Internet-based scenarios and action plan for promoting
alternative fuels and alternative automotive technologies in
EU-countries
Amela Ajanovic, Reinhard Haas
Energy Economies Group, Vienna University of Technology
Brussels, 01.03.2011
Content
1. Introduction
2. Internet based scenarios
3. Action Plan: Method of approach
4. 10 hypotheses of the Action Plan
5. Conclusions
Deriving scenarios and action plan
• … to derive scenarios and to formulate precise and concrete
recommendations in an action plan
• The scenarios derived for selected EU countries will show
which developments are possible in the next years if the proper
policies are implemented.
• Web tool: Play Policy Maker!
CO2-emissions: What is possible to 2020?
BAU: CO2 emissions
500
450
?
Mill. t CO2_equ
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2000
2005
Gasoline
Diesel
2010
CNG/LPG
2015
Bioethanol
2020
Biodiesel
Biogas
2025
Electricity
2030
Hydrogen
Cost curve of CO2-reduction (preliminary results)
2000
1800
1600
Electric passenger car
EUR/ton CO2
1400
1200
Efficiency 2
1000
Efficiency 1
800
Registration taxes
600
Hybrids
400
Fuel taxes
200
Biodiesel
Bioethanol
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
CO2-reduction (Mill tons CO2)
Fuel tax 1
Fuel tax 2
Biodiesel
Bioethanol
Hybrid
Efficiency 1
Reg tax 1
Efficiency 2
E-mobility
Reg tax 2
100
The ALTER-MOTIVE model:
0.
Historical development
1.
Assumptions about future development of income and fuel price
2.
Energy consumption
3.
Travel distance (vkm)
4.
Fuel intensity
5.
Number of cars (stock)
6.
New Registered Cars (1000/yr)
7.
Fuel price (w and w/o tax)
8.
Costs of cars (w and w/o tax)
- Registration tax
- Ownership tax
- Procurement of BEV
9.
Service price (EUR/km)
10. Size of cars / share of small, medium and large cars
Ps_Stock
PF
τ
PCEt  PCEt 1
Pst  Pst 1
VSTt  VSTtF1
Y
vkmt  vkmt 1 (1  
)(1  
)(1  
)
VSTt  VSTt 1   PCE
VST
Pst 1
VSTt 1
t 1new
τREG
t
V_new
V_Stock
vkm
fCO2_SP
E  vkm* FI
IC_new
size
CO2
E
Learning
FI 
Ps_new
FI new  f ( pF )
FI_stock
Standard
FI_new
FI SVSTS  FI M VSTM  FI LVSTL
VSTS  VSTM  VSTL
Web tool: Play Policy Maker!
Internet based scenarios
- BAU
scenario
- Policy scenarios
Play policy-maker:
•Select countries
•Show business-as-usual scenario
•Edit policy
•Results
Select countries
•EU-15
•AT
•DE
•SE
•NL…..
Show business-as-usual scenario
•Show assumptions (GDP, price increase…)
•Start demo version
Edit policy
•Biofuels (Quote, tax, subventions…)
•Standards
•Fuel tax
•Car taxes
•Quotas
•Procurement Policies
Select results:
•Energy consumption by fuel
•CO2 by fuel
•Vehicle stock
•New car registrations
•Policy scenario versus BAU
Policy scenario: Energy consumption
BAU: Energy consumption
7000
Energy consumption (PJ)
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
2000
2005
Gasoline
Diesel
2010
CNG/LPG
2015
Bioethanol
2020
Biodiesel
Biogas
2025
Electricity
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
2000
2030
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
Hydrogen
Gasoline
Diesel
CNG/LPG
Bioethanol
Biodiesel
Biogas
Electricity
Hydrogen
BAU vs Policy scenario: Vehicle stock
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
7000
200000
6000
150000
5000
1000 cars
Energy consumption (PJ)
Energy consumption (PJ)
7000
4000
3000
100000
2000
50000
1000
0
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
0
2000
Energy BAU
2005
2010
2015
2020
Energy POLICY
BAU
POL
2025
2030
Action Plan
Top-Down
analysis
Project
perceptions
Evaluation of
Case Studies
Feedback from
Stakeholders
Expectations from experts
guesses up to 2020
Stakeholders
comments (by category)
Recommendations
for Action Plan
- Action Plan is a LIVING document which will be
updated and fine-tuned continuously
TARGETS OF THE ACTION PLAN
•
Ultimative objective: REDUCE CO2-EMISSIONS
•
WHICH EFFECTS contribute to REDUCE CO2EMISSIONS?
–
–
–
–
–
•
Reduce
Improve
Switch
Increase public awareness
Substitute
WHICH POLICIES/ACTIONS (e.g. increase
registration tax) do we consider to have an impact
(also or not) on the above-mentioned EFFECTS?
Hypotheses of the Action Plan
10 MAJOR HYPOTHESES FOR HEADING TOWARDS
SUSTAINABLE PASSENGER CAR TRANSPORT
1. CONVERT FUEL TAXES TO CO2-BASED TAX AND
ADAPT AT 20% ON TOP OF THE CURRENT
MAXIMUM LEVEL
-An average increase of fuel taxes by 20% would reduce
CO2-emissions in EU-15 by 7% up to 2020 compared to
BAU.
- This tax should take into account the differences between
the WTW-CO2-emissions of all fuels and could consider
differences in GDP of countries!
RECYCLING OF TAXES FROM PASSENGER CARS
Use tax revenues to
• reduce taxes on wages and ensure balanced burden for
different social groups;
• provide incentives for using zero-emission transport
modes (walking, biking …)!
• improve performance of public transport !
2. NEW VEHICLES:
REQUIREMENTS TO THE CAR MANUFACTURING
INDUSTRY
- One major policy measure to reduce fuel consumed per km
driven is the enforcement of standards.
- The scenario analysis in ALTER-MOTIVE shows that an
improvement of standards for the aggregate of all segments
of sold vehicles in every country by 4% per year cuts CO2
emissions by about 10% up to 2020.
-This is linked to an emission target of 75 g/km CO2_equ.
3. PROMOTE ALTERNATIVE FUELS FOR PUBLIC
VEHICLES IN CITIES!
- The case studies analysed has proven that alternative
fuels – regardless whether it is hybrid electric, CNG,
LNG, biogas, plant oil or biodiesel in cities – have clearly
indicated that this is a promising approach to be pursued
further. It has a high acceptance, CO2 emission savings are
significant, economic performance is reasonable and it
raises public awareness!
4. PROVIDE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR “EMISSIONFREE” VEHICLES
-Battery electric vehicles and fuel cell vehicles may to
some extent contribute to a relief of over-all CO2emissions and may especially in cities contribute to
improve air quality.
-It is recommended that the electricity supply industry
and municipalities design joint roadmaps for an efficient
development of infrastructure.
-Overall ecological performance
5. PROMOTE BIOFUELS 1st GEN. CAUTIOUSLY
- BF should be exempted from general excise taxes but a WTWbased CO2-tax should be implemented.
-It must also be ensured that the ecological performance of BF
1st improves and meets continuously tougher standards regarding
net CO2_equ-emissions.
-These standards should be subject to a rigorous monitoring and
a pan-European certification scheme.
-Passenger cars might not be the priority target for biofuels,
freight transport could make more sense!
6. EFFICIENT R&D FOR 2nd GEN. BIOFUELS AND
HYDROGEN
-The time horizon of this project is 2020. Within the
remaining period it is very unlikely that either 2nd gen biofuels
or hydrogen enter the market in a significant quantity.
- It is very important that R&D is intensified focussing
especially on a more efficient conversion of feedstock and
primary energy carriers into these alternative fuels.
- Further pilot projects are needed to come down the learning
curve! This should finally also lead to more cost-effective
production paths and market competitiveness.
7. REVISE REGISTRATION TAX SYSTEM
EUROPEAN-WIDE!
- The registration tax should reflect the LCA-based carbon
emissions (and the other external costs) of the production of a
vehicle leading towards a progressive system taxing larger
cars remarkably higher.
8. INTRODUCE AND TIGHTEN STANDARDS FOR
THE “STOCK OF CARS”!
- There is a huge gap between car fuel intensity achieved in
the laboratories and on-road fuel efficiency performed.
- A strict check of cars on-road (surveillance like for speed)
regarding CO2-emissions could kick-out the worst
vehicles.
9. INTRODUCE AND EXTEND
EMISSION-FREE ZONES!
- Starting with small zones in cities where only
emission-free vehicles are allowed is an approach that
stimulates the demand for zero-emission vehicles
without providing subsidies and without leading to the
danger of additional transport caused by just adding
electric vehicles to the existing car stock.
- Plan and provide charging stations for BEV and H2vehicles close to the emission-free zones.
10. TEACH AND PROCURE ECO-DRIVING!
The way of driving can save about 20% of fuel intensity.
-To harvest this potential we suggest to introduce a
rigorous EU-wide (and beyond) mandatory learning
programme for fuel-saving driving.
-This activity must be accompanied by proper
infrastructure for organizing traffic flows and the
introduction of electronic systems supporting ecodriving.
OTHER MEASURES SUGGESTED?
Please specify!
PRIORITY OF MEASURES ?
Please comment on the order presented above
regarding the priorities of action!
4. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS
 There is no “one size fits all” measure;
 A quite broad portfolio of actions has to be
implemented to finally meet environmental targets
(also to avoid to bet on the wrong horse!) ;
 A major recommendation will be to focus on finetuning, adaptation and exchange of lessons learned –
between countries and regions.
Please visit
www.alter-motive.org
Use discussion forum
and
„Play Policy Maker“
Thank you!