sheffield low emission zone feasibility study
DESCRIPTION
Sheffield Low Emission Zone Feasibility Study - presentation to STEP by Dr. David Connolly on 21 January 2014.TRANSCRIPT
STEP Meeting 21 January 2014Sheffield LEZ Feasibility Study
Dr David Connolly, SYSTRA Ltd
Tuesday 21 January 2014
Summary
1. Background to the Study
2. Scope and Methodology
3. Key Findings from the Data Analysis
4. LEZ Strategy Development
� Our approach to the LEZ strategy development
� Assessing LEZ strategy effectiveness
� The Recommended LEZ Strategy
1.
Background to the Sheffield LEZ Study
Context
� All 4 South Yorkshire Local Authorities have declared AQMAs for NO2 exceedances – Sheffield also
has/had PM10 exceedances
� Sheffield has been highlighted by the EU as an area requiring urgent attention because it is
unlikely to meet these health-based AQ EU Limit Values by 2015
� Sheffield’s AQ health impacts estimated as £160m (& 500 early deaths) per annum
� Transport emissions are the biggest single contributor
� Prospect of EU fines post-2015 helping focus defra (& local politicians’) attention on the problem
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 4
South Yorkshire’s Current NO2 Levels
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 5
Sheffield’s Current Air Quality (NO2)
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 6
Table 1. Number of sites exceeding NO2 limit values (Based on Predicted 2013 levels)
PERCENT REDUCTION REQUIRED NUMBER OF SITES
0% 10
0-5% 8
5-10% 12
10-20% 13
20-30% 8
Total 51
Health vs PM2.5 Concentrations
in Sheffield Neighbourhoods
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 7
City Centre
y = 0.21x2.87
R² = 0.38
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
PM2.5 (2010)
CHD Emergency Admissions (All ages)
y = 0.34x2.66
R² = 0.38
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
PM2.5 (2010)
CHD Emergency Admissions (All ages)
y = 45.5x1.42
R² = 0.32
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
PM2.5 (2010)
Circulatory Diseases Admissions
Why SCC needed an LEZ Strategy
NO2 annual mean concentration predicted to exceed the EU’s 40 µg/m3 limit for NO2 at
(at least) 40 locations in Sheffield in 2015
Data from our LEZ Appraisal Tool shows that >=7 years of fleet renewal would be
required to achieve compliance with this NO2 limit at all of these sites, assuming:
o there is no significant net traffic growth over this period
o all the other non-traffic sources of NO2 contribute their corresponding ‘fair share’ of
the required reduction; and
o Euro 6/Euro VI performance is as expected and does not deteriorate over time
Conclusion: further action is required to speed up the reduction in traffic emissions,
particularly NOX/NO2
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 8
2.
Scope and Methodology
Improving the Evidence Base
� Developed a detailed understanding of Sheffield’s taxi fleet and their contribution to emissions
� Used SCC’s city-wide ANPR data (anonymised) to refine car/freight fleet composition assumptions
� Reviewed evidence regarding actual ‘real-world’ emissions
� Program of remote sensing of actual vehicle emissions at 5 locations within Sheffield’s AQMA
(carried out by emissions experts from ITS Leeds)
� Used South Yorkshire’s existing Air Quality model to convert changes in traffic emissions into AQ
Impacts
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 10
Development of the LEZ Strategy
� Evidence-based recommendations
� Appraisal considered deliverability, affordability and acceptability of potential measures
� Study included some consideration of potential funding mechanisms and other ‘Delivery’ Issues
(including a ‘Next Steps’ section)
� Large Steering Group involved in shaping the final strategy
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 11
3.
Key Findings from the Data Analysis
Vehicle Emissions Rates
� MVA/SYSTRA’s ENEVAL Software updated to be consistent with defra’s EFT, then COPERT 4 v10
� Revised 2015 traffic model forecasts
� Vehicle fleet assumptions from (anonymised) city-wide ANPR data
� Bus fleet information from operators
� Taxis (Hackney and ‘Other PHVs) identified separately from private cars
� New LEZ Strategy Appraisal Tool developed using observed emissions distributions (based on data
collected via roadside emissions monitoring by Dr James Tate ( ) up to EURO V and
supplemented by EURO VI standards)
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 13
Fleet Information from Sheffield’s Number Plate Data
� Vehicles allocated to Euro engine class based on date of first registration
� Over 40% of SCC’s current car fleet is diesel and this proportion is growing
� More than half of the goods fleet is Euro 4 or newer
� Only 17% of the LGV fleet is Euro 5 or newer, compared with 35% of the OGV fleet
� Taxi flows considerably higher on Fridays and Saturdays
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 14
Remote Sensing Vehicle Emissions ( )
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 15
Average NOX Emission Rates for Cars and Taxis
Page 16 Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting D
-
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
Average NOX Emissions for Goods Vehicles & Buses by EURO Class
Page 17 Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting D
-
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
4.
LEZ Strategy Development
Approach to LEZ Strategy Development
Analysis of UK AIR (defra ‘s Air Quality Data) and Sheffield AQ Monitoring Sites
o Magnitude of air quality problems
o Contributors to air quality problems eg traffic, other transport, industry, domestic
Strategy Development Tool
o Inputs: Anonymised ANPR Data, Roadside Emissions Monitoring (Dr James Tate, ITS
Leeds)
o Assumptions: Year, Strategy Elements
o Outputs: Contributions from different fleet to NOx and PM10
LEZ Strategy Objective:
o Traffic just tackling its ‘fair share’ rather than being expected to solve problems
caused by other emission sectors
o Focus on NOx (EU fines), but PM10 also important (health impacts)
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 19
Predicted Proportions of City-wide Weekday NOx Emissions 2015
(based on anonymised ANPR and observed emissions factors)
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 20
Predicted Proportions of City-wide Weekday PM10 Emissions 2015
(based on anonymised ANPR and observed emissions factors)
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 21
What can we expect from natural fleet renewal by 2015?
(Do Minimum Impacts – 2015 )
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 22
Strategy Year 2015
.
Impact of Strategy
Main Vehicle Type Vehicle Subclass
% Change in
NOx
% Contribution
to Total
Change in NOx
% Change in
PM10
% Contribution
to Total
Change in PM10
Car Private Car - Petrol -18.3% -3.3% -10.9% -2.0%
Private Car - Diesel -4.3% -1.6% -23.0% -8.1%
Private Car - Other 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0%
Taxi_Hackney 2.6% 0.2% -9.8% -0.8%
Taxi_Other 6.3% 0.2% -15.9% -0.5%
LGV LGV 0.8% 0.1% -19.7% -3.9%
OGV OGV 4.3% 0.5% -13.0% -0.9%
Bus_SingleD 4.2% 0.2% 3.1% 0.1%
Bus Bus_DoubleD -17.9% -1.2% -0.4% 0.0%
Total -4.9% -4.9% -16.1% -16.1%
Do Minimum Do Minimum
Description Option 0 - Do Minimum (2015)
Factors included in the Appraisal of LEZ Measures
� Effective – must target vehicles which contribute to current and future emissions
� Significant proportion of current & future traffic
� High emission rate
� Efficient:
� = Emission reduction achieved/ the number of vehicles affected
� (but some vehicles spend longer driving in the AQMA than others)
� Cost-effective
� = Emissions reductions / (Cost of making the ‘bad’ vehicles compliant + a fixed component (design,
implementation, enforcement etc)
� Publicly/politically acceptable ?
� Inversely proportional to the number of vehicles affected?
� Deliverable
� Technically-feasible to meet emissions criteria
� Enforceable
� Affordable
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 23
Developing the LEZ strategy
Discussions with Key Stakeholders
Pack of different strategy elements provided
o Impacting different fleets
o Different levels of ‘enthusiasm’
Assessing strategy effectiveness & efficiency
o Trade-off between emissions reductions achieved and number of vehicles affected
o taking account of the fact that certain fleets spend more time driving in the AQMA area
than others
o Upgrade costs (by vehicle type) used to produce a ‘cost-effectiveness indicator’
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 24
Strategy Achievement Achievement DescriptionVery Low 0-5% NOX emission reduction
Low 5-10% NOX emission reduction
Medium 10-20% NOX emission reduction
High 20-30% NOX emission reduction
Excessive 30%+ NOX emission reduction
Option Targeting1 Bus & Taxi
2 Bus & Taxi & Goods Vehicles
3 Switching Diesel to Petrol (all feasible vehicle types)
4 Tackling Diesel Car
Recommended LEZ Strategy
Vehicle Technology
�Bus – ‘Best in class’ ie Euro
VI/CNG/Hybrid
�Taxi – Tackling ‘worst 50%’
�Goods – Tackling ‘worst 15%’
�6% of total fleet affected
�20% reduction in NOX emissions
predicted (inc 7% from Do Min)
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 25
Behavioural Change
�Car – Switching 10% Diesel to Petrol
�Car – 5% Reduction
�Goods – 5% Reduction (more efficient
driving, Ecostars, smarter routing etc)
�A further 5% reduction in NOX emissions
predicted
Impact of Recommended LEZ Strategy –
ENEVAL 2015 DM vs DS NOX % Reductions
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 26
Impact of Recommended LEZ Strategy –
ENEVAL 2015 DM vs DS PM10 % Reductions
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 27
Discussion/Any Questions
?
Sheffield Air Quality Modelling – LEZ Phase 2 Steering Group Meeting DPage 28
?
??Dr David Connolly/ [email protected]/ Ph: 0131 240 8904