sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC
sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC
sectoral economic costs and benefits of ghg mitigation - IPCC
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Seth Dunn<br />
year. In addition to adding unnecessary GHG emissions, this translates into an annual cost <strong>of</strong> $74<br />
billion in wasted fuel <strong>and</strong> lost productivity. Interestingly, regions that invest heavily in road<br />
construction perform no better in restricting congestion than those that invest less in roads.<br />
A number <strong>of</strong> American cities are, however, starting to address development patterns that<br />
encourage automobile dependence. Their policies include regulations <strong>and</strong> incentives to lower<br />
vehicle emissions, give greater priority to bicycling <strong>and</strong> rail, <strong>and</strong> encourage developers to build<br />
on vacant l<strong>and</strong> within the city rather than in outer green regions.<br />
The U.S. city with the most progress in stemming sprawl is Portl<strong>and</strong>, Oregon. Under a 1973 state<br />
law, an urban growth boundary prevents the city from encroaching onto farm <strong>and</strong> forest l<strong>and</strong>.<br />
Planners are now requiring most new building to take place within a short walk <strong>of</strong> a public transit<br />
stop. Revised zoning codes permit the mixed-use development <strong>of</strong> apartments above stores <strong>and</strong><br />
more dense types <strong>of</strong> housing - townhouses <strong>and</strong> apartment buildings - that are capable <strong>of</strong><br />
supporting public transit systems. The greater urban density that results from integrated transport<br />
planning, in addition to reducing automobile dependence <strong>and</strong> its accompanying GHG emissions,<br />
can also make for more aesthetically pleasing cities, as European cities such as Paris <strong>and</strong> Vienna<br />
demonstrate: another “local-global synergy.”<br />
4 Imposing Savings, Not Costs<br />
Opponents <strong>of</strong> public policies to address transport-related externalities <strong>of</strong>ten create the false<br />
perception that the existing system is a perfectly-operating one, <strong>and</strong> that any additional steps will<br />
therefore “impose <strong>costs</strong>.” A more accurate description, however, is that many transport systems<br />
contain substantial hidden <strong>costs</strong> <strong>and</strong> inefficiencies that, through careful policies, can be<br />
mitigated. Such steps, in fact, “impose savings” both <strong>economic</strong> <strong>and</strong> environmental, lowering<br />
energy <strong>costs</strong> <strong>and</strong> GHG emissions.<br />
A 1999 study prepared by the Tellus Institute for the World Wildlife Fund supports this<br />
alternative view. Modeling the <strong>economic</strong> impacts <strong>of</strong> a package <strong>of</strong> integrated policies <strong>and</strong><br />
measures targeted at specific sectors to promote the use <strong>of</strong> high-efficiency, low-carbon<br />
technologies, the report suggests that U.S. carbon emissions can be reduced by 20 percent below<br />
1990 levels by 2010, with net annual savings <strong>of</strong> over $40 billion per year <strong>and</strong> 900,000 net<br />
additional jobs created by then. Contrary to claims that the transportation sector cannot<br />
contribute significantly to near-term reductions, all sectors make meaningful reductions in this<br />
scenario.<br />
In the 20 percent reduction scenario, the transport sector achieves carbon savings <strong>of</strong> more than<br />
200 million tons in 2010 (See Table 5). Specific steps taken in the transport sector include a<br />
vehicle efficiency initiative, with progressively stronger fuel economy st<strong>and</strong>ards for cars <strong>and</strong><br />
sport utility vehicles; R&D for improved design, materials, <strong>and</strong> technologies; public sector<br />
market creation programs for cleaner <strong>and</strong> more efficient vehicles; <strong>and</strong> st<strong>and</strong>ards <strong>and</strong> incentives<br />
for freight trucks <strong>and</strong> other commercial modes. They also include urban <strong>and</strong> regional<br />
transportation dem<strong>and</strong> management <strong>and</strong> other incentives: pricing reforms, such as congestion <strong>and</strong><br />
emissions-based pricing; l<strong>and</strong>-use <strong>and</strong> infrastructure planing for improved access to alternative<br />
<strong>and</strong> complementary travel modes, including transit, walking, <strong>and</strong> biking; facilitation <strong>of</strong> high<br />
speed intercity rail development; <strong>and</strong> pricing, planning, <strong>and</strong> informational initiatives to promote<br />
intermodal freight movement. Finally, they involve a cap on the carbon intensity <strong>of</strong> motor<br />
vehicles, progressively strengthened to 10 percent by 2010; R&D for renewable fuels <strong>and</strong><br />
associated vehicle technologies; <strong>and</strong> renewable fuels commercialization programs in a variety <strong>of</strong><br />
market segments, including public sector procurement.<br />
189