Upload
embarq
View
2.621
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
By Dario Hidalgo. Presented on Day Two of Transforming Transportation. Washington, D.C. January 15, 2010.
Citation preview
Scoping Post 2012 Climate Instruments:Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions
NAMAsCase Study for Opportunities in Urban
Transport in Brazilian Cities
Transforming Transportation 2010
Washington DC, USAJanuary 2010
Principles
Developing countries offer great climate change mitigation potential by shifting to a low carbon strategy (as opposed to Business as Usual)
Low carbon strategies should also support local environmental, economic, transport, social, health and urban development objectives
Climate change mitigation instruments can contribute in rising financial and institutional barriers for mitigation efforts, while greatly contributing to the local development goals
Sustainable Transport Co-Benefits MatrixBenefits Description Health Benefits
Environment • Reduced GHG emissions• Reduced air pollutants Reduced
Noise • Reduced impact in water and
protected areas
• Reduced health impacts due to global warming
• Reduced deaths and disabilities from air pollutants
• Reduced stress and hearing losses
Social • Reduced accidents• Equitable accessibility• Increased pride
• Reduced deaths and disabilities from traffic accidents
Transport • Reduced travel time (walking, waiting, transferring, in-vehicle)
• Reduced travel time uncertainty• Reduced transport costs
• Reduced stress
Economic • Increased economic productivity • Increased employment• Better labor conditions• Increased business opportunities
Urban Development
• Increased density/mix uses• Creation of public spaces• Reduced cost in utilities’ and social
networks
• Increased physical activity (reduced obesity and other illnesses from sedentary lifestyles)
The main challenge for local quality of life and competitiveness and for the global environment is
motorization
Source: Lee Schipper, Univesirty of California, Berkeley, 2009
NAMAs: Support GHG mitigation efforts AND development goals
1. Actions that are undertaken by developing country Parties and are not enabled or supported by other Parties (unilateral NAMAs);
2. Actions that are supported by developed country Parties that could include additional financing support for capacity building and knowledge/ technology transfer; and is likely to be supported by fund-type instruments (supported NAMAs);
3. Actions that are undertaken to acquire carbon credits that would be enacted through a crediting scheme. Include up-scaled CDM (very contested).
http://www.transport2012.org/bridging/ressources/documents/1/68,Discussion_Paper.pdf
ObjectiveWe use the specific case of a mid-size Brazilian city to provide understanding of the needs, methodological and practical issues of application of NAMAs in the urban transport sector
Main questions: • Which are the GHG mitigation and co-benefit potentials of
sustainable, low carbon transport in a mid size Brazilian? • What would an Avoid-Shift-Improve oriented NAMA for Brazilian
city/cities look like?• How would it be organized?• How would it be financed?• How would it be Monitored-Reported-Verified?• How could it be scaled up?
Why a NAMA for Urban Transport?Help remove barriers
FundingIncrease likelihood of receiving funding from Federal/State level as the plan contributes to the National/State GHG mitigation objectivesParticipate in international financial flows: supported NAMA (outside offsetting mechanism)
Public AcceptanceMaking explicit the local benefitsGrowing concern on climate change mitigation
ContinuityIncreased likelihood of “surpassing” local/state/national election cycles
A model NAMA Structure
Policy Objective
NAMA Description
Green House Gas Emission Reductions
Co-Benefits
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
Risk Analysis
Financing
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/South_america_%281%29.jpg
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u252/rmcastanheira/BelaFoto.jpg
“Road Testing”
Belo Horizonte Brazil
Case Study: Belo Horizonte
Capital of Minas Gerais – Southestern Brazil
Third-largest metropolitan area in the country: 2.4 million inhabitants with 5.4 million in the Metropolitan Area
Is developing a comprehensive mobility plan Extensive data collection
Adequate transport modeling techniques
Transport oriented indicators
A model NAMA Structure
Policy Objective
NAMA Description
Green House Gas Emission Reductions
Co-Benefits
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
Risk Analysis
Financing
Policy Objective (example)
The NAMA for integral urban mobility seeks the reduction of GHG emissions from urban transport and the improvement of transport conditions, the local environment and the population’s health.
The NAMA seeks to avoid the increase of vehicle kilometers, shift passenger and cargo movements to efficient modes, and improve the energy efficiency of the vehicle fleet. Actions under the plan are also expected to increase the city competitiveness and the quality of life.
A model NAMA Structure
Policy Objective
NAMA Description
Green House Gas Emission Reductions
Co-Benefits
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
Risk Analysis
Financing
Component Committed Investments
(BAU)
Intermediate Development (BRT)
Complete Development (BRT+Metro)
Roadways Construction/Improvement
Limited Interventions VIURBS Complete interventions in VIURBS and Central Area Plan
Bus Rapid Transit Implementation
9 corridors with reserved bus-lanes
9 corridors with full BRT and 6 corridors with reserved bus-lanes
Metro Expansion Headway reduction to 4 minutes and train expansion to 6 cars in Line 1. New Metro Station
Expansion L1, L2, L3
Integration 12 Integration stations including 2 metropolitan stations
All integration stations, 5 connections between BRT corridors, priority for metropolitan bus
Bicycle Infrastructure 110 Km bikeways 365 Km bikeways
Pedestrian Facilities Improved sidewalks in downtown and the 9 corridors with bus-lanes
Improved connections in downtown, sub-centers and BRT
Land Use No action. Transit Oriented Development regulations along transit corridors
Parking Policies Increase in median daily parking charges in Central area to R$15,00/dia
Source: Prefeitura de Belo Horizonte “Plano de Mobilidade Urbana de Belo Horizonte: Diagnóstico, Cenários e Resultados”, Logit Consultants, October 2009
Modal Split 2020
Source: Prefeitura de Belo Horizonte “Plano de Mobilidade Urbana de Belo Horizonte: Diagnóstico, Cenários e Resultados”, Logit Consultants, October 2009
50.6% 52.1% 49.7%
49.1% 47.5%44.1%
6.2%0.3%0.3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
CommittedInvestments (BAU)
IntermediateDevelopment (BRT)
CompleteDevelopment(BRT+Metro)
Bicycles
Private Transport
Public Transport
A model NAMA Structure
Policy Objective
NAMA Description
Green House Gas Emission Reductions
Co-Benefits
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
Risk Analysis
Financing
TransportModel
CalibrationBase Year 2008
Roadwayand TransitNetworks
(Supply 2008)
Socio-EconomicCharacteristics
Origin-DestinationMatrix
(Demand 2008)
Travel Time Vehicle Kilometers
Emissions Factors2008
GHG Emissions2008
TransportModel
ApplicationBase Year 2008
Roadwayand TransitNetworks
(Supply 2020)
Socio-EconomicCharacteristics(Demand 2020)
Travel Time Vehicle Kilometers
GHG Emissions2010
Emissions Factors2010
Structure and Parameters
TransportModel
CalibrationBase Year 2008
Roadwayand TransitNetworks
(Supply 2008)
Socio-EconomicCharacteristics
Origin-DestinationMatrix
(Demand 2008)
Travel Time Vehicle Kilometers
Emissions Factors2008
GHG Emissions2008
TransportModel
ApplicationBase Year 2008
Roadwayand TransitNetworks
(Supply 2020)
Socio-EconomicCharacteristics(Demand 2020)
Travel Time Vehicle Kilometers
GHG Emissions2010
Emissions Factors2010
Structure and Parameters
Direct GHG EmissionsCO2eq (tonnes/year)
-
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
1,200,000
1,400,000
1,600,000
Baseline 2008 Baseline 2020 Intermediate Complete
Public Transport Private Vehicles
Direct GHG Emissions Savings 2020 (CO2eq tonnes/year)
ModeIntermediate Development
(BRT)
Complete Development (BRT+Metro)
Public Transport (86,446) 88,046
Private Transport 146,637 344,843
Total 60,192 432,889
A model NAMA Structure
Policy Objective
NAMA Description
Green House Gas Emission Reductions
Co-Benefits
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
Risk Analysis
Financing
Travel Time Savings User Benefits (example Public Transport)
56.2
50.7
-
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000
Demand (pax/year*1000)
Tim
e (m
inu
tes/
pax
)
(56.2 - 50.7)*(204,304 + 236,427)/2 ~ 20.2 million hours/year
Travel Time Savings 2020 (Million hours/year)
ModeIntermediate Development
(BRT)
Complete Development (BRT+Metro)
Public Transport 20.2 33.2
Private Transport 51.8 77.3
Total 72.0 110.5
Criteria Pollutant Emissions
-
5,000.0
10,000.0
15,000.0
20,000.0
25,000.0
30,000.0
35,000.0
40,000.0
45,000.0
50,000.0
Baseline 2008 Baseline 2020 Intermediate 2020 Complete 2020
CO (Ton/year) HC (Ton/year) NOx (Ton/year) PM (Kg/year)
CO (Ton/year)
HC (Ton/year)
NOx (Ton/year)
PM (Kg/year)
Savings Intermediate
4,078.0 536.6 1,102.2 19,426.2
Savings Complete
10,480.3 1,279.2 2,391.0 24,505.9
Reduction Intermediate
12% 13% 16% 41%
Reduction Complete
31% 32% 34% 52%
Criteria Pollutant Emission Savings
Other quantifiable co-benefits
Accident Reduction
Increased Physical Activity
Summary indicators Deaths avoided
Injuries avoideed
Days lost
Disability Adjusted Day Life (DALYs)
Socio-Economic Equivalent
A model NAMA Structure
Policy Objective
NAMA Description
Green House Gas Emission Reductions
Co-Benefits
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
Risk Analysis
Financing
Data Sources for MonitoringPrimary
Origin-destination surveys Volume and occupancy analysis Measurement of travel speeds Road network characteristics (number of lanes, parking, directions)Public transport network characteristics (routes, frequency, stops, fares)Phone interviews on principal mode of transport, trip length and trip time
Secondary
Public transport boardings and revenuesCensus data (population by census tract, socio-economic characteristics)Home based surveys (employment, level of education, income)Student enrollmentBusiness activity surveysCar registration, including type of fuel and vehicle efficiencyFuel consumptionGross Domestic Product (proxy for travel activity)Air quality monitoring data (criteria pollutants)Traffic accident data (fatalities, injuries, incidents)Hospital admissions (acute respiratory disease, heart failure)
Key Indicators
Modal Share
Total System Travel Time Average Travel Time by Mode
Demand by Mode
Kilometers by Mode Emissions (CO2eq, Criteria Pollutants) – Emission Factors – Lifecycle effects
System cost (out of pocket per km, total per trip)
Accidents
Physical Activity (min per day walking/biking)
Reporting & Verification
Annual consolidated report Update demand and supply characteristics
Verify consistency with field data
Update emission factors if applicable
Calculate key indicators
Verify quality of data collection & modeling
Contrast modeling results with secondary data Air quality monitoring data
Telephonic surveys: principal mode of travel, trip length, trip time.
http://www.bogotacomovamos.org/datos/AE_14_Bogota_Como_Vamos_2009.pdf1600 surveys, error 2.6% with a 95% confidence level
A model NAMA Structure
Policy Objective
NAMA Description
Green House Gas Emission Reductions
Co-Benefits
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification
Risk Analysis
Financing
Risks & Mitigation
Plan implementation Local political agenda, Natural resistance of affected parties (existing transit providers, community in the area of influence of terminals, businesses during construction)Funding availability.
Emission and Cobenefit Analasys
Prone to problems in data collection, modeling and lack of technical expertise to analyze and interpret the data.
Community Information,
Participation and Involvement
Formalization and standardization
and quality assurance (ISO certification).
A model NAMA Structure
Policy Objective
NAMA Description
Green House Gas Emission Reductions• Co-Benefits• Monitoring, Reporting and Verification• Risk Analysis• Financing
Supported NAMA
• Local funding: taxes, public-private partnerships (value capture, congestion pricing)
• Contribution of different levels of government (federal, state)
• Programmatic Loans from MDBs• Climate change funding (broad
understanding of technology funds, not limited to clean, low carbon fuels and vehicles)
Conclusions• A comprehensive policy for transport is promising in
reducing GHG and improving transport and the local environment, and thus, constitute an appropriate mitigation action.
• Formalizing a comprehensive mobility plan under a NAMA framework is likely to help in addressing the barriers and implementation risks.
• NAMA will encourage results oriented transport planning and provide a good framework for monitoring, verification and continuous improvement
Motorization trends can (and should) be reversed
Graph: Sao Paulo Municipality
Sao Paulo Success Story
Recommendations
• Continue expanding the initial suggestions under the framework presented in this study. For instance:– Develop detailed guidelines for data collection, modeling
and analysis.
– Inclusion of life cycle and leakage calculations in emission estimates.
– Training for people involved in estimation, monitoring, reporting and verification.
– Adoption of national standards on procedures, parameters and reporting requirements.