Simulations of alternative scenarios for the further reduction of light duty vehicle CO2 emissions in the European Union: an application of the European TREMOVE 2 model

TREMOVE is an integrated simulation model developed for the strategic analysis of the costs and effects of a wide range of transport policy instruments and measures. The model covers 21 countries and all relevant transport modes. Depending on the version, the model covers the 1995-2020 or 1995-2030 period, with yearly intervals. The first versions of the TREMOVE model were developed in 1997-1998 by the Catholic University of Leuven and Standard & Poors DRI. The more recent TREMOVE 2 versions have been developed by Transport and Mobility Leuven, the Catholic University of Leuven, and their subcontractors. In 2005, the model was used as one of the tools for the assessment of the mid-term implementation of the White Paper on European Transport Policy. In 2006 the TREMOVE model has been used for the impactassessment of the European Commission proposal on new Euro 5 light duty vehicle emission standards. The model was applied also for the impact assessment of the new European strategy to further reduce the CO2 emissions of cars, beyond the 140 g per km objective agreed with the automotive industry for 2008/2009. This paper presents the latter analysis on options to reduce the CO2 emissions of cars beyond the 140 g (on the test-cycle) objective for 2008/9. An extensive set of scenarios has been simulated. Each scenario simulation assessed the impact of a specific package of policy measures. The main policy measure in each of the packages is an extension of thecurrent agreement to reduce car test-cycle CO2 emissions by improved technologies at the vehicle level. Extensions towards target values of 120, 125, 130 and 135 g in 2012 were studied. In most of the studied packages, this main measure is combined with other supplementary measures. These supplementary measures include the accelerated introduction of gear shift indicators, tyre pressure monitoring systems, low rolling resistance tyres, lowviscosity lubricants and more fuel-efficient mobile air conditioning systems, as well as technical measures on vans and light duty trucks. For eachpolicy package TREMOVE was used to forecast the impact on fuel consumption and emissions, as well as impacts on overall transport demand and its modal split, on vehicle fleet composition, on transport costs and on fiscal revenues for the government. Finally, TREMOVE provided estimates for the cost-effectiveness of each of the policy packages, as well as for their overall welfare effect. Next to exhaust CO2 emissions, also emissions of other greenhouse gases (CH4, N2O) and pollutants (PM, NOx) have been included in the analysis. Furthermore, impacts on well-to-tank greenhouse gas emissions related to production and distribution of the vehicle fuels have beencovered. The results for the scenario simulations with only the main policy (technologies at the vehicle level) clearly indicate an increasing marginal abatement cost. Reducing up to 120 g per km comes at a significantly higher cost per ton CO2-equivalent abatement than reducing towards a 135 gobjective. In the former 120 g scenario, the overall greenhouse gas emission reduction in 2020 is about 70 mega-tonnes CO2 equivalents. The scenario simulations for the policy packages that combine the main policy with supplementary measures, indicate that similar reductions can be reached at alower cost however. For example, the 70 mega-tonnes reduction is also reached by a package of a 130 g objective for the main policy combined with measures to promote gear shift indicators, tyre pressure monitoring systems, low rolling resistance tyres, low viscosity lubricants, more fuel efficient mobile air conditioners and improvements in technologies of vans and light duty trucks. And the cost per ton CO2-equivalent of that latter combined policy package is significantly lower than that for the aforementioned120 g scenario. Although the individual supplementary measures have only a limited reduction potential, some of them come at a low cost. As a consequence most packages of technical measures at the vehicle level (main policy) combined with supplementary measures prove to be more cost-effective than packages with only technical measures at the vehicle level. The potential for more cost-effective supplementary measures is not unlimited. The model results prove that also for the supplementary measures the abatement costs increase when stronger emission reductions are envisaged. For the covering abstract see ITRD E137145.

  • Authors:
  • Publication Date: 2007


  • English

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 01100036
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Source Agency: TRL
  • Files: ITRD
  • Created Date: May 27 2008 9:29AM