Presentation on theme: "Getting From Problem to Solution: Reducing Diesel Pollution From Goods Movement Rich Kassel September 23, 2011"— Presentation transcript:
Getting From Problem to Solution: Reducing Diesel Pollution From Goods Movement Rich Kassel September 23, 2011 firstname.lastname@example.org
Introduction: A Vision of Goods Movement We all want and need stuffmore all the time Need to address all key pollution sources to create a sustainable goods movement future Believe it or not, the regulatory process is in place But turnover is slow – trucks, equipment, and ships last a long time So how do we speed things up in an economically and politically constrained world?
In 1995, most midtown PM at street- level came from diesel vehicles Average PM Source Contribution in Midtown Manhattan
NYC Transit Clean-Fuel Bus Program showed Clean Diesels possible
Applicable lessons from NYC Transit for the Goods Movement debate Use objective criteria: Technology-neutral, fuel-neutral measurement of PM and NOx reductions 90% of the NYC Transits emission benefits came from retiring and replacing the older buses regardless of fuel/technology chosen for the new buses Retrofits workedbut perhaps best only in sophisticated maintenance environments? Solutions that are scalable and replicable will provide benefits beyond the initial program
A Bit of Context: Goods Movement impacts In A Few Quick Slides
Reducing Ship Pollution Saves Lives Along Coasts and Inland Source: Corbett, J. J.; Winebrake, J. J.; Green, E. H.; Kasibhatla, P.; Eyring, V.; Lauer, A., Mortality from Ship Emissions: A Global Assessment. Environmental Science & Technology 2007, 41, (24), 8512–8518 Premature deaths from PM due to Ship Emissions Cleaner marine fuels would reduce nationwide ship health impacts by ~ 60 %.
Its not just PM – Goods Movement is a major CO2 emitter >30% efficiency <3 year Paybacks = > $70bn a year is being wasted >30% efficiency <3 year Paybacks = > $70bn a year is being wasted
EPA truck standards are cleanest in the world…but old trucks are dirty 0.010.10 0.2 1.2 2.5 4.0 5.0 1994 1998 2002 2007 2010010 NOx [g/HP-hr] PM [g/HP-hr] ULSD 15 PPM (7/06) 500 PPM (6/93) SULFUR
IMO Emissions Control Area Will Reduce Ship Pollution ECA: 200 nm from US and Canadian coast Two key components: 2015: Sulfur levels drop from todays >25,000 ppm to 1,000 ppm 2016: PM cut 85% and NOx cut 80% Benefits: 14,000 premature deaths and >$100B in net health costs by 2020
Comprehensive Program Will Avoid ~40,000 Premature Deaths Annually RuleCoversPremature Deaths Avoided 1999 Tier 2Cars, light trucks, SUVs4,300 2001 Highway DieselTrucks and Buses8,300 2004 Nonroad DieselFarm, Construction, etc.12,000 2008 Locomotive/MarineTrains and ships1,100 2010 Emission Control Area (IMO ECA) Ocean-going vessels w/in 200 nm of US 14,000 Note: Premature death numbers are annual estimates, as of 2020 for IMO ECA, 2030 for all others
U.S. Vehicle Regulations Are Extremely Cost-Effective Total Cost: approx. $13 Billion Total Benefits: approx. $290 Billion Costs Benefits
…But These Engines Last for Decades, So We Need to Accelerate the Phase-out… 2 Examples of Drayage Clean-up Worth Exploring
Example 1: POLA Clean Air Action Plan Resulted from NRDCs China Shipping lawsuit. Addressed all major sources of port pollution: trucks, ships, trains, cargo handling equipment. Set firm goals for reductions of diesel particulate matter from each source.
Solutions in the Clean Air Action Plan Diesel trucks: Progressive ban on older trucks Cargo container fee on dirty trucks Structural change in employment structure Ships: Cold ironing Cleaner fuel Speed reduction Cargo handling equipment: Electrification Trains: Anti-idling recommendations
Example 2: Developing the PANYNJ Truck Replacement Program Multi-stakeholder effort in 2009-2010, co- chaired by PANYNJ and NRDC Included all key sectors Why different than POLA?: Huge economic and political constraints after 2008 recession Different goals: truck replacements and reduced emissions only Container fees, labor issues not on the table
PANYNJ Truck Replacement and Phase Out Programs Truck Phase Out Program Phase 1: Ban pre-1994 NY engines, as of Jan. 2011 Phase 2: Ban pre-2007 engines, as of Jan. 2017 Trucks register in Drayage Truck Registry, voluntary sticker system Truck Replacement Program (TRP): Received 180 applications for 202 trucks (72% IOO) 63 trucks sold (70% IOO) Eligibility now expanded to trucks with 2003 or older engines Supplemental TRP $1.57M EPA grant; $4.3M PA funds (financing @5.25%) Eligibility: Trucks with engines 2003 or older Replacement vehicle must be 2007 emission compliant
2010 Drayage Truck Characterization Survey 20102008 Pre-1994 Frequent Callers196 (4.7%)709 (16%) Pre-1994 Total 390 (4.5%)2406 (15%) Total Frequent Callers41894544 Total Trucks 849616286 Most Common MY20001999 & 2000 Average MY20001998
Next Steps for PANYNJ Clean Truck Programand other new programs? Given budget constraints, will there be continued financial support? What additional steps need to be taken for phase 2 (i.e., post-2007 engines in 2017)? Can EPA Smartway Drayage Program help accelerate clean-up? If ships are wasting fuel, can ports create incentives for ship efficiency too?
Conclusions Thanks to EPA and IMO regulations, new truck, equipment, and ship engines will be much cleaner than old models But turnover is very, very slow No one-size-fits-all approach to accelerating the clean-up: POLA and PANYNJ show different ways to eliminate old trucks Successful solutions must take into account needs of all stakeholders and local environmental, economic, and political conditions
If A Picture is Worth A Thousand Words, How Much Are These Two Slides Worth?
Southern California Cancer Risk from Air Pollution: 2000 Data Source: SCAQMD, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study II, March 2000 Cancers per million
So. CA Cancer Risk from Air Pollution: When All Trucks, Equipment, and Ships are Clean Source: SCAQMD, Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study II, March 2000 Cancers per million