Date post: | 05-Dec-2014 |
Category: |
Technology |
Upload: | ltc-csusb |
View: | 342 times |
Download: | 2 times |
Agenda No. xx
Clean Air Clean Air Cl ECl EClean Energy Clean Energy
Clean TransportationClean TransportationMaking the ConnectionsMaking the Connections
ldPeter GreenwaldSr. Policy AdvisorSouth Coast Air Quality Management DistrictMay 2010
Cleaning the Air That We Breathe…Cleaning the Air That We Breathe…
PresentationPresentationPresentationPresentation
• The Big Picture . . . Where we’ve been and where we need to gobeen and where we need to go
• Is getting there really possible?g g y p
• Making it happen: SCAQMD’s role and strategiesand strategies
2
• The Big Picture: Where we’ve been and where we need to gobeen and where we need to go
3
South Coast Air BasinSouth Coast Air BasinSouth Coast Air asinSouth Coast Air asin
Key Key Air PollutantsAir Pollutants
• Ozone (“Smog”)– Forms from emissions of nitrogen
oxides and hydrocarbonsoxides and hydrocarbons
– Federal attainment deadline: 2023
• Fine Particulates (PM2 5)( 2.5)– Forms from emissions of particulates, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides
– Federal attainment deadlines: 2014 (annual avg), 2019 (24 hr avg)
• Air Toxics– Most significant: Diesel particulates (carcinogenic)
– No ambient standards or attainment deadlines– No ambient standards or attainment deadlines
4
Annual Days Exceeding Ozone StandardsAnnual Days Exceeding Ozone Standards250
150
200
50
100
01976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 2006
Former 1-Hour Federal Ozone Standard
1997 8-Hour Federal Ozone Standard (0.08 ppm)
5
2008 8-Hour Federal Ozone Standard (0.075 ppm)
Health ConsequencesHealth ConsequencesHealth ConsequencesHealth ConsequencesAnnual Impacts in South Coast BasinAnnual Impacts in South Coast Basin
Based on 2004 Based on 2004 –– 2006 Monitored Pollutant Concentrations2006 Monitored Pollutant Concentrations
•• >6,500 premature deaths
• 4,100 hospital admissions
• 100,000 asthma cases & other respiratory symptoms
• 8,400 cases acute bronchitis
• 660,000 lost workdays
• 5,200,000 restricted activity days
Source: CARB. Based on 2004 – 2006 Monitored Concentrations 6
Modeled Cancer RiskModeled Cancer Risk2005 2005
7
History: Air Quality ProgressHistory: Air Quality Progress WithWith GrowthGrowthHistory: Air Quality Progress History: Air Quality Progress With With GrowthGrowthKey Reason: Key Reason: TechnologyTechnology
– AQMD policy generally growth
Demographic Projections and Ozone Air Quality Trend
Demographic Projections and Ozone Air Quality Trend g y g
accommodating
– Sources generally controlled over 90%120%
140%
160%
180%
pula
tion
and
200
250
300
ppb)
Ozone Air Quality TrendO3 8-Hour
Design Value
120%
140%
160%
180%
pula
tion
and
200
250
300
ppb)
Ozone Air Quality TrendO3 8-Hour
Design Value
controlled over 90%
– Technical challenges increasing
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
ent I
ncre
ase
in P
opA
ctiv
ities
50
100
150
200
Des
ign
Valu
e (p
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
ent I
ncre
ase
in P
opA
ctiv
ities
50
100
150
200
Des
ign
Valu
e (p
– Increasing marginal control costs . . . diminishing marginal returns
0%
20%
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
YEAR
Perc
e
0
50
population VMT Housing Unit O3 Design Value
0%
20%
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
YEAR
Perc
e
0
50
population VMT Housing Unit O3 Design Value marginal returns
8
Baseline NOx Emissions andBaseline NOx Emissions andBaseline NOx Emissions and Baseline NOx Emissions and Federal 1997 Federal 1997 Ozone Standard Carrying Ozone Standard Carrying CapacityCapacity
Data from 2007 AQMPI l di b fit f l d t d t 2007Including benefits of rules adopted to 2007
1000
700
800
900
ay
300
400
500
600
Black Box231To
ns per da
0
100
200
300
Carrying Capacity
1152005 2014 2023
9
2030 Ozone: Source Contributions2030 Ozone: Source ContributionsBackground + Ships + Aircraft + Locomotives = 72 ppb
(With majority Tier 4 Locomotives; Approx 75% Tier 3 Ships)
100
110
120
130
Current SCAQMD Ambient Ozone:
120 ppb
70
80
90
100
Ozone
Current Fed Ozone Standard: 75 ppb
40
50
60
70
ppb O
Proposed Fed Ozone Standard: 60 ‐70 ppb Oceangoing Ships, Aircraft, Locomotives (24)Oceangoing Ships, Aircraft, Locomotives (24)
10
20
30
Natural Background (48)Natural Background (48)0
g ( )g ( )
10
Needed: Needed: 75 75 –– 90 percent 90 percent additionaladditional NOx reduction NOx reduction
Timeframe: 2023 Timeframe: 2023 ‐‐ 20302030
Requires broad Requires broad deployment of zerodeployment of zero‐‐emission emission technologies, e.g. electrictechnologies, e.g. electric
“Combustion Out”“Combustion Out”
11
• Is getting there possible?
12
Top 15 AQMP NOx Categories in 2023Top 15 AQMP NOx Categories in 2023T h l i l P i l f El ifi i / ZT h l i l P i l f El ifi i / Z EE
Oceangoing Vessels
Technological Potential for Electrification / ZeroTechnological Potential for Electrification / Zero‐‐E E
*
( )Aircraft
Heavy‐Duty Diesel TrucksOff‐Road EquipmentOceangoing Vessels
Recreational BoatsLocomotives
Light‐Duty TrucksRECLAIM (Large Stationary)
Commercial BoatsResidential Fuel CombustionHeavy‐Duty Gasoline Trucks
Light‐Duty Cars
High Potential Some Potential Low Potential
Service/CommercialHeavy‐Duty Buses
Medium‐Duty TrucksCommercial Boats
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
* Preliminary emissions estimates; based on IMO Tier 1 – 3 for ocean vessels; EPA 2008 rule for locomotives; 2007 AQMP short‐term measures for other.Range for oceangoing vessels based on varying deployment assumptions for IMO Tier 3 vessels.
tons per day
• Electric / Zero‐Emission – On‐Road (with hybrid transition)
Key Sources:Key Sources:
AAh lh l
( y )– Rail– Ships at Berth– Residential
TechnologyTechnologyPathPath
• Substantial Hybrid‐Electric – Off‐Road– Harbor Craft
• Electric / Zero‐Emission Where Possible– Industrial/Commercial
• 80% NOx Control– Ocean Vessel Main Engines
• Substantial Renewable Energy
14
Is such a pathIs such a pathpppossible in the possible in the real worldreal world
What’s already been achievedWhat’s already been achievedWhat s already been achieved . . .What s already been achieved . . .
15
Combustion Out 100 Years Ago: Combustion Out 100 Years Ago: ggElectric Local Rail TransitElectric Local Rail Transit
Los Angeles Pacific Electric Railway Depot, circa 1910
16
Combustion Out 1944: Combustion Out 1944: Electric Regional Rail Transit Electric Regional Rail Transit
Four Counties 1 150 Track Miles 900 Cars 109 Million PassengersFour Counties 1 150 Track Miles 900 Cars 109 Million PassengersFour Counties 1,150 Track Miles 900 Cars 109 Million PassengersFour Counties 1,150 Track Miles 900 Cars 109 Million Passengers
17
Combustion Out 1948:Combustion Out 1948:Electric Transit Buses Electric Transit Buses
Los Angeles Transit Lines ‐ The Trolley Bus; One of the final 30 delivered to Los Angeles in 1948
18
Combustion InCombustion InCombustion InCombustion In
19
Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:Light RailLight Rail
20
Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:yyCars and Light/MediumCars and Light/Medium‐‐Duty TrucksDuty Trucks
21
Combustion Out Today: Combustion Out Today:
HeavyHeavy‐‐Duty TrucksDuty Trucks
22
Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:yy
ResidentialResidential
23
Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:Ships at BerthShips at Berth
24
Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:yyCargo Handling EquipmentCargo Handling Equipment
http://www.bnsf.com/employees/communications/bnsf_today/2007/06/2007‐06‐28‐e.html 25
Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:
Freight Rail Freight Rail Worldwide . . . Worldwide . . . but not in United Statesbut not in United States
26
Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today:Combustion Out Today: Combustion Out Today: Electricity GenerationElectricity Generation
80 kW Solar Expansion; Stationary Fuel Cells; 2 x 250 kW in Fontana; 3 x 5 kW in Irvine
27
Combustion Sources Today:Combustion Sources Today:yyOceangoing VesselsOceangoing Vessels
March 2010: IMO requires lower sulfur fuel, and 80% NOx control for new vessels used in U.S. waters beginning 2016
28
• Making it happen, SCAQMD’s roles and strategiesroles and strategies
29
ReassessingReassessingReassessing Reassessing Roles & StrategiesRoles & Strategies
• Authority spread among many entities
• Need emphasis on —• Need emphasis on —
– planning & analysis
– commenting advocacy public informationcommenting, advocacy, public information,
– funding
– collaborative solutions
30
R i ’ L d hi O iR i ’ L d hi O iRegion’s Leadership OpportunityRegion’s Leadership Opportunity
What the nation will need in 2050,What the nation will need in 2050,South Coast will need in 2023 South Coast will need in 2023 –– 20302030
31
General Policies for the Future
32
Eliminate the Black BoxEliminate the Black Box
• Served purpose, but as attainment deadlines approach,
– could hinder planning & tech development
• e.g. long lead‐time infrastructure
b– creates business uncertainty
• Specify at least generally what region needs in long‐term, and from what sourcesg ,
– air plan can include options
33
Leapfrog TechnologiesLeapfrog Technologies
• Wherever possible, consistentwith need to maintain interim progress,
– seek emissions control technologyd d f l tneeded for long‐term
– seek consensus for long‐term control by providing finality & certaintyfinality & certainty
34
U “C ” t B ild CU “C ” t B ild CUse “Convergence” to Build Consensus Use “Convergence” to Build Consensus
• Convergence: Zero emission technology can• Convergence: Zero‐emission technology can
be part of solution to multiple needs:
– energy security
– efficiency
– climate
– mobilitymobility
– jobs
35
Use “Convergence” to Build Consensus cont’dUse “Convergence” to Build Consensus cont’dUse Convergence to Build Consensus, cont d Use Convergence to Build Consensus, cont d
• Seek design of fed, state, local actions to provide g , , pair quality co‐benefits– E.g. energy, transportation, regulatory
– More bang for buck; broader support
– Reduce overlapping regulatory burdens
• Develop local air strategies that also serve• Develop local air strategies that also serve national priorities – E.g. energy security
• Seek federal funding & support – Lead in coordinated solutions
36
Strategies: Specific Examples
37
Define aDefine a Freight Transport System thatFreight Transport System thatDefine aDefine a Freight Transport System that Freight Transport System that Meets Region’s LongMeets Region’s Long‐‐Term Needs Term Needs
• Work with transportation agencies and stakeholders
• Seek federal funding for consensus system
38
Example: Example: ChiChiChicagoChicago
39
Define aDefine a Freight Transport System thatFreight Transport System thatDefine aDefine a Freight Transport System that Freight Transport System that Meets Region’s LongMeets Region’s Long‐‐Term Needs, cont’dTerm Needs, cont’d
• Potential elements:
– Zero‐emission port container ptransport & cargo handling (in the works now)
Electrified truck lanes on key– Electrified truck lanes on key corridors (in the works now)
– Rail electrification
40
Example:Example:
II 710710 D di t d ZD di t d Z E i iE i i T k L ?T k L ?II‐‐710710 Dedicated ZeroDedicated Zero‐‐EmissionEmission Truck Lanes?Truck Lanes?
• Key corridorKey corridor
• Benefits– safety
– congestion
– railyard risk– public supportp pp
despite cargogrowth
• Possible tech– overhead catenary
– electromagnetic
b tt– battery
41
Achieving ConsensusAchieving ConsensusAchieving Consensus Achieving Consensus on Freight Transporton Freight Transport
– Global competitivenesscompetitiveness
+– Local– Local quality of life
– A world class transport system
42
Li htLi ht D t V hi lD t V hi lLightLight‐‐Duty VehiclesDuty Vehicles
• CARB authority
• AQMD – Support infrastructure for electricity and hydrogen (e.g. charging)
– Support development and transfer of technologies, e.g.
– batteriesbatteries
– alternative fuel hybrids
43
R il El t ifi tiR il El t ifi tiRail ElectrificationRail Electrification
• Alameda Corridor: designed to accommodateaccommodate electrification
• Dual‐mode locomotives,New York City
F di t iti• Funding opportunities in energy/climate, transportation bills?
44http://www.acta.org/newsroom/photo_gallery.asp
Oceangoing VesselsOceangoing VesselsOceangoing Vessels Oceangoing Vessels
• Problem: Nothing requires Tier 3 NOx vessels to• Problem: Nothing requires Tier 3 NOx vessels to be built or routed to U.S. waters
– Controlling this enormous NOx source is left to i f l b l i l d i ivagaries of global commercial decisions
• AQMD Proposals:
– Requirements or incentive/disincentive programs to spur routing of clean vesselsg
– Preferably nationwide
45
Foster Renewable EnergyFoster Renewable EnergyFoster Renewable EnergyFoster Renewable Energy
• Incentives planning etc• Incentives, planning, etc . . .
46
Find the renewable power!
T h l Ad tT h l Ad tTechnology AdvancementTechnology Advancement
• Two key non‐road needs:
– Aircraft• Federal/international authority
• Opportunity: build on climate &fuel efficiency measuresfuel efficiency measures
– Vessel main engine PM• Largest source of port cancer riskg p
• EPA authority
47
Conclusion:Conclusion:Conclusion:Conclusion:Key Action ItemsKey Action Items
• Transportation: infrastructure planning, funding projectsfunding, projects
• Legislation: transportation, energy & liclimate, etc
• Regulatory: SIP, emissions standards, etc
• Technology: funding advancement, deploymentdeployment
Thank You!Thank You!Thank You!
Thank You!Thank You!
49