[sustran] Smart Transport Emission Reductions - VTPI Special News

[Todd Alexander Litman]

Dear Colleagues,

Last week I attended the Energy Analysis Forum sponsored by the 
National Renewable Energy Laboratory 
(<http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/news.html>http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/news.html 
), where leading North American energy analysts discussed current 
thinking concerning greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies, 
much of which involves emission cap and trade programs 
(http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Releases/2007Releases/July2007ClimateChangeBillsinCongress.cfm 
). Similarly, a recent report by McKinsey, "Reducing U.S. Greenhouse 
Gas Emissions: How Much At What Cost" 
(<http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/greenhousegas.asp>http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/ccsi/greenhousegas.asp 
) evaluates emission reduction strategies according to their cost 
effectiveness.

Virtually all this analysis is biased against mobility management 
(strategies that increase transport system efficiency by improving 
accessibility options and applying more efficient incentives, 
described at http://www.vtpi.org/tdm ), for the following reasons:

* Co-benefits are ignored. Current analysis gives little 
consideration to benefits such congestion reduction, road and parking 
facility cost savings, consumer savings, reduced traffic accidents, 
and improved mobility for non-drivers, although these benefits are 
often larger in total value than emission reduction benefits. When 
all impacts are considered, mobility management strategies are often 
among the most cost effective GHG emission reduction strategies, 
because they are justified on economic grounds and so provide "free" 
environmental benefits (see http://www.vtpi.org/winwin.pdf ).

* Current analysis generally ignores the additional external costs 
that result when increased vehicle fuel efficiency and subsidized 
alternative fuels stimulates additional vehicle travel, called a 
"rebound effect" (see http://www.vtpi.org/cafe.pdf and 
http://www.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-04-53.pdf ).

* Mobility management emission reductions are considered difficult to 
predict. Although case studies and models are available for many of 
these strategies (see for example, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm , 
www.ccap.org/trans.htm and the TRIMMS Model at 
http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77704.htm ) this information is 
not widely applied to energy planning.

* Mobility management programs are considered difficult to implement. 
Such programs often involve multiple stakeholders, such as regional 
and local governments, employers and developers, and various special 
interest groups. As a result, they tend to seem difficult and risky 
compared with other emission reduction strategies that only require 
changes to utility operations, fuel production or vehicle designs 
(http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/articles-70119_paper.pdf ).

* Analysis often assumes that vehicle travel reductions harm 
consumers and the economy. In fact, many mobility management 
strategies benefit consumers directly and increase economic 
productivity 
(<http://www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/77704.pdf>www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/77704.pdf 
). Our research indicates that with more optimal pricing and planning 
practices, travelers would choose to drive less, use alternative 
modes more, and be better off overall as a result 
(<http://www.vtpi.org/sotpm.pdf>http://www.vtpi.org/sotpm.pdf ).


Described differently, there are two general approaches to reducing 
transportation emissions: reduce emission rates per vehicle-kilometer 
or reduce total vehicle-travel. The first often seems easier, but if 
done correctly, the second provides far more benefits and so is often 
best overall (http://www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf ).

Currently proposed emission reduction programs (particularly those 
that rely on cap-and-trade) will not implement mobility management as 
much as optimal, and will miss an opportunity to help address other 
planning objectives, such as congestion reductions, crash reductions, 
consumer savings and improved mobility for non-drivers. It is up to 
people who understand the wider value of mobility management to 
educate energy analysts about these issues, so mobility management 
can receive the support justified.

Please let me know if you have comments or questions.


Sincerely,
Todd Alexander Litman
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
litman at vtpi.org
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
"Efficiency - Equity - Clarity"