Air Pollution and Transportation Policy Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Should Be Addressed by Technology, Not Behavior

1
Air Pollution and Transportation PolicyMotor
Vehicle Air Pollution Should Be Addressed by
Technology, Not Behavior

• Joel Schwartz
• Visiting Fellow
• American Enterprise Institute
• June 25, 2005

2
Addressing Air Quality through Transportation
Policy

• 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and 1991 ISTEA
• Require that transportation policy be constrained
  by air quality goals
• Conformity Regional transportation plans must
  conform to regional air quality plansthat is,
  planned road projects must not cause future motor
  vehicle emissions to exceed levels permitted by
  air quality plans
• Lose federal transportation funds if fail to
  demonstrate conformity
• ISTEA and CAA arguably made air quality the
  premier objective of the nations surface
  transportation programs.
• NEPA provides a separate means to challenge road
  projects, potentially causing years of delay

3
Two Ways to Reduce Motor Vehicle Emissions

• Improve Technology
• Inherently cleaner cars
• Improve on existing gasoline technology
• Develop alternative fuel technologies
• Change Behavior
• Induce people to drive less
• Make driving more expensive, less convenient
• Provide alternative modes, such as transit
• Change land use to support alternatives and
  discourage driving
• Induce people to maintain their cars better

4
Only Improving Gasoline Technology Has Been both
Effective and Cost Effective

• Federal and state policies include all methods,
  but only technology has been effective and only
  gasoline-based technology has been cost effective
  for reducing motor vehicle emissions
• Technology has stayed and will continue to stay
  way ahead of increases in total driving
• Behavioral methods have been and continue to be a
  costly failure, and a distraction from approaches
  that would genuinely bring cleaner air faster
• Behavioral approaches are still popular, because
  they serve anti-suburb, anti-automobile, and
  energy-rationing goals of policymakers and
  activists

5
Air Quality/Transportation/Land Use Policy Link
Goes Back to 1970s

• Clean Air Act linked transportation and air
  quality
• 1970 Clean Air Act required transportation
  control plans
• Conformity in 1977 strengthened in 1990
• States refused to implement TCPs in early 1970s.
  EPA was forced by court order to promulgate
  federal TCPs in 1973
• SF Bay Area TCP a VMT reduction of 97 percent
  is necessary if the national standard for
  photochemical oxidants is to be attained by
  1977.
• Plan included limits on construction of parking
  lots, parking surcharges, carpool lanes, employer
  rideshare, transit, etc.
• EPA reluctantly included a provision for gasoline
  rationing, but said such rationing would be
  needed to attain the standards in 1977
• Also vehicle inspection and retrofit programs
• States still refused to implement the plans and
  EPA lacked institutional capacity for federal
  implementation.
• Congress took away EPAs authority to implement
  pricing or restrict parking
• 1977 CAA amendments added weak conformity
  requirement, but did not require restrictions on
  personal travel
• Highway funds could be withheld only if states
  failed to submit an acceptable air quality plan

6
Huge Declines In Air Pollution Despite Huge
Increases in Driving

• Total VMT more than doubled between 1975 and
  2003, but air pollution of all kinds declined
  substantially
• Fine particulate matter measurements started
  later
• PM2.5 declined nearly 50 between 1980 and 2004
• Today, entire nation attains federal standards
  for NO2, SO2, and CO
• Near full attainment for PM10 and 1-hour ozone
• Only tougher new standardsPM2.5 and 8-hour
  ozoneremain an attainment challenge

Sources EPA, FDOT
7
Vehicle Emissions Improvements Continue to Stay
Well Ahead of Growth
Emission trend in SF Bay Area Tunnel Car/SUV VOC
emission rate is dropping about 13/year
gasoline consumption is increasing about
2.7/year in fast-growing areas of California. So
total VOC still declining more than 10/year.
Sources Kirchstetter, Kean, Harley (UC
Berkeley), Caltrans.
8
Fleet Turnover Will Continue to Clean the Air

• At any given age, more-recent vehicle models are
  cleaner than earlier models
• Means fleet turnover will continue to clean the
  air as earlier models leave the fleet
• SUVs and pickups started out worse, but improved
  more rapidly than cars
• SUV/pickup emissions have been same as cars since
  1996 model year for VOC 2001 model year for NOx

Denver vehicle inspection data, 1996-2002
9
Motor vehicle air pollution has been solved as a
long-term problem

• Improvements will continue
• Automobile emissions are dropping about 10/year
  as fleet turns over to inherently cleaner cars,
  SUVs, pickups
• Fleet meeting 2004 EPA standardsthe fleet that
  will be on the road in 15-20 yearswill be at
  least 90 cleaner per-mile than current average
  car
• Net reductions of more than 80, even after
  accounting for VMT growth
• Diesel truck standards were tightened in 1998 and
  2003. Additional 90 reduction required in 2007

• But anti-automobile activists arent aware of the
  real-world data
• sprawl and higher-emitting SUVs are
  proliferating faster than technological fixes can
  keep up. David Goldberg, Smart Growth America
  in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution 2003
• More Highways, More Pollution, 2004 report by
  Public Interest Research Group

10
EPAs Emissions Model Also Predicts
Near-Elimination of Emissions

• EPAs MOBILE6 emissions model prediction
• Recent data suggest the model understates future
  improvements
• Model overestimates emissions of recent models
  and underestimates emissions of older models

11
Can We Get there Faster? If So, How?

• Worst 5 of automobiles produce 50 of tailpipe
  volatile organic compound emissions
• Mainly middle-aged and older vehicles in poor
  repair
• Identify these vehicles on the road with remote
  sensing and offer owners money to scrap
• There are only so many 1982 Buick Regals left on
  the road. Once you scrap them, theyre gone for
  good.
• Cost would be no more than a few thousand dollars
  per ton of ozone- and particulate-forming
  emissions eliminated and probably less

12
What About Behavioral Measures?

• Ineffective and very expensive
• Hundreds of billions in transit subsidies over
  the last few decades, but transits market share
  continues to decline
• Even with proponents own cost and emissions
  numbers, light-rail costs more than 1
  million/ton of pollution eliminated heavy rail
  costs more than 100,000/ton
• Regulators normally dont consider a measure cost
  effective unless is costs less than about
  10,000/ton
• Density does little to reduce driving doubling
  density is associated with 10 decline in
  per-capita VMT
• Increase in congestion offsets some or all
  emission gains
• Indirect source fees miss the target people who
  can afford to buy new houses or shop at suburban
  malls dont drive high-polluting cars
• Most other behavioral measures cost a few hundred
  thousand per ton e.g., bike/pedestrian paths,
  employer trip reduction.
• Europes experience also shows limits of
  behavioral policies
• Europe is experiencing rapid growth in per-capita
  driving and suburbanization and declining transit
  market share, despite 5/gal gasoline and better
  transit.

13
Tying Transportation Policy to Behavioral Air
Quality Measures Imposes Huge Costs

• Diversion of hundreds of billions of dollars to
  transportation modes that hardly anyone chooses
  to use
• Increases in road congestion erode benefits of
  automobile travel
• Unnecessary and undesirable constraints on
  peoples lifestyle choices and mobility

14
A Better Way

• Acknowledge that technology has solved the
  long-term problem of motor vehicle air pollution
• Fleet turnover will eliminate most remaining
  motor vehicle pollution
• Deal with near-term conformity problems by
  addressing current high-polluting cars
• This is the quickest and cheapest way to
  near-term emission reductions
• Focus transportation infrastructure and policy
  decisions on peoples real transportation needs

15
Contact information

• Joel Schwartz
• joel_at_joelschwartz.com
• 916.203.6309
• www.joelschwartz.com