Download European Commission - Plan Estratégico de Infraestructuras y

SECRETARÍA DE ESTADO DE INFRAESTRUCTURAS Y PLANIFICACIÓN
MINISTERIO
DE FOMENTO
DIRECCIÓN GENERAL
DE PLANIFICACIÓN Y
COORDINACIÓN TERRITORIAL
CENTRO DE ESTUDIOS
Y EXPERIMENTACIÓN
DE OBRAS PÚBLICAS
Encuentro:
“Objetivos ambientales”
Environmental Objectives for Transport
Jacques Delsalle
European Commission
DG Environment, Clean Air and Transport Unit
Madrid, 14 de octubre de 2004
European Commission - DG Environment
European Commission - DG Environment
Environmental Objectives for Transport
Madrid,
14 October 2004
Jacques Delsalle
European Commission
DG Environment, Clean Air and Transport Unit
Agenda

Integration Transport – Environment


Air Pollution





Setting Environmental Objectives
C.A.F.E. Baseline
Setting Targets for Clean Air
Climate Change
Nature and Biodiversity
Conclusions
European Commission - DG Environment
Integration
Transport-Environment

Integration Transport –
Environment


Air Pollution





Setting Environmental
Objectives
C.A.F.E. Baseline
Setting Targets for Clean
Air
Climate Change
Nature and Biodiversity
Conclusions
European Commission - DG Environment
Background:
Cardiff, Lisbon, Gothenburg



1998 : Cardiff: sector-wide strategies for the promotion of
environmental integration in all policy areas. Transport strategy
submitted to Helsinki Council October 1999.
2000 : Lisbon process : make the EU the most dynamic and
competitive economic region of the world.
2001: Gothenburg: Integrate environmental concerns into
Lisbon process.



Assess progress against economic, social and environmental
indicators.
New approach to policy-making and emphasised improved policy
co-ordination (e.g. internalisation of external costs)
Extended Impact Assessment for all major Commission proposals
European Commission - DG Environment
Integration : how it works
(or should work…)
Policy:
Long term and intermediate targets
Economic Instruments
Focus on sensitive areas
Environmental
policymakers
Transport sector
Better knowledge
of environmental
impact
Being explicit about
what is to be
achieved from the
environmental point of
view.
Better knowledge
of social costs of
measures
Find out how this is
best achieved (mix of
policies that best
accommodate all
objectives, including
the environmental
ones)
Knowledge:
Information, Indicators
Models, Integrated assessment
Cost Benefits Analysis (valuation external
costs)
European Commission - DG Environment
Indicators: T.E.R.M.

Transport and Environment Reporting Mechanism




Developed by the European Environment Agency (EEA), jointly with
the Commission's DG Environment, DG Transport and Energy and
Eurostat
Monitor progress in integrating environmental concerns into
transport policy throughout Europe
Comprises 40-odd indicators, which cover all relevant aspects
of the transport and environment system
Building blocks for regularly published environmental issue
reports


http://themes.eea.eu.int/Sectors_and_activities/transport/indicators
http://reports.eea.eu.int/technical_report_2004_3/en/Technical_repo
rt_3-2004_web.pdf
European Commission - DG Environment
Models : help to separate
policy and technical issues

Decision makers:

Models

Decide about

Identify cost-effective and
robust measures:



Ambition level
(environmental targets)
Level of acceptable risk
Willingness to pay





Balance controls over
different countries, sectors
and pollutants
Regional differences in
Europe
Side-effects of present
policies
Maximize synergies with
other air quality problems
Search for robust strategies
European Commission - DG Environment
Environmental Effects


Climate Change
Air pollution






Health impacts
Acidification
Eutrophication
Ozone formation
Damage to buildings




Today
Land use
Disturbance and
segmentation of habitats
Other:



Noise
Biodiversity:
Visual intrusion
Severance of
communities / liveability
of cities / children
Consumption of energy
and resources
European Commission - DG Environment
Air Pollution

Integration Transport –
Environment


Air Pollution





Setting Environmental
Objectives
C.A.F.E. Baseline
Setting Targets for Clean
Air
Climate Change
Nature and Biodiversity
Conclusions
European Commission - DG Environment
Objective (6th Environmental
Action Plan (EAP))


“To achieve levels of air quality that do not give rise
to unacceptable impacts on, and risks to human
health and the environment.”
Policy Approach


Implementation: to ensure that air quality standards, are met
by 2005 and 2010 accordingly and that standards for
vehicles and stationary sources of pollution are complied
with;
Coherency: to develop a comprehensive, integrated and
coherent framework for all air legislation and related policy
initiatives under the title ‘Clean Air For Europe’ (C.A.F.E.)
European Commission - DG Environment
Air quality impacts
analysed in CAFE

Health:



Loss in life expectancy attributable to PM2.5
Premature deaths attributable to ozone
Vegetation:





Ozone damage to forests (AOT40)
Excess acid deposition to forests
Excess acid deposition to semi-natural ecosystems
Excess acid deposition to lakes
Excess nitrogen deposition

All impacts shown for “no further climate measures” scenario,
average results of 1997, 1999, 2000 & 2003 meteorological
conditions
European Commission - DG Environment
C.A.F.E. Baseline
(September 2004)

1) Emissions will further decline


Present legislation and structural change will significantly reduce
air pollution in the future
Expected changes between 2000 and 2020 (EU-25):






2) But: in 2020, Air quality remains threat to human health:



SO2: -65%
NOx: -50%
VOC: -45%
NH3:
-4%
PM2.5: -45%
Approximately 5 months loss in life expectancy due to PM
Several 1000s premature deaths due to ozone
3) Sustainable conditions for vegetation will not be reached
European Commission - DG Environment
Loss in life expectancy 2020 attributable to
anthropogenic PM2.5 [in months]
Despite emission
reductions up to 2020,
about 5 months of
average statistical life
expectancy is
projected to be lost
due to PM
Loss in average statistical
life expectancy
due to identified
anthropogenic PM2.5
Average of calculations for
1997, 1999, 2000 & 2003
meteorologies
Source: CAFE Baseline, RAINS (2004)
European Commission - DG Environment
Vegetation-relevant ozone
concentrations 2020 AOT40 [ppm.hours]
Also ozone remains an
problem for vegetation
and human health.
Critical level for forests:
5 ppm.hours
Average of calculations for 1997,
1999, 2000 & 2003 meteorologies
Source: CAFE Baseline, RAINS (2004)
European Commission - DG Environment
Excess of critical loads for
eutrophication 2020
55% of European
ecosystems will
receive too high
nitrogen deposition,
endangering biodiversity
Percentage of ecosystems area
with nitrogen deposition above
critical loads,
using grid-average deposition.
Average of calculations for 1997,
1999, 2000 & 2003 meteorologies
Source: CAFE Baseline, RAINS (2004)
European Commission - DG Environment
Relevance of sources
will change

Traditional “large polluters” will reduce their
contributions

Other sources will take over (Ships will surpass
land-based EU sources)




SO2: Ships, industrial processes, small sources
NOx: Ships, diesel heavy duty vehicles, off-road
Impacts on population exposure needs to be
further explored
Energy projections will influence future emissions
European Commission - DG Environment
Setting Targets for Clean Air

Integration Transport –
Environment


Air Pollution





Setting Environmental
Objectives
C.A.F.E. Baseline
Setting Targets for Clean
Air
Climate Change
Nature and Biodiversity
Conclusions
European Commission - DG Environment
Long–term objectives
for air pollution
Environment
6th EAP
«no significant
negative
impact »
Long-term
Objectives,
« Clean Air »
“Science”
based
Buildings
Cultural
heritage
Threshold
Health:
WHO
Guidelines
No Threshold
Critical loads +
dynamic =
LT objective
Still to be considered
AQ guideline value =
LT objective
•Define acceptable risk
European Commission - DG Environment
How to set interim targets in
C.A.F.E. WG TS&PA
Environmental
quality based
Model Runs
State/Impact values
Initial/Intermediate
Interim Targets
Principles
Risk reduction
Capping
Gap closure
Equity
Not
OK
Recommendations
for interim targets
Technology
e.g. impact of new
EURO standards
Additional
Model Runs
Sectoral
e.g. Transport
Agriculture
Results
OK
Behaviour
e.g. impact on
Driving forces
Cost/benefits
Optimalisation
European Commission - DG Environment
Modelling Framework
European Commission - DG Environment
Integrated assessment in CAFE
Energy/agriculture
projections
Driving Forces
Emission control
options
Emissions
Costs
OPTIMIZATION
BASELINE SCENARIO
Atmospheric dispersion
Health and environmental
impacts
Environmental
targets
European Commission - DG Environment
Climate Change

Integration Transport –
Environment


Air Pollution





Setting Environmental
Objectives
C.A.F.E. Baseline
Setting Targets for Clean
Air
Climate Change
Nature and Biodiversity
Conclusions
European Commission - DG Environment
Objective 6th Environmental
Action Plan (EAP)


“To stabilise the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse
gases at a level that will not cause unnatural variations of the
earth's climate.”
Targets (all economic sectors)





Reduce global GHG emissions by 70% over 1990 levels in the
longer term.
This means global reduction of 20 – 40% over 1990 by 2020
Short term: EU committed (Kyoto) to achieving - 8% by 2008-2012
Burden Sharing EU : Spain +15%
Policy approach (Transport)



Specific measures to enhance energy-efficiency, energy saving,
renewable energies, emissions other GHG than CO2.
Integration climate change objectives into the Community’s
sectoral policies
Structural changes : decoupling, modal shift, Alternative fuels and
appropriate engine technologies
European Commission - DG Environment
Greenhouse Gas emission from
Transport : Trends

“Greenhouse gas emission trends and projections in Europe
2003”, European Environment Agency, Dec. 2003



Between 1990 and 2001, carbon dioxide emissions from transport
increased 20 % in the EU. Road transport is by far the largest
emission source in the transport sector (92 %). Emissions
increased due to continuous increases in road transport volume
(passenger and freight).
Carbon dioxide emissions from international aviation and
navigation amounted to 6 % of total emissions in 2001, growing by
44 % from 1990 levels.
Nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from transport currently account for
only a small part of total EU greenhouse gas emissions but have
more than doubled from 1990 to 2001 due to an increase in the
transport volume of petrol cars equipped with catalysts. This is a
negative consequence of an overall effective policy for improving
air quality in Europe.
European Commission - DG Environment
Climate Change : setting a
sectoral target for emissions

Usual approach : “one-size-fits all” : reduction target is
allocated uniformly to different sectors (no information on the
reduction potential in the individual sectors)


Economic Evaluation of Sectoral Emission Reduction
Objectives for Climate Change (2001) (“Top-Down / Bottom-Up”)




This approach can be very costly: Following a least-cost route,
(different target / sector), cost of reaching Kyoto for EU may be
halvel (PRIMES, 2000)
Overall -8% Kyoto Target (1990-2010) means +25.6% for Transport
Spain: +15 % overall target, +44% for transport…
Need to update (forthcoming revised ECCP)



Revise macro-economic framework
Include non-technological abatement measures
Include ancillary benefits (e.g. air pollution)
European Commission - DG Environment
Nature and Biodiversity

Integration Transport –
Environment


Air Pollution





Setting Environmental
Objectives
C.A.F.E. Baseline
Setting Targets for Clean
Air
Climate Change
Nature and Biodiversity
Conclusions
European Commission - DG Environment
Objective 6th Environmental
Action Plan (EAP)


“To protect and restore the functioning of natural systems and
halt the loss of biodiversity in the European Union and globally.
To protect soils against erosion and pollution.”
Policy approach






Natura 2000 : protect and manage the most representative natural
areas and eco-systems
LIFE programme's nature projects
Bio-diversity Thematic Strategy.
Community legislation protecting water and air quality and
resources, and mandating environmental assessments of projects
and (in future) land-use plans and programmes.
Integration of environmental concerns in Common Agricultural and
Fisheries Policies
Integrated Coastal Zone Management.
European Commission - DG Environment
Land Fragmentation

Operational Objective :

Define and implement
procedures that suppose
a ‘meaningful’ application
of Article 6(3) and 6(4) of
the Habitat Directive
92/43/EC (Natura 2000) Plans and projects
affecting Natura 2000
sites 
European Commission - DG Environment
A four Stage Approach




1. Screening likely significant impacts upon the Natura 2000
site of a project or plan
2. Appropriate assessment of the impact, with respect to the
site’s structure and function and its conservation objectives.
Assessment of the potential mitigation of those impacts;
3. Assessment of alternative solutions (alternative ways of
achieving the objectives of the project or plan that avoid
adverse impacts)
4. Assessment of compensatory measures


where no alternative solutions exist and where adverse impacts
remain
where, in the light of an assessment of imperative reasons of
overriding public interest (IROPI), it is deemed that the project or
plan should proceed
European Commission - DG Environment
Conclusions

Develop knowledge networks across EU




Tools are available
Data may still be insufficient in some areas, but it is not a
reason to wait.
Stakeholder implication in target setting and policy
assessment
Integrate economic considerations in the target
definition and in the policy formulation




Cost-effectiveness of targets
Cost benefits analysis for alternatives
Economic instruments
Assessment equity and social issues
European Commission - DG Environment