minimize the problems identified in the U. S. federal government arising from the fact that disparate offices and bureaus, residing in several different departments and agencies, address various aspects of the global warming issue.

It is concluded that in order to develop effective global warming policy, the U. S. should reorganize all or most of these disparate activities into a new Department or Agency dealing exclusively with global warming, its causes, characteristics and impacts.  The examples from the developed world discussed here generally have such integrated administrative structures.   The new entity would evaluate the worsening trends related to warming, and formulate unified policies addressing both the mitigation of, and adaptation to, global warming at the national and international levels.

Details

Developed Countries

The European Union

The European Environment Agency (EEA) is an agency of the European Union (EU). Its task is to provide sound, independent information on the environment. It is a major information source for those involved in developing, adopting, implementing and evaluating environmental policy, and also the general public.

The European Commission is the high level body for the European Union, formulating policy proposals presented to the European Parliament for action.  The European Commission has several Directorates-General (DG), including those for Climate Action, Energy and the Environment.

The DG for Climate Action assembled the 20-20-20 goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions: a 20% reduction in emissions from 1990 levels; producing 20% of the EU’s energy from renewable sources; and improving energy efficiency by 20%; by 2020.

The DG for Energy sets up an energy market for Europe, and promotes sustainable energy production and use consistent with the EU emissions goal for 2020.

The DG for the Environment oversees enforcement of EU environmental law.

Any act passed by the European Parliament is implemented by passing corresponding legislation in each member nation.  Examples of some European national-level environmental or global warming agencies are presented here.

Germany has a cabinet-level Ministry of for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety.  Its responsibilities include

Fundamental national environmental policy,

Informing and educating the public about environmental issues,

Environmental remediation and development in Eastern Germany, and

Climate protection and energy.

Germany also has a Ministry of Economics and Energy whose objective is promoting economic efficiency, security of supply and environmental compatibility of its energy.  The Ministry formulates and implements energy policy.

United Kingdom: The cabinet-level Department of Energy and Climate Change assures responsible development of energy sources for the UK, promotes energy efficiency, and develops international approaches for limiting climate change.  It oversees the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs develops strategies for

Climate change, adaptation and energy use; and

Sustainable consumption and production; among others.

Sweden: The Ministry of the Environment has responsibilities that include, among others,

Climate policy,

Environmental quality objectives,

Environmental legislation, and

Sustainable Development.

Sweden’s Ministry of Enterprise, Energy andCommunications includes responsibility for assuring an efficient energy system at competitive prices.

Norway: The Royal Norwegian Ministry of the Environment is specifically responsible for carrying out the environmental policies of the Government.  Among its sections are

Department for Climate Change,

Department for Marine Management and Pollution Control, and

Department for Nature Management.

Norway’s Ministry of Petroleum and Energy oversees energy production and usage.  Much of Norway’s energy is derived from hydropower.

Japan: The cabinet-level Ministry of the Environment has 10 interrelated policy guidelines with the overall objective of integrating policies that secure a sustainable environment while developing the economy and promoting the wellbeing of society.  Its policy is to work “towards a lifestyle that could be passed on to generations 100 years from now.”  In order to reduce the nation’s burden on the environment while still ensuring a high quality of life for all, “it is necessary for each one of us to think about how we can lead a rich and eco-friendly life….”  The environmental policy recognizes that Japan must work with all peoples of the world, including applying the experience gained in the development of Japan’s economy to those nations now undergoing development.  Global warming is a long-term problem, requiring a time horizon of at least 50 years  to achieve emission reduction goals. 

Japan’s Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources has the mission of managing development of energy and mineral resources in a sustainable and environmentally friendly manner.

Australia has the following ministries.

The Ministry of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency promotes policies for mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation to global warming already under way, promotion of energy efficiency and development of Australia’s positions in global negotiations on warming.

The Ministry of the Environment is devoted to preservation and protection of Australia’s natural environment.

The Ministry of Industry includes a Department of Industry whose charge is to integrate policies in industry, energy, resources and skills to promote economic growth and competitiveness.

Developing Countries

China: The mission of the Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People’s Republic of China includes

Developing laws, regulations and assessments, as endowed by the State Council, for environmental protection.  Protection from pollution extends to air, water, soil, marine areas and vehicle emissions, among others.  In addition the Ministry oversees development and utilization of natural resources affecting the environment.  The Ministry also develops environmental standards and capabilities for environmental measurements.  It also generates basic principles that come to bear on global environmental issues, participating in and coordinating negotiations on international environmental conventions. 

The China Renewable Energy Scale-Up Program appears to participate in an international program in renewable energy.  Its web page shows date stamped entries of news items up to June 2013.  It is not clear how it fits into the national administrative structure. 

There appears to be no ministry dealing with energy.
 

India: India issued a National Action Plan on Climate Change in 2008. Important components include the National Missions for Sustaining the Himalayan Ecosystem, Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change, Solar (Energy), Enhanced Energy Efficiency, and various missions for aspects of sustainability and reforestation.  These are found within a Council on Climate Change reporting directly to the Prime Minister.

India’s Ministry of Power oversees generation and distribution of power, including from thermal and hydro generation sources.

India also has a Ministry of New and Renewable Energy whose aim is to develop and deploy new and renewable energy sources to supplement the country’s energy needs.

The Ministry of Environment and Forests has the goals of preserving the nation’s natural resources and reducing pollution.

An Energy Planning Commission in India seeks to unify development of the nation’s energy policy.  India recognizes “the need for an integrated energy policy because the responsibility for different energy sources is distributed over a number of different Ministries, e.g. Petroleum, Coal, Power, Water Resources (in the case of hydroelectricity), Atomic Energy and New & Renewable Energy.”

Brazil: The Ministry of the Environment has the goal of protecting and restoring the country’s environment, and of the sustainable use of its natural resources.  The ministry is responsible for developing policy for the environment and water resources, for preservation, conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems, for improving environmental quality and for sustainable use of natural resources.

Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy has as its mission “to guarantee the supply of energy and mineral resources…and promote …sustainable environmental and economically viable policies.”

This writer did not find an administrative body directed toward global warming.

Indonesia:  The Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources promotes security of energy supply and production of minerals.

The Ministry of Forestry includes the Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation.        

© 2014 Henry Auer

The EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme Has Been Voted Down

Summary.  The European Union instituted its Emissions Trading Scheme, using a cap and trade mechanism, in 2005.  Since that time, the Scheme has gone through periods in which the number of allowances was too high, resulting in excessively low values for their price. 

In a vote on April 16, 2013 the European Parliament defeated a proposed measure continuing to allot allowances to the emissions sources among the EU’s member nations, largely for economic reasons.  If allotments are not revived, the ETS will cease operations.  This would terminate one of the first multinational efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.
 

The ETS exemplifies the administrative and political difficulties facing cap and trade regimes.  Valuing carbon emissions is better achieved with a carbon fee.

 

Introduction.  The original members of the European Union (EU) in 1997 acceded to the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty to limit emissions of carbon dioxide (CO₂) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs).  The Protocol entered into force in 2005.  Even before this date the now expanded membership of the EU undertook to establish an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) to limit GHG emissions through 2020, using a cap and trade market mechanism.  In such regimes allowances, once granted, can be traded or auctioned in an open market; this fixes a monetary value for them.

In the initiation phase of the ETS the EU allowed each member nation independently to establish the number of allowances (each permits release of one metric ton of CO₂).  As a result, too many allowances were granted, and the ETS market wound up valuing the allowances at a very low price, even approaching EUR 0 in one year.  In the second phase (2008-2012) the number of allowances granted was reduced, and the ETS market valued allowances at reasonable levels.  In the third phase, beginning in 2013, the EU began centrally to determine the distribution of allowances.

Unfortunately, the EU cancelled its most recent auction   in March 2013 because bids received were “significantly” below the actual market rate.  In 2013, the start of Phase 3, about 40% of newly issued carbon emission allowances were being sold at auction for the first time.  The rest are still distributed at no charge.  The price had fallen to EUR3.73 (US$4.86) a metric ton early in the year.  The price had been about EUR 25 in 2008.

Longer term the ETS price for emission allowances has fallen drastically, by 90%, in the last five years.  This is due largely to a drop in demand for energy among EU countries because of recessionary conditions.  This has led to an oversupply of allowances.  The ETS began to reevaluate its allocation of allowances, in an attempt to rebalance the trading system and maintain a price on emissions.

Unfortunately the EU has now voted against its cap and trade regime.  The New York Times reported on April 17, 2013 that the European Parliament had voted not to lower the number of carbon dioxide emission allowances to be granted going forward.  The Times called the result “a potential death blow” to the cap and trade emissions regime.  Even so, emissions from the EU had fallen by 10% between 2007 and 2012, at least partly because of weak economic conditions.  The Parliament gave greater weight to the desire to keep energy costs down in view of the economy than to the overarching need for the world to limit its emissions of GHGs.  After the vote, the value of an allowance fell 40% to about EUR 3 per metric ton.  It is estimated that in order to have an effect on curtailing emissions, the price would have to be about EUR 30 per metric ton or higher. 

Analysis

This blog has long advocated in favor of a direct fee on carbon fuel consumption, rather than implementation of a cap and trade regime, to put a price on emissions of GHGs and thereby lower the annual rate of GHG emissions.  This latest development in the EU, the failure of its policymakers to continue the ETS, shows that a cap and trade regime may continually be subject to political interference.

As written in a recent post a cap and trade regime has many disadvantages in comparison to a carbon fee.  Some of these are apparent when considering the EU.  The factors include a) a need to account accurately for baseline emissions from each identified source prior to placing the regime in operation; b) a continued need for monitoring emissions from each source as the regime operates; c) a need for a  mechanism to allot allowances both at the outset and in subsequent periods of operation; d) a mechanism or rule for distributing allowances, including determining whether to grant or sell them; and e) setting up the administrative offices needed to operate the regime.  It is seen from this incomplete list that a cap and trade regime presents many challenges, requires an extensive bureaucratic structure, and includes many opportunities for mistakes to be made, or for influence, that defeat the objective of constraining emissions.

In contrast, a carbon fee is extraordinarily simple in its operating features and is easy to implement.  For example, a low rate could be established at the outset, which would increase annually to a level at which it would have a meaningful effect in reducing energy demand.  Experience has shown (not discussed here) that a carbon fee is easy to apply, has a broad if not universal reach, and achieves its objective according to its magnitude.  It is clear that the simplicity and effectiveness of a carbon fee offers major advantages over use of a cap and trade regime.

Many commentators have urged use of a carbon fee to mitigate emissions. 

 

In summary, the simplest, most direct, and most effective mechanism for reducing dependence on fossil fuels and mitigate emissions of GHGs is to apply a carbon fee.  The time to begin abating humanity’s emissions of CO₂, a major greenhouse gas, is now.  The longer we wait, the more firmly we cement our dependence on fossil fuels, and the more difficult it will be to achieve meaningful mitigation of global warming.

 © 2013 Henry Auer

Efficiency and Decarbonization of Transportation

Summary.  Transportation policy plays an important role in meeting the overall objective of the IPCC to limit warming of the long-term global average temperature.  It is challenging to reduce CO₂ emissions, or to decarbonize, the myriad sources involved in transporting people and goods, so that other solutions are being developed.  These include making vehicles powered by internal combustion engines more efficient, and migrating to the use of electric vehicles powered by electricity that has been generated using renewable technologies.

States, nations and regions are approaching the problem of reducing emissions from transportation in different ways.  Some use market mechanisms and others use taxation, to put a price on carbon or on vehicles that burn fossil fuels.  Others issue regulations with efficiency goals that reduce the emission of CO₂.  The European Union is the only jurisdiction that has created a comprehensive transportation roadmap to reduce emissions and develop a trans-national integrated transportation system, all by 2050.

Lowering CO₂ emissions by transport vehicles is an important aspect of overall global climate change policy.  Both government policy and private enterprise can play major roles in developing new technologies to accomplish this objective. 

Climate change policy adopted by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the organization of most nations of the world that sponsored the Kyoto Protocol and is seeking its extension, is based on a science-derived finding of the U. N.-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its 4^th Assessment Report.  It seeks to limit the accumulated atmospheric concentration of CO₂ (and other greenhouse gases expressed as CO₂ equivalents) to 450 parts per million (ppm), which is estimated to constrain the long-term global average temperature increase above the temperature that prevailed before the start of the industrial revolution to 2ºC (3.6ºF). 

 
The pre-industrial atmospheric CO₂ concentration was 280 ppm.  Presently the CO₂ concentration is about 393 ppm, and the global average temperature increase to date is about 0.7 ºC (1.3ºF).  Both these numbers are growing as mankind uses more and more fossil fuels and emits more and more CO₂ (and other greenhouse gases) into the atmosphere.  Since transportation accounts for about 25-30% of global CO₂ emissions there is a strong motivation to make this sector more fuel efficient, when using fossil fuels, and to decarbonize  the movement of people and goods wherever possible (i. e., eliminate the release of atmospheric greenhouse gases).
 
Internal combustion engines are highly inefficient.  Personal passenger transport is powered by internal combustion engines (ICE) that are fueled mostly by gasoline, refined from crude oil.  Burning fossil fuels injects the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, in a one-way flow from the geological deposits containing the oil to the release of a car’s exhaust to the atmosphere.  Yet use of ICEs is highly inefficient in terms of converting the chemical energy contained in the oil into useful mechanical energy, namely, propelling a car along the road.  This is shown below.

Energy use and losses in driving an automobile powered by an internal combustion engine, for combined city/highway driving.  The useful energy is “Power to Wheels”, lower right.  Its percentage is slightly lower for all-city driving, and slightly higher for all-highway driving (see the website below).  Source: Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, U. S. Dept. of Energy; http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/atv.shtml

It is remarkable that only 1/7 to 1/4 (depending on city to highway driving) of the energy contained in the fuel is used in moving the car.  It is even more surprising that “Engine Losses” include heat that is deliberately dissipated via the car’s radiator and exhaust, which constitutes about 56-64% of the energy in the fuel (depending on city to highway driving). 

The energy that propels the vehicle along the road must overcome the forces opposing forward motion, namely wind resistance, rolling resistance and braking (Power to Wheels, see graphic above).  These are susceptible of improvement.  Yet even if they were fully eliminated, which of course is not possible, there would still be the very high thermal losses (Engine Losses, see graphic above) that arise as long as the power source is an ICE. 

Reducing losses and increasing efficiency are considered in many sources (see References).  Among the most significant is weight reduction.  The inertia of an object is directly related to its weight.  It takes energy to change its inertia, for example when accelerating a car from a stop.  A lighter car will need less energy for acceleration than a heavier one.  A lighter car, needing less energy, can then incorporate a smaller engine, thereby decreasing weight even more.   

In addition, lighter materials can be used fabricate the frame and body of the car.  These include new steel alloys, alternative metals such as magnesium, aluminum and titanium, and nonmetallic composites such as carbon-fiber materials and strong plastics.  The Canadian Automobile Association states that vehicle weight can be reduced by as much as 40%, and that each weight reduction of 10% improves fuel economy by 5 to 7%.   

Smaller ICEs, in addition to being lighter, are also more efficient in converting the energy in the fuel to the forward motion of the car.  The Canadian Automobile Association, citing data from Natural Resources Canada’s 2008 Fuel Consumption Guide, shows that there is a much larger percentage increase in fuel economy in a compact car than in an SUV or a pick-up truck by making the engine smaller.  This factor is in addition to the considerable fuel economy achieved just by driving a compact car as opposed to an SUV or a pick-up truck.   

Streamlining the body lines of a car reduces its aerodynamic drag resistance to forward motion, a second important factor in optimizing efficiency of automobile transport.  In addition to the improvement in body shape that is obvious to the observer, shielding wheel wells and the underbody of the car further would improve its aerodynamic flow properties.   

Rolling resistance to forward motion refers to the deformation of tires as they roll along the road.  The tire, a semi-rigid object, is circular when it bears no weight, but is flattened out where it contacts the road when the car’s weight rests on it.  Energy is dissipated in the tire when this happens, and of course this goes on continuously as the car rolls along the roadway.  New high-efficiency tires, which optimize tread and sidewall design as well as incorporate new materials that dissipate less energy on deformation decrease rolling resistance.  Thus the losses ascribed in the graphic above to rolling resistance, amounting to 5-6% of the input energy of the fuel, can be reduced in some cases by as much as 20%.   

Capturing waste heat.  As seen in the graphic above, a major portion of the energy provided by burning fuel in an ICE, perhaps 60% or more, is lost as heat.  Research and development of technologies in ICE-driven vehicles that capture some of this heat are at an early stage, even though this aspect of vehicle inefficiency potentially offers the greatest gains in optimizing fuel economy.  

Thermoelectric conversion of heat directly to electricity relies on use of semiconductors that generate electricity when placed between two objects whose temperatures differ.  Schock and coworkers reported on research sponsored by the Energy Efficiency Renewable Energy program of the U. S. Dept. of Energy in a workshop in January 2011.  They fabricated and tested two different thermoelectric semiconductor materials, generating 70W or more.  They estimate that the payback period for the extra cost of a 1kW system is about 1 year, and for a 5kW system about 3 years.  Other thermoelectric systems, using various high-temperature  semiconductors, are being tested by BMW, Ford and Chevrolet, according to a report from May 2011.

Thermomechanical energy.  In 2005 Joaquin G. Ruiz, an undergraduate at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, proposed a way of capturing the heat generated in the catalytic converter in the exhaust train of an ICE-powered car to obtain more mechanical energy.  He estimated that overall thermal efficiency of fuel utilization (the numbers in the graphic above) could be improved by 7%, to be added to his estimate of 30% efficiency in current ICE fuel use.  In other words, his device would have a relative improvement in efficiency of more than 20%.  Honda is experimenting with a similar system that is reported to improve the thermal efficiency by 3.8% in a hybrid electric vehicle.

Cars powered by electricity, either partially or entirely, are expected to be far more efficient than full ICE-driven cars.  Electric cars were considered in an earlier post on this blog.  It discussed the all-electric Nissan LEAF, the two models of the all-electric Tesla Motors cars, the all-electric Mitsubishi iMiEV minicar, and the ICE-assisted electric Chevy Volt. 

Manufacturers of these electric cars emphasize their environmental advantage in having zero or minimal tailpipe emissions of CO₂.  Electric motors such as used in electric cars are highly efficient, capable of converting more than 90% of the electrical energy into the mechanical energy of motion.  As pointed out in the earlier post, however, these cars actually have low or zero emissions only to the extent that the electricity used to charge the batteries itself is obtained from renewable or low-CO₂ emitting generation sources.  Coal-fired electric generation is the least efficient, whereas modern natural gas-fired plants using combined cycle generation attain quite high efficiencies and much lower emissions of CO₂.  By 2035, the U. S. National Academy of Engineering estimates that even for all-electric vehicles, the greenhouse gas emissions will remain at 30-50% as much as currently emitted by ICE-powered cars because electricity will still be  generated to a considerable extent from fossil fuels.  Optimally, use of renewable sources such as wind power, solar power, hydroelectric power and geothermal power will provide truly zero emission generation of electricity.

BMW electric drive-train cars, BMWi3 and BMWi8 (see this video), strive to achieve sustainability to optimize energy efficiency by radically new design.  The heavier weight of the large-capacity electric batteries is offset by replacing metal bodies with carbon fiber-reinforced plastic which is lighter than any metal used in car construction, yet is stronger in crash tests.  The video states that this is the first use of carbon fiber in production cars.

Hybrid-electric cars are powered in tandem by electric motors and ICEs; the cars are engineered so that the two energy sources share the burden of propelling the car.  The Toyota Prius and Honda’s Civic Hybrid and Insight are examples of hybrid-electric cars currently available.

California’s plan to decarbonize passenger vehicles.  In the U. S., California has the most advanced plan, affecting the most people, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions of all the states.  In an unofficial report detailing a path to achieving the state’s goal of reducing emissions by 80% by 2050, the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) emphasizes the major role that will need to be played by decarbonizing the energy industry (see this post).  The report expects that personal transport will be achieved by electric vehicles, and that the electricity that powers these vehicles (and provides energy generally for the economy) will be generated largely by decarbonized sources.  Fossil fuels may continue providing the energy for electricity generation to the extent that the currently unproven technology of carbon capture and (geological) storage will be developed to industrial scale.  Otherwise renewable energy sources must be relied upon, in the view of the report.

U. S. government extends fuel efficiency standards.  In 2011 the administration of President Obama extended the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard to 55.4 mpg for cars by 2025.  The previous CAFÉ standard issued by the Obama administration in 2009 raised the value to 35.5 mpg by 2016.  In addition the 2025 mandate covers new fuel efficiency standards on medium- and heavy-duty trucks.  It is expected to prevent emission of large amounts of CO₂, save fuel costs to drivers, and reduce the need to import oil from foreign producers.  These savings, in the case of trucks, are expected to offset the extra cost of compliance with the standard, reaching payback within two years.

China and other developing countries will be responsible for a major increase in the number of passenger vehicles in use in coming decades, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).  Its World Energy Outlook (WEO) 2010 (Executive Summary) analyzes present and projected world-wide production and consumption of energy over the period 2010-2035.  The New Policies Scenario of the WEO predicts changes in energy demand resulting from measures to be taken in response to the commitments made at the UNFCCC Copenhagen meeting of nations in 2009.  WEO judges that under this Scenario CO₂ emissions continue to rise, by 21% over the level of 2008.

The growth in passenger vehicles in regions of the world, actual and projected under the New Policies Scenario, is shown below.

Actual growth in number of passenger vehicles (1980-2008) and projected growth (2020, 2035).  Other non-OECD (developing) countries includes India, for example.  Reproduced from World Energy Outlook 2010 © OECD/IEA.  The OECD has essentially similar membership as the IEA, plus 5 additional nations; http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/docs/weo2010/weo2010_london_nov9.pdf

The growth for China reflects its pronounced economic growth over this period, resulting in a large shift of its population into a middle class that demands personal cars, among other amenities.  It is seen from the chart that other developing countries are likewise projected to experience large increases in the number of passenger cars.  

Current technology emphasizes powering passenger cars with fossil fuel-driven ICEs, leading to a large increase in greenhouse gas emissions worldwide from this source.  But the Edmunds Auto Observer reports that, as of 2009, China’s fleet-average fuel efficiency, including SUVs and minivans, was already 36.8 miles per gallon (mpg), and that the country has mandated an increase to 42.2-mpg by 2015.  A tax on vehicles based on their engine size provides a further economic incentive impelling Chinese purchasers toward smaller vehicles.   The current tax rates are shown in red bars in the graphic below.


Vehicle excise tax in China based on engine size.  Source: Huiming Gong, The Energy Foundation;  http://www.egeec.apec.org/www/UploadFile/apec_wppeet_gong_huiming.pdf

It is seen that there is a strong tax incentive to purchase smaller cars having smaller engines, and that this incentive became more pronounced for the largest cars after 2008.  In addition to this vehicle excise tax, there is a fuel tax as well.  Conversely, according to The China New Energy Vehicles Program , pilot programs are deploying electric vehicles in as many as 25 Chinese cities, beginning with government vehicle fleets. Purchases of electric vehicles by the public will be subsidized and vehicle charging stations will be deployed.  RMB 100 billion (USD 15.9 billion) will be devoted to new energy vehicles in the next 10 years.  While some reductions in CO₂ emissions occur as a result of China’s shift toward use of electric vehicles, it is not as great as it could be in view of the fact that a major portion of China’s electricity is generated from coal-fired power plants.  These emit about twice as much CO₂ per kWh as do modern natural gas-fired generating plants. 

Europe’s integrated economy-wide transportation plan.  The European Commission (EC) has developed a plan, currently being implemented by the nations of the European Union (EU), to limit greenhouse gas emissions from all sources by 20% below the levels of 1990 by 2020, and by at least 80% by 2050 (see this earlier post).  As part of this program the EC has set forth its transportation program in a White Paper on Transport (see References).  Its objective is to achieve a single EU-wide transport area that closely integrates all modes of transportation and unifies modes of transportation across national boundaries.  The plan intends to reduce the EU’s dependence on oil for transport by 60% by 2050, while enhancing efficiency and the mobility of goods and people, and promoting economic development.  The White Paper recognizes that action must begin without delay, since an extended period of planning, building and implementing the system will be needed.  The following are among the plan’s features. 

There will be incentives in urban areas to limit personal car travel, and migrate to mass transit and even bicycling and walking.  Generally personal vehicles, clearly involved mainly in short trips, will be powered other than by fossil fuel-driven engines.  This will contribute to lowering the dependence on oil, and reducing emissions of greenhouse gases and other polluting combustion products. 

Intermediate-range movements will emphasize development of multimodal means for transport, with efficient terminals facilitating the interchange of passengers and goods between modes such as vehicle use and rail use.  The White Paper observes that use of more efficient vehicles and phasing in of renewable fuels by themselves will likely not be sufficient to attain the intended objectives.  It proposes that common transportation modalities  including trains (including high-speed rail), buses and airplanes be developed to supplant personal vehicle use, and that more than 50% of freight be moved by rail and waterborne shipping by 2050 rather than by road as is currently done. 

For long distance travel, beyond the boundaries of the EU, the White Paper proposes enhancing the efficiency of aircraft and optimizing air traffic flow by developing information technology-based traffic efficiencies.  These steps should increase fuel efficiency and optimize the flow of passengers and cargo.  It is likely that the volume of air transport of the EU will double by 2050.  

Analysis

Transport, which includes passenger vehicles, heavy duty vehicles, rail, air and shipping, accounts for about 27% of all the energy consumed worldwide.  Virtually all the energy used in transport is derived from burning fossil fuels, releasing the product, CO₂, a greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere.  Vehicles powered by ICEs, and the other transport modes mentioned, are distributed sources for CO₂ emissions.  There is no obvious way to capture CO₂ from them in a way that would prevent it from entering the atmosphere. 

The number of transport vehicles is expected to rise in coming decades, due both to rising populations, especially in the developing world, and to advances in economic wellbeing as the economies of developing countries expand.  In the absence of policies that would lower the extent of CO₂ emissions from transport, this sector will contribute significantly to ever increasing annual rates of greenhouse gas emissions in coming decades.  

CO₂, once emitted into the atmosphere, persists for at least a century and probably longer.  Thus each year’s incremental addition accumulates, increasing the atmospheric CO₂ concentration.  One can think of adding CO₂ to a bathtub through its faucet; the bathtub’s drain, however, is closed so no CO₂ leaves.  Even if the faucet were turned off (i. e., reducing the annual rate of CO₂ emissions to zero), the bathtub would still have its full accumulated level of CO₂ in it.  This is why the IPCC has warned of the need to limit CO₂ emissions.  Lowering greenhouse gas emissions will help keep the level in the CO₂ bathtub as low as possible, but can not meaningfully reduce its level. 

Transport vehicles powered by ICEs (or diesel) can reduce, but not eliminate, CO₂ emissions by efficiency steps such as outlined here, significantly increasing fuel efficiency.  Distribution of more efficient vehicles among buyers is facilitated by measures such as China’s excise tax which becomes more severe as engine size increases; by a “fee-bate” regime whereby the purchase of small, efficient cars is subsidized by a tax imposed on the purchase of larger, inefficient vehicles; by fuel taxes; or by pricing CO₂ emissions using a cap-and-trade market system.  Alternative measures are exemplified by regulations that increase the required fleet-average fuel efficiency, such as imposed administratively in the U. S. Nevertheless, as long as ICE-powered vehicles remain in service, CO₂ emissions can be reduced to near zero only by substituting renewable biofuels for fossil fuels. 

The CCST elaborated an ambitious program for reducing emissions by moving toward zero-emissions electricity to power transport vehicles and the economy more generally.  The CCST plan envisions using carbon captureand sequestration (CCS) to the extent that fixed generating facilities retain the use of fossil fuels as the primary energy source.  Yet, at the present time, CCS remains an experimental technology under development; it is not clear yet that it will become feasible at the industrial scale needed to accommodate fossil fuel-derived electric power.  Additionally, the CCST report stresses the development of renewable energy sources including wind, solar and biomass. 

China’s auto excise taxes induce its car-buying public to purchase smaller, more fuel-efficient car models.  The U. S., on the other hand, has been unable for more than a decade to enact a national energy policy which would have included transportation goals for fuel efficiency.  Instead, the present Obama administration has acted twice to extend previous regulations governing average fuel efficiency for passenger cars, first in 2009, then again in 2011.  The latter standard, to be effective by 2025, is quite ambitious.  Other than that, however, there is no unified national energy policy in effect in the U. S.  The state of California has partially filled that void, by enacting overall emission reduction goals that mirror those of the European Union.  The unofficial CCST plan for complying with its state’s mandate places strong emphasis on electrifying the energy economy with zero emissions, including, for transport, a virtually complete transition to use of electric vehicles or renewable fuels. 

Among the nations of the world, it is only the trans-national European Union that is addressing its energy economy overall, and its transportation policy in particular, in a cohesive, comprehensive fashion.  The EU’s “Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area” (see References) details the many interconnected aspects of transport policy, formulated with the objective of contributing significantly to the EU’s overall Roadmap 2050 for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by that year.  The EU fashioned its Roadmap, extending beyond the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol in 2012, independently of the fruitless negotiations under the UNFCCC seeking to formulate global energy policies beyond 2012.  

The need for global policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is critical.  Given the significant role that transport plays in contributing to these emissions, reformulating transportation modalities to reach low- or zero-emissions is an important facet of overall energy policy.  We should strive to achieve such goals as quickly as possible.  From the many examples cited above, it is clear that there is a role to be played both by government policy, including monetary support for new technologies, and by private industry driven by motives to generate profits.   

References 

“Primer on Automobile Fuel Efficiency and Emissions”, Canadian Automobile Association, June 2009; http://www.caa.ca/primer/documents/primer-eng.pdf.  

“Reinventing Fire: Bold Business Solutions for the New Energy Era”, Amory B. Lovins and the Rocky Mountain Institute, Chelsea Green Publishing, White River Junction, VT, 2011. 

“Real Prospects for Energy Efficiency in the United States”, U. S. National Academy of Engineering, a component of the National Academies, 2010; http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12621.  A free summary may be obtained here http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12621.html . 

“California’s Energy Future: The View to 2050”, Summary Report, California Council on Science and Technology, May 2011; http://www.ccst.us/publications/2011/2011energy.pdf) 

“Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area — Towards a Competitive and Resource-Efficient Transport System” (COM (2011) 144 final, European Commission White Paper, 28 March 2011; http://ec.europa.eu/transport/strategies/doc/2011_white_paper/white-paper-illustrated-brochure_en.pdf  

“The China New Energy Vehicles Program: Challenges and Opportunities”, World Bank and PRTM Management Consultants, Inc., April 2011; http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTNEWSCHINESE/Resources/3196537-1202098669693/EV_Report_en.pdf

© 2012 Henry Auer