Observations on energy and sustainable mobility First preliminary version

1
Observations on energy and sustainable
mobilityFirst preliminary version

• Survey as starting point for EU-presidency high
  level conference on 19 and 20 October, 2004

2
What do we intend with these observations?

• To provide a starting-point for discussions with
  our European partners in preparation for the
  Conference
• To identify common challenges, interests and
  concerns, but also creative tensions
• Based on survey of policies in EU-member states
  with own car industry, USA, Japan, EC
• By stimulating an enquiry mode, not an advocacy
  mode

3
EU-ambitions towards sustainable mobility

• EU wants to be less dependent on fossil fuels
  coming from trouble areas
• EU wants to be the worlds most competitive
  economy in 2010 (Lisbon)
• EU wants to reduce its carbon emissions by 8
  overall in 2008-2012 compared to 1990 (Kyoto)
• EU wants cleaner, healthier and more efficient
  cities

4
Current trends (1)

• Oil production will peak in 2037 (US DfE)
• EU-dependence on imported oil will grow from 75
  today to more than 85 in 2020
• Transport is responsible for 32 of EU-energy
  consumption (and 28 of EU CO2-emissions), and
  its share is expected to increase
• EC expects CO2 emissions of transport in 2010
• To increase by 17 (compared to 2000) without any
  measures
• To hold at 7 due to agreements with car industry
• EEA great concern about meeting Kyoto-agreement
  by EU-countries

5
Current trends (2)

• Sharp growth in ownership (up to 100 1990-2000)
  and use of private cars (up to 70) in new member
  states
• External costs attributable to congestion will
  increase in 2010 to approx. 1 of EU-GDP
• Air pollution levels (esp. SO2, NO2, PM, HC) have
  been falling and are still falling in W-European
  cities however remains serious problem
• Noise pollution is constant in most urban areas,
  or has improved marginally remains concern

6
Observations the key players

• Observed key players
• Member states with own car industry (D, GB, F, I
  and S)
• New member states (CR, H, PL)
• USA and Japan
• Car industry
• Energy suppliers p.m.
• Cities
• NGOs p.m.

7
Observations member states on problems and
drivers

• Major drivers to be active in sustainable
  mobility have been stable over last decade
• Since 2001 mainly re-ranking of issues
• More focus on security of energy supply (9/11)
• Climate change in transport more persistent
  problem
• Not one single issue to be named the driving
  force for policy towards sustainable mobility
• Each country has its own combination of drivers
• This diversity is an opportunity for involvement
  of everyone starting point for our conference

8
Observations the new member states

• Air quality in urban areas is major driver
• New fleet will be much cleaner, but strong
  increase in car-ownership is expected
• Climate change and energy supply not much of an
  issue
• Any transport strategy has to match with economic
  development perspective
• Focus on building new roads efficient/clean cars
  could help to decrease EU-preference for
  modal-shift
• Possibilities for biofuels

9
Observations other key players - USA

• Securing energy supply as major driver (9/11)
• Choice for Hydrogen (FreedomCAR, Hydrogen Fuel
  Initiative) 1,7 bn. budget for FCV RD
• No benchmark targets for renewable sources
• International Partnership for the Hydrogen
  economy competitively priced hydrogen powered
  vehicle nearby refueling infrastructure in 2020
• Air pollution in urban areas as major driving
  force to regulate emission standards
• California front runner, generally followed
  later in time by federal standards
• Initiatives to rise fuel economy standards (CAFE)
  highly controversial

10
Observations other key players - Japan

• Major drivers to be active
• Security of energy supply (50 energy demand and
  98 transport dependent on (imported) oil)
• Kyoto reducing CO2 emission by transport in 2010
  to 1995-level
• Air quality in urban areas among the thoughest
  emission standards in the world on NOx PM
• Ambitions of car industry (esp. Toyota Honda)
• Ambitious targets
• 10 mln. EFVs in 2010 (20) now 3,2 mln.
• 50.000 FCVs in 2010 1 mln. in 2020
• Many options followed hybrid most favourite
  option?
• Japan considers EU as unattractive market too
  fragmented

11
Observations other key players car industry

• (Almost) Everyone involved in developing EFVs
  (hybrids, FCVs, ). Frontrunners Toyota, Honda,
  DaimlerChrysler
• Complaining about fragmentation in demand volume
  is key driver for investment decisions
• Call for clear policy perspectives / frameworks
  but dont create a market artificially
• Focus on well-to-wheel needed not on vehicles
  alone
• Voluntary agreements and public-private
  partnerships

12
Observation other key players - Cities

• Many ambitions and initiatives throughout Europe
  (e.g. Stockholm, Rotterdam, Bremen)
• Every city keeps several technology options open
• Perception by cities EC and car industry go for
  hydrogen little interest for short/medium term
• Complaint car industry not able (or willing) to
  supply what they offer
• Complaint diverging legislation and regulations
  within EU frustrates introduction new
  technologies (clean cars)
• Lack of information on demand-side fleet
  managers dont know what options are available

13
Observations technical developments (1)

• Improvements in internal combustion technology
  and cleaner fuels will continue to reduce
  CO2-emissions but marginally
• Fuel cell technology offers improvement,
  providing that hydrogen is produced renewably,
  but a long way to go on the path to
  commercialisation
• Next 20 yrs improvement current technology and
  hybrids will generate greater benefits than
  introduction on fuel cell technology

14
Observations technical developments (2)

• Increased usage of biofuels is expected future
  biofuels will be far more effective than current
  generation. Usage will be limited by
  considerations of economics and availibility
• LPG, natural gas and designer diesels
  (gas-to-liquid) will provide niche solutions
  where urban air quality issues exist
• Need for well-to-wheel analysis and life-cycle
  analysis to be able to make rational choices

15
Emerging perceptions on sustainable mobility (1)

• There is no inspiring and coherent long term
  European perspective
• There is a fragmentation in activities and a lack
  of overview around Europe that leaves the joint
  potential to reach EU-ambitions unrealized
• Lack of information about activities in other
  countries
• Diverging activities, perceptions and policies
• Parties have started to connect, but
  technological, economical and political networks
  need to be aligned

16
Emerging perceptions on sustainable mobility (2)

• Focus on individual issues (congestion,
  emissions, noise, etc.) nears end of its
  effectiveness
• We do not know enough about the role and impact
  of consumer behaviour in innovation processes
• Focus on individual (technical and policy)
  solutions tends to fail in solving the problem
• No single silver bullet in dealing with
  sustainable mobility
• Governments have bad track record in picking
  technology winners
• Some countries have chosen to develop technology
  neutral policy frameworks

17
Conclusions (1)

• Ambitions for securing energy supply
• Hard to achieve, for world need for energy will
  double by 2050 and transport will remain highly
  dependent on (imported) oil
• Oil prices are expected to remain low for some
  decades (so no natural driver to change to
  alternative fuels)
• Modest role for alternative fuels in next 30 yrs
• Natural gas and biofuels make (modest)
  contribution to EU energy independency within
  next 10-20 years
• Q do we value reducing energy dependency that
  important that we would be willing to intervene
  in marketmechanism and set strict EU-targets
  (e.g. 20 alternative fuels in 2020)?

18
Conclusions (2)

• Ambitions to be the most competitive economy
• EU is said to be 10 years behind USA and Japan
  with regard to innovations in car industry
• Investments in RD are fragmented, therefore
  joint potential will not be realised sufficiently
• Weak link between RD and deployment of
  innovations
• Q would a long-term joint perspective on
  sustainable mobility be a precondition to boost
  innovation (in fuels and vehicles) in Europe?

19
Conclusions (3)

• Ambitions to control climate change
• Mobility and exhaust of greenhouse gases will
  increase
• Kyoto overall-target (EU-8 in 2010 compared to
  1990) will be difficult to reach
• Reduction of 40 60 by 2030 (Sustainable level
  defined in NMP4, OESO, UK and Sweden not an EU
  target!) will not be reached
• Q what targets after 2010 would be effective to
  control climate change and should there be
  dedicated targets for transport?

20
Conclusions (4)

• Ambitions urban quality of life
• Targets NOx, SOx, etc. can be reached with
  current technology (implementation of Euro 5
  6), but possibly not within timeframe of current
  EU-directives
• Noise-reduction is possible with current
  technology but hardly any progress is made
• Congestion will increase in European cities
• Q how could we achieve synergism between long
  term goals (climate change, energy supply) and
  attaining short term goals (urban quality of
  life) more rapidly?

21
What is needed to bridge the gap?

• Current efforts and (improving) existing
  technologies will not be sufficient to achieve
  all EU-ambitions transition is needed
• Need for partnership between government, market,
  research and ngos / society

22
What would we like to achieve with our initiative?

• Joint European strategy / roadmap on transition
  towards sustainable mobility, that could include
• An ambitious, inspiring common goal/perspective
• Technology neutral policy frameworks and criteria
• Next steps, balanced with long term vision
• Effective roles of governments, industry, ngos
  etc.
• Goal conference to phrase recommendations for
  work programme of the new Commission

23
Process of preparation

• Dec Jan Feb March Apr May
  Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

TC
Draft Survey Actions
Final Survey Actions
EC
Contents Processing
Learning from innovations
Interactive knowledge network
24
Creating momentum

• We are looking for possible alliances on
  key-issues / dilemmas of joint interest that
  could create momentum for the conference (and
  beyond)
• Snowball-groups (10-12 persons) with
  representatives of governments, NGOs, industry,
  science, supported and facilitated by Conference
  Team

25
Possible Snowballs

• How to formulate a common goal that is ambitious
  and inspiring, technology neutral, but also
  guarantees improvement?
• How to create markets worth investing for?
• How can integration of issues be more effective
  find inspiration in a small example (Austria)
• How to move from public acceptance towards
  public demand use knowledge and experience
  from NGOs and the industry to learn about the
  role of human behaviour in innovation processes

26
We would like you to join us !

• For example
• In commenting these observations
• In helping to identify possible snowballs and
  in taking part in the snowball-groups
• In contributing to our interactive knowledge
  network
• In attending the Conference
• In supporting the transition process towards
  sustainable mobility beyond 2004

27
How to contact us?

• EU-Conference on Energy and Sustainable Mobility
• P.O. Box 20901
• 2500 EX The Hague
• The Netherlands
• Phone [phone]
• Fax [phone]
• E-mail eu-conference_at_dgp.minvenw.nl
• Internet www.