CRedcarbon reduction

1

Norfolk Federation of Women’s Institutes

Carbon Challenge Day

February 23rd 2008

Transport Issues

N.K. Tovey ( 杜伟贤 ) M.A, PhD, CEng, MICE, CEnv Н.К.Тови М.А., д-р технических наук

Energy Science Director CRed Project

HSBC Director of Low Carbon Innovation

Recipient of James Watt Gold Medal

5th October 2007

1

2

• Historic Trends• Technical Issues

• Fuel Efficiency• New Fuels

• The Social Dimension• How important is it?• New Ideas

• Carbon Footprint Issues• Conclusions

Transport Issues

3

Historic Trends: Personal Mobility

• Increase in personal mobility by ~400% in 50 years• Mostly by car journeys• Decline in bus travel (but trend now reversed )• Nearly 50% increase in rail travel since privatisation

– represents a saving of 1.5 - 2 millions tonnes of CO2 per annum compared to road.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1952

1956

1960

1964

1968

1972

1976

1980

1984

1988

1992

1995

1999

2003

bil

lion

pas

sen

ger

kil

omet

res

airrailothercars and vansbuses and coaches

If this travel is replacing road travel!!

Will investment in public transport necessarily reduce car journeys?

Privatisation

4

Private Motoring

• Components of Energy Demand in personal transport.

• Desire for mobility exceeded fuel efficiency improvements until 1990.

• Since 2000 energy consumption approximately in balance.

• Need to reduce further increases in mobility if CO2 is to be reduced significantly.

5

Historic Trends: Freight

• Distance each tonne has travelled has increased by:– 223% since 1960– 20% since 1990

• Is this increase in movement of freight conducive to optimum economic growth, energy security, and carbon reduction?

6

Band G covers a broad rangeBase taxation directly on carbon emission?

Data from Vehicle Emissions Database

Energy Labelling: Is it helpful?

Carbon and Energy Efficiency Trends in Cars

voluntary emission targets will not be reduced to 140 g/km by 2008/09

New Vehicles: A Hybrid Vehicle

9

Technical Issues: New Fuels

• Biofuels: one part of the solution in near term with Fuel Cells in longer Term??

Overall CO2 emissions for different fuels/production methods/power trains.

Based on CONCAWE/JRC/EUCAR results as adapted by Andy Taylor

Depending on the pathway, biofuels can have a major impact in reducing CO2 from transport.

However, other studies give differing results and clarity and robustness of methodolgy is needed – including “Real Road Tests”

Biofuel Options• Biogas• Bioethanol (5% or 85%)• Biodiesel (5% to 100%)• Vegetable oil

• Benefit > Reduced CO2 and other emissions?

Technical Issues: New Fuels

11

Launch of BioEthanol in UK: Norwich 15th March 2006

Planning is needed both for vehicles and infrastructure

12

• Historic Trends

• Technical Issues• Fuel Efficiency

• New Fuels

• The Social Dimension• How important is it?

• New Ideas

• Carbon Footprint Issues

• Conclusions

Transport Issues

13

Biodiesel Trials – Banham Poultry 2004

• Despite reduced calorific value of biodiesel, fuel consumption remained the same

First trials ever of fuel economy ‘on the road’ using biodiesel8 Volvo FH12 Trucks: 5%, 20%, 35%, 50% biodiesel blends

14

• Driver behaviour can affect performance• Driver 2 uses 13.8% more fuel than driver 1

Biodiesel Trials – Banham PoultryDriver behaviour

15

• Trials demonstrated other benefits compounding to 60% saving– Using 50% uvo biodiesel (~40% saving)

– Advanced driver training (~15% saving): cumulative ~49%

– Better route/load planning (~10% saving): cumulative ~54%

– More fuel-efficient trucks (~10% saving): cumulative ~59%

Total CO2 saving ~59%

• However– Widespread availability of biodiesel at this concentration and new trucks will

take time

• Other actions could be taken in shorter time scale– Advanced driver training (~15% saving):

– Better route/load planning (~10% saving):

Total CO2 saving ~24%

Biodiesel Trials – Banham Poultry

16

• In UK it is 5% substitution of biofuels by volume. Should it be 5% by energy?

• Will the buy out money necessarily end up promoting UK projects as with Renewable Obligation?

• Significant quantities of wheat are exported which could be used for bioethanol.

• Land Area required for 5% by volume– ~10000 – 12000 sq km (similar to NFU figure of 1.2 Mha)

– or 4-5% of total land area of UK.

area of Norfolk, Suffolk, and part of Cambridgeshire combined

• Opportunities for use of co-products- animal feed/power generation

• What happens if RTFO is increased further? Is land area requirement sustainable?

Implications of Road Transport Fuel Obligation for 2010

17Data from Transport Statistics 2005. Table 2005.

Trends in Car Engine Size

Car engine sizes are getting larger.

This increase has caused the emission of an extra

2.9 Mtonnes extra of CO2. per annum.

18

Percentage of models available compared to social desire.

-ve means less models on market than people intending to buy.

Size of Car Engines in Market 2006

0200400600800

1000120014001600

<1000 1000 -1300

1300 -1600

1600 -2000

2000 -2500

2500 -3000

> 3000

Engine Size (ccs)

Nu

mb

er o

f M

odel

s

Size of Choice according to survey of prospective buyers

Data: Vehicle Emission DatabaseDepartment of Transport Report: Assessing the Impact of Graduated Vehicle Excise Duty”

<1000 1000 - 1300

1003 - 1600

1600 - 2000

2000 - 2500

2500 - 3000

>3000

19

Fuel Consumption and Driver Behaviour

• Car: 5 door Toyota Yaris

• Real performance is best at ~ 50 mph. Saves up to 15% in fuel consumption cf 70 mph.

• Driver behaviour at low to moderate speeds can affect consumption by up to 10%%

• A small car emits: equivalent of 1 party balloon every 60m.

• Driving just 1.6 miles emits as much carbon dioxide as heating an old persons room for 1 hour.

Raising Awareness

20

Personal Mobility: Does Public Transport reduce car travel?

9000

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000 13000

tota

l ann

ual d

ista

nce

(km

)

annual car distance (km)

UK

D

More use of car > more total distance travelled.

Greater distance by train > greater use of car.

Compare UK with Germany

switch UK car journeys to public transport at German levels. saving by train 1.01 M tonnes saving by bus 0.74 M tonnesReducing mobility desire 9.22 M tonnesSuggests overriding issue is increased desire for mobility rather

than significant switching of mode of transport.

D

UK

D

UK

Investment in Public Transport

Smart Dynamic Bus Routing?

• Bus Service A > B• People at C not served• Divert route via C

– increased journey times less popular with A > B, particularly if people only occasionally get on at C.

• Dynamic Routing on demand Extension of Trinidad Route Bus System

A

B

C

• Mobile phone SMS• Intelligent bus stops

21

22

Social Issues: Lift SharingOur congested roads are full of empty seats

The UK leader in lift sharing, Liftshare.comis based in Norfolk; Aim: CO2, Car Occupancy 2

52 million km shared each year.

Car travel (2006 statistics):• 679 billion passenger kilometres• 398 billion vehicle kilometres

Average occupancy 1.71.Raising this to an average of 2 would save

9.9 Mtonnes CO2.

Lift sharing/car pooling is very cost effective, can help combat social exclusion, and enhance the effectiveness of public transport.

Increasing average car occupancy is a very cheap way of saving CO2 and reducing car use.

Social Issues: First car share club in East Anglia

EDP, June 2, 2006

However, some research of Cambridge scheme by Prof. Crawford Brown suggests that much of use is additional use not replacement use.

23

24

Providing Public with more information

• Impact of carbon emissions

• Petrol receipt from Denmark

• Individuals often go for budget airlines for the cheap weekend break in Europe. Is this rational?

• e.g. Paris for weekend break

29th Sept - 2nd Oct 27th Oct - 30th Oct

BMIBaby EasyJet Eurostar BMIBaby EasyJet Eurostar

Return Tickets £95.00 £86.18 £124.00 £9.00 £56.58 £79.00

Airport Taxes £55.20 £14.50   £55.20 £14.50  

London>Airport £8.00 £22.40   £8.00 £22.40  

CDG > Gare du Nord £13.00 £13.00   £13.00 £13.00  

Total £171.20 £136.08 £124.00 £85.20 £106.48 £79.00

Total Time 04:05 04:15 03:00 04:05 04:15 03:00

Prices as per respective WEB Sites on 19th Sept. 2006

25

• Historic Trends

• Technical Issues• Fuel Efficiency• New Fuels

• The Social Dimension• How important is it?

• New Ideas

• Carbon Footprint Issues

• Conclusions

Transport Issues

               

    Time cumulative

distancePassengers grams per    

      km   Pass-km    

  Norwich 05:53 0.0   0    

  Wymondham 06:04 17.3 50 37.3    

  Attleborough 06:11 25.7 54 34.5    

  Thetford 06:25 48.7 56 33.3    

  Ely 06:51 85.3 62 30.1    

  March(GB) 07:08 109.8 55 33.9 average  

  Peterborough 07:25 132.3 67 27.8 31.9  

               

Carbon Emissions from Train Travel

Norwich – Peterborough

Saturday 24th March 2007

Data Collected by Energy Field Course Students en route for Orkney.

               

    

Cumulative distance

Passengers gms per   

      km   Pass-km    

  Peterborough 07:46 0.0        

  Grantham 08:05 46.7 213 36.3    

  Newark North Gate 08:17 70.4 217 35.6    

  Doncaster 08:42 128.3 241 32.2    

  York 09:06 180.2 240 32.3    

  Darlington 09:36 251.4 242 32.1    

  Newcastle 10:07 309.3 264 29.5    

  Berwick-upon-Tweed 10:50 417.1 391 20.3 average  

  Edinburgh 11:37 509.7 385 20.6 26.3  

               

Carbon Emissions from Train Travel

Peterborough - Aberdeen

               

    Time cumulative

distancePassengers grams per

   

      km   Pass-km    

  Edinburgh 12:06 0.0        

  Haymarket(Edinburgh) 12:10 2.0 134 27.1    

  Kirkcaldy 12:38 21.3 159 22.8    

  Markinch for.Glenrothes. 12:47 41.8 155 23.4    

  Ladybank 12:55 53.5 168 21.6    

  Cupar 13:00 63.2 168 21.6    

  Leuchars (St.Andrews) 13:07 71.6 173 21.0    

  Dundee 13:25 82.1 139 26.1    

  Arbroath 13:39 95.3 93 39.0    

  Stonehaven 14:15 122.7 64 56.7 average  

  Aberdeen 14:35 183.8 88 41.3 31.2  

               

Carbon Emissions from Train Travel

Edinburgh - Aberdeen

Carbon Emissions from Train TravelA Problem

Driving to London ~ 32 kg of CO2

Travelling by Train ~ 4.5 kg – a saving of 27.5 kg based on data from our research

BUT

If travelling by car the train would still run.

What would be the reduction in CO2 because a person did not travel

[ 85 – 90% of energy consumption arises from dead weight of train]

Reduction is only around 0.4 kg [ weight of person plus luggage]

So true saving by public transport is about 31.6kg

How do you then account for emissions by the train???????

30

Conclusions• Are Biofuels an answer?

• Government needs clearer statements on its commitments: e.g.RTFO.

• Why not a requirement of 5% by energy content?

• Where will buy out money go?

• Will it promote industry in UK?

• Land requirements in post 2010 ideas from increased RTFO?

• Issues of fuel efficiency need addressing more effectively

• Reverse trend towards large engine cars

• Revisit the banding system and related taxation

Lao Tzu (604-531 BC) Chinese Artist and Taoist philosopher

"If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading."

• Social Dimension must not be overlooked.

– Better education/awareness - driver behaviour.– Address issue of continual increases in desire for mobility.

Could provide more rapid and cheaper method to reduce CO2?