Review of ASIF Concept, Methods used in Bogota and Mexico

Maria Cordeiromcordeiro@wri.org

UN DESA, Consultation with Experts15th June 2009

The ASIF Concept: Drivers behind emission trends

• Accessibility• Urban planning & design

x xTotal

TransportEmissions

Activity(veh.km, pax.km, ton.km)

Modal Structure

Intensity(l/pax.km, kJ/pax.km)

Fuelcarbon content

(g/l, g/kJ)= x

• Vehicle characteristics• Driving cycles• Driver behavior• Load

• Services availability, efficiency, safety, cost

• LC fuel availability, reliability, cost

SUPPLYMANAGEMENT

PRICING

DEM

AN

DM

AN

AG

EM

EN

T

LAND USE

NETWORK STRUCTURE

TRAFFICCONTROL

INFORMATION

SOCIO-ECON-DEMODISTRIBU-

TIONS

INP

UTS

PO

LIC

Y

LA

YER

FLEETDISTRI-BUTIONS

INPUTSEM

ISSIO

N

FACTO

RS

INPUTSEN

ERG

Y, AIR

QU

ALITY M

AN

.Adapted: Professor Hani Mahmassani

“DEMAND”• Activity decisions

(what, where)• Travel decisions

(virtual vs physicaltiming, mode, route)

“SUPPLY”• Mode options • Routing• Network loading

Trip chains

Level of service

“EMISSIONS”• (I) Energy intensity• (F) Fuel characteristics

Individual and household activities

(A) Activity, (S) Modal share

Accounting and Reporting Principles

• Relevance and Completeness• Consistency• Transparency• Accuracy• Conservativeness

When to count carbon?

Operate & MaintainExecuteDefineSelectIdentify &

Assess

Emissions Inventory - Measurements or existing data on ASIF

Diagnose

Project type option analysis and co-benefits- Modeling or

sketch planning -

Project design option analysis and co-benefits

- Modeling -

Measurement, Reporting and

Verification (against baseline)

Demand for impact estimations

Carbon Market

Reproducibility, Verifiability, Engagement to reduce project risks

Ball Park, Low CostWater-tightCo-benefits

Conservativeness

Philanthropic Orgs. Intergovernmental Orgs.

Multilateral BanksGovernment withnon-biding targets

Government withbiding targets

Corporations and individuals

Examples from the field

Bogotá México City

Querétaro

Planned BRT in Querétaro, Mexico

Sketch Planning Tool, Bottom‐up Approach

Emission factors

xDistance traveled by vehicle 

xNumber of vehicles

=Emissions

INESENES

Inventario ZMVMRetrofit CM

Componente 3 CM

QuerétaroData sources

Sum of emissions per vehicle model and fuel typeBoundary: Only looked at the bus network

Baseline – official recordsPost project – transport plan

85% reduction of CO2 emissions from Bus fleet

Trunk (18 buses):• D350• D50• D50, DPF• D15• CNG• Hybrid Series, D15• Hybrid Parallel, D15, DPF

Mexico CityInsurgentes BRT Project– July 2005– 19.3 km– 97 articulated buses, replacing around 350 buses and micros

– 250,900 trips per day (1.25% region’s tot daily trips)

– Average Speed: 23.0 Km./hr   

Source: John Rogers, CTS-Mexico

Before and After

CO2 Emissions Estimation• Assumes no change in O-D patterns.• Vehicle changes related to the bus system itself

Number buses (SMA), driving distance, fuel consumption, IPCC emission factors.

• Impacts on Insurgentes cross and parallel trafficNumber, type of vehicle operating in Insurgentes, average speed before and after Metrobus, emission factor from model of fuel use vs. speed.

Counts of cross traffic and left-turning traffic were used to estimate extra waiting time to cross Insurgentes or extra distance traveled to make left turns

• Modal shifts from cars and other mass transitSurveyed Metrobus riders to identify previous travel mode, avgdistance of trip, load factor of car, avg fuel consumption of cars based on counts of types and City database.

Cameras monitor Insurgentes traffic

Travel time Before: 12 km/h After: 17 km/h

CHILPANCINGO FÉLIX CUEVAS9 MINUTES

50,000 tons CO2/year38% improvement on buses38% improvement on other vehicles27% due to modal shift-3% impact on other vehicles, leakage

Emissions reduction

Transmilenio – BRT, Bogotá• Project registered by the UNFCCC.

• 1st approved method for BRT; developed by grütter consulting on b/ CAF.

Transmilenio S.A.

515 kmFeeder routes170,150Pax. peak

Phase III (2010)36.3 km

448741,0806011484 Km

Phase I, II

Trunk ways

Feeder busesFeeder routesTrunk busesTrunk routesStationsTrunk ways

Approach of AM0031• Compares emissions per passenger trip of the baseline

and the project

Emission Reductions = baseline ‐ leakage ‐ project emissions

• Includes emissions per passenger trip of various transport modes: buses, cars, taxis, motorcycles, NMT, induced traffic.

• Additionality based on barriers removal not on financial analysis:– Investment level– Political barriers– Resistance transport sector– Lack of experience

Baseline Determination

• Determine emissions per trip per mode by calculating fuels used and emission factors per mode:

– Taxis and cars based on avg. trip distance and occupancy rate.

– Buses based on total distance driven and total passengers transported due to multi-bus trips

• Baseline emissions per mode of transport are fixed ex-ante and improve per annum based on technological improvement factor (default available)

Leakage

• Construction of trunk roads (default available)

• Early bus scrapping (default available)

• Change in occupancy rate of remaining buses and taxis (monitoring required)

• Reduced upstream emissions of fuels saved (default available)

• Changes due to reduced congestion:

– Rebound-effect– Reduced emissions due to change of speed

MonitoringCore measurements:• Fuel consumption in TransMilenio buses

• Distance driven (GPS) in TransMilenio buses

• Passengers transported

• Surveys to identify mode of transport in absence of TransMilenio

• Survey every 3 years to determine occupation rates of remaining buses and taxis

• Infrastructure built and buses scrapped

Estimated CO2 Emissions

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

tCO

2

Baseline emissions in tCO2eq Project emissions in tCO2eq

Leakage emissions in tCO2eq

grütter consulting

Estimate CO2 Emission Reductions

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

tCO

2

grütter consulting

Total (2006-2012): 1,725,940 tCO2eq

Maria Cordeiromcordeiro@wri.org

Thank you !

Questions to kick-off debate:• What are the methodological requirements of

NAMAS, sectoral approaches, CTF?• Do we want the CDM to accommodate

transportation? How?• What other co-benefits would you suggest to be

measured?