Promoting Low Carbon Vehicles

This measure was provided by AUSTRIAN MOBILITY RESEARCH (AMOR) in 2014 under the CH4LLENGE project, financed by the European Commission.


Cars are responsible for about 12% of the EU’s total emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas. While the level of emissions is decreasing in other sectors, transport emissions have increased 36% since 1990. The substitution of conventional vehicles by low emission vehicles (LEVs) is one crucial measure to counteract this trend and thus to combat climate change and to improve air quality.

However, this substitution of conventional vehicles by LEVs is no natural process that runs by itself. As for every new technology, marketing activities are needed to speed the introduction process, to overcome a critical mass and finally to establish the new technology as a self-sustaining one.

In the case of LEV, these marketing activities need to be carried out jointly by car manufacturers and public authorities. Society is the main beneficiary of lower transport related emissions and has the power to influence the vehicle market through regulatory and financial actions. This power should be used in order to steer the vehicle market in a more sustainable direction.

Promotion of the use of Low Emission Vehicles is an easy task – there are several financial and infrastructural actions to start with. Among local authorities, it is very popular to give financial incentives like reduced parking tariffs for LEVs or purchasing subsidies. The set up of a charging stations network is one common infrastructural measure.

Evidence has shown that a multi-step approach with a clear strategy is very efficient. Successful “clean vehicle cities” like Stockholm have taken three steps: First, they replaced their municipal car fleet by LEVs, second they encouraged large companies to use LEVs and third they have promoted LEV among citizens and the broad public. Target group specific incentives have been arranged, such as technological procurements to purchase clean cars for municipal departments, priority lanes for clean company cars or financial incentives like discounts on congestion charge for owners of LEVs.

These promotional activities need of course some public investment. Pilot cities have found successful ways to finance these extra costs, for instance by means of EU-funded projects or though national funding.

Examples from Stockholm, London or Klagenfurt give evidence that the promotion of LEVs works. The initiatives of the city of Stockholm have led to the fact that Sweden is a pilot country for clean vehicles, with around 40% of new registered cars being “clean” ones.

Introduction

Cars are responsible for about 12% of the EU’s total emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the main greenhouse gas. While the level of emissions is decreasing in other sectors, transport emissions have increased by 36% since 1990. The use of low emission vehicles (LEVs) is one crucial instrument to counteract this trend and thus to combat climate change and to improve air quality.

To push vehicle manufacturers to build more energy efficient vehicles, emission targets have been set at a European level. Since 1992, the European Commission has introduced standards for passenger cars and commercial vehicles, that are updated regularly (Euro 1 to Euro 6). A fleet average of 130 grams of CO2 per kilometre by 2015 and 95 grams of CO2 per km by 2021 must be achieved1. Those emission targets are a driving force in the development of LEV technologies, particularly electric cars but also hybrid vehicles and those that use alternative fuels.

The full range of types of LEV is described below.  Amongst them, electric vehicles seem to be the most promising technology of the future. Although currently only 0.2 % of all vehicle registrations in Europe are for electric cars, this figure is increasing from year to year2. Significant progress has been made in battery technology and engine construction so that consumer barriers like high costs, low battery range and lack of charging infrastructure are likely to be overcome. Electric vehicles are expected to re-enter the market on a large scale within the next couple of years.

Terminology

Definition of a low emission vehicle

A low emission vehicle (LEV) is defined as a vehicle that emits relatively low levels of motor vehicle emissions. Generally, the term is used for vehicles with low levels of CO2 emissions, but in some countries it refers to an emission standard. This standard is defined according to the amount of pollutants found in the engine exhaust. It varies from country to country and also depends on the type of vehicle. Passenger cars have more demanding standards than heavy trucks or buses. On average, the standard for a low emission passenger vehicle is 75-100 g CO2/km.

Instead of “low emission vehicle”, the term “low carbon vehicle” (referring to the low level of carbon dioxide emission) is also used in the specialised literature. To consider the different levels of emitted motor emissions, the following terminology is used:

  • Low emission vehicles (LEV)
  • Ultra low emission vehicle (ULEV)
  • Zero emission vehicle (ZEV).

Technologies for cars

There are different technological strategies to decrease the level of motor emissions per vehicle. One possibility is to increase the efficiency of the internal combustion engine of the vehicle; another is to use renewable fuels like biodiesel, biogas or bioethanol. Finally, the use of electric vehicles is another option. The following list gives an overview of the technology portfolio of cars:

  • Internal combustion engine
  • Conventional hybrid (HEV)
  • Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV)
  • Battery electric vehicle (BEV)
  • Hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle (FCEV).

We consider all of these under the heading of LEVs.

Description

The measure “Encouraging low emission vehicles: pricing and infrastructure” aims to encourage citizens to use low emission vehicles (LEV) through financial incentives and the provision of better infrastructure. By doing so, the barriers to using LEV should be reduced. Both strategies – pricing and infrastructure – can be applied for motorized individual transport (encouraging the use of low emission cars, vans, scooters, bikes etc.) as well as for public transport (low emission vehicles like electric buses, trams, suburban trains, electric boats etc.).

The strategy “pricing” contains all measures that give a financial benefit to the purchase or use of LEV. These can be tax breaks for LEV, consumer grants from the government, lower tariffs for filling with electricity or bio-fuels, free use of charging stations for electric vehicles (EV), reduced parking tariffs for LEV and many more.

In addition to that, infrastructure is a key factor for a successful market penetration of LEV. While there is a dense network of petrol stations in every European city, filling with alternative fuels / bio-fuels or charging electric cars can be challenging. The provision of infrastructure equally matched to that provided for conventional vehicles is thus an important element that needs to be fostered. However, infrastructural measures include much more than just public electric vehicle recharging stations.

Municipalities can allow LEV to drive on priority lanes (bus lanes, taxi lanes), to open access for LEV into access restricted areas (e.g. environmental zones) or even to buy a municipal fleet of LEV that serves as a showcase. This fleet may be for rental to allow citizens to test LEV without making a binding offer.
To promote clean low emission vehicles, local authorities can:

  • Act as a role model and operate low emission bus fleets for public transport and large fleets of LEV for municipal services (e.g. the public transport bus fleet in Graz (AT) runs with Biodiesel, the city of Vienna (AT) introduced electric buses, Stockholm (SE) uses ethanol and biogas buses)
  • Buy large quantities of alternative fuels to lower the price (e.g. Stockholm (SE) involved many buyers in a joint procurement)
  • Decide on incentives such as parking discounts, special parking areas, special priority for clean taxis etc. (e.g. in Stuttgart (DE), electric cars can park free in municipal parking facilities)
  • Reach citizens with information (e.g. in Munich (DE), every new citizen receives a Welcome Package containing mobility information – including information about LEV)
  • Impose requirements on fuelling stations to provide biofuels or electricity charging stations (in the frame of the spatial planning)
  • Require the use of clean vehicles in tenders for contracts.

Overview of infrastructural and pricing measures to promote LEV

Infrastructure

  • Road infrastructure
    • Priority lanes for LEV
    • Access to restricted areas
    • Establishment of (green) environmental zones
    • Set up a network of fuelling / charging stations
  • Rental / Car infrastructure
    • Clean municipal fleet (LEV) as positive example
    • Provision of renting facilities (Electric car rental)
    • Introduction of  E-Carsharing
  • Public Transport
    • Operate a clean bus fleet

Pricing

  • Incentives and disincentives
  • Parking discounts / free parking
  • Subsidies for purchase of LEV (Funding programmes)
  • Free fuelling / charging (free bio-fuel or electricity)
  • Tax reductions
  • Joint procurement

Why introduce promotion of low carbon vehicles?

Encouraging Low Emission Vehicles – aims and objectives

There are six main objectives that are addressed through the encouragement and support of low emission vehicles:

  • Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions
  • Reduction of noise pollution
  • Less dependence on oil imports
  • Cost savings
  • Value creation (LEV as a new business market)
  • Energy efficiency.

(1) Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions / CO2

Electric vehicles emit less greenhouse gas than conventional vehicles. The great advantage is that electric vehicles have no exhaust pipe; they do not emit emissions like CO2 or nitrogen oxides, which are bad for the air quality and the global climate. Therefore, they address the problem of air pollution in cities and other areas with dense traffic.

Nonetheless, it is wrong to assume that electric vehicles emit no CO2 at all. The electricity to run the motor needs to be produced and therefore the CO2 emissions of electric vehicles depend on the mix of electricity generated. Electricity from renewable sources like wind, water and sun is better than that from coal, oil, gas or and nuclear power. In Germany, for the production of 1 kilowatt-hour, 601 gram of CO2 is produced. Taking the Nissan Leaf as an example (with more than 100,000 sold, this is the most popular e-car), 17.6 kilowatt-hours per 100 kilometres are needed. This leads to an emission of 106 gram of CO2 per kilometre. This is far less than a conventional car. For instance, the VW Golf emits about 169 gram CO2 per kilometre.

In addition, a responsible / fair comparison of both technologies needs to take the full “generation-to-wheel” CO2 emission cycle into account. Here, the emissions for the production of the engine, the drilling for oil and its transport, the production of batteries and the mining of Lithium, the emissions for waste disposal and much more need to be taken into consideration. In total, the electric cars have still a slightly better CO2 emission factor than conventional cars. Experts say that electric vehicles have to drive at least 28.000 km to balance the higher environmental costs that arise in the production process.3

The table below gives facts and figures for the reduction of emissions in %, per clean vehicle measure.4

01

(2) Reduction of noise pollution

Electric cars are more silent than conventional cars and can thus be a solution to reduce noise pollution, in particular in areas with a high traffic density. In Austria, traffic is responsible for about 60-70%5 of all noise pollution, followed by construction areas and neighbours in second and third rank. In Germany, the Federal Environment Office (Umweltbundesamt) carried out a study that shows that more than 50% of the German population feel disturbed by traffic noise.6

The noise limit which is acceptable and healthy for human beings is 40 decibels (at night) and 50 decibels (during the day).7 However, in Germany more than half the population have to stand levels of more than 45 decibels (DB) at night and 55 DB during the day. 15% of the population live in areas with more than 55 DB at night and 65DB during the day. The reduction of traffic noise is therefore a very important factor to ensure the healthiness of our population.8

A closer look at the distribution of traffic noise per mode shows that car transport is responsible for 43% of traffic induced noise problems. 23% of all traffic noise is caused by buses and trucks and only 7% each by planes and trains. Therefore, a shift from conventional vehicles to electric vehicles can lead to a major improvement, in particular for inner city transport with a low average speed (the faster a cars goes, the higher noise caused by the rolling resistance).
02
(Source: www.rezipe.eu)

(3) Less dependence on oil imports

The EU produces only 48% of the energy needed. This leads to a dependency on imports, which then leads to high costs and political dependency. Electric cars as an opportunity to reduce oil dependence are therefore more than welcome. In 2009, the dependency on oil imports reached 83.5% in the EU-27. Taking into consideration that fossil fuels represent three quarters of our energy mix today, the reduction of oil dependency is one main objective of the promotion of LEV/electric cars.9

(4) Cost savings

The figure below shows the development of the average fuel-prices in Austria. In 1995, one litre of fuel cost 0.20 EUR to 0.30 EUR. This price stayed constant until the 1970s, with an increase to about 1.20 EUR in 2010 and 1.40 EUR in 2014.10

03

Through the encouragement and promotion of LEV (and in particular electric vehicles), car users can save costs. Either they will save money due to consuming less fuel, or because of a substitution of driving power. For 100 kilometres driven with a conventional car (6 litres/100 km), the user will spend 7.40 EUR. In contrast to that, a LEV with 3 litres/km costs 4.40 EUR and an electric vehicle is even cheaper, costing 2.00-3.50 EUR for the same distance.

These positive cost savings are attenuated because of higher costs when purchasing a LEV. An electric vehicle costs a minimum 30,000 EUR, while a conventional car in the same category costs 20,000 EUR and new cars with combustion engines are available from 10,000 EUR onwards (in Austria).11

04

Figure 1: Comparison of purchasing costs of electric vehicles (blue) and conventional vehicles (orange), in 1.000 EUR – Y-axis: different vehicles and manufacturers

From the long-term and user perspective, Low Emission Vehicles are more cost-efficient. This is a main rationale for the promotion of LEV via pricing and infrastructural measures. The high purchase costs can be reduced by funding schemes, e.g. governmental grants. By doing so, the state can profit from the other benefits, as addressed above.

(5) Value creation - LEV as a new business market

In Europe, the automotive industry with car manufacturers, automotive suppliers and service provides has an enormous market share. In Austria, more than 10% of the GDP was made by the automotive industry, more than 170,000 people work in this sector. These companies have of course a strong interest to continue selling their cars –and if emission standards and restrictions get stronger, they need to focus on LEV. In addition to that there is a strong concurrence from Asia. Of the top 10 companies expected to gain market share in future, only two – Volkswagen (VW) and BMW – come from Western nations12. Therefore, the national governments need to act to ensure that their companies will stay competitive. Thus, a further promotion and support of the take up of Low Emission Vehicles and in particular electric vehicles is also of benefit for them.

(6) Energy efficiency of electric vehicles

The energy efficiency of Low Emission Vehicles depends on the technology used. The bio-fuels biodiesel and ethanol have the same energy efficiency as a conventional vehicle. Vehicles driving with biogas have even worse energy efficiency; they need more energy than a diesel/petrol equivalent.13

However, electric engines have much higher energy efficiency than conventional vehicles with combustion engines. The degree of effectiveness of electric cars is 75 % (plug-to-wheel), while a combustion engine has – due to the loss of heat – only 25 % of effectiveness (tank-to-wheel).14

4 CIVITAS (2010): Cleaner vehicles and alternative fuels. Policy Advice Notes 02.

5 BUNDESMINISTERIUM FÜR VERKEHR, INNOVATION UND TECHNOLOGIE (2011): Verkehr in Zahlen. Wien.

7 Not taking into account weighting scales.

10 BUNDESMINISTERIUM FÜR VERKEHR, INNOVATION UND TECHNOLOGIE (2011): Verkehr in Zahlen. Wien.

13 CIVITAS TRENDSETTER (2006): Clean vehicles – a way to reduce emissions.

Demand impacts

In the case where conventional vehicles are replaced one by one by low emission vehicles, the effect on the demand is rather low. Therefore, it is important to shift trips from motorized transport to low or zero emissions modes like cycling and walking as well. In addition, clean vehicles need to be used for the public transport fleet, taxi services and other services where motorized vehicles cannot be substituted by non-motorised modes.

Furthermore, the rather new phenomenon of E-Carsharing15 could lead to a decrease in demand. If people share a car instead of owning it, the number of car trips will decrease.

Responses and situations
Response Reduction in road traffic Expected in situations
The promotion of LEV has no effect on departure times.
Route changes will be very small. It might be the case because the fuelling stations / charging infrastructure require a new route or – for cities with environmental zones – because access is extended (in case there is an access restriction for high emission cars).
For EV with low battery ranges this might be the case. Generally, the promotion if LEV has small effects in the choice of destination.
Maybe even to the contrary – if the use of LEV is cheaper because of lower operating costs, people might increase the number of trips.
If a conventional car is replaced by a LEV, there is no modal shift.
The promotion of LEV via pricing measures has an effect on vehicle purchases. People might sell their car and buy a new LEV if those are subsidised by local authorities or the state.
The promotion of LEV has no effect on residential location.
= Weakest possible response = Strongest possible positive response
= Weakest possible negative response = Strongest possible negative response
= No response
15 Carsharing (or car clubs) is a model of car rental where people rent cars for short periods of time (e.g. by an hour) or by distance in km. They are attractive to customers who make only occasional use of a vehicle. E-Carsharing is carsharing with a fleet of electric vehicles. Examples: EMIL Salzburg www.fahre-emil.at; SunMoov, Lyon www.sunmoov.fr

Short and long run demand responses

It is expected that the demand for LEV, in particular electric vehicles, will increase within the next few years. Due to technological innovations, the price for purchasing a LEV will decrease and thus more people will be able to afford a LEV.

Currently, the market share of LEV is relatively low. For example, in Austria16 only 0.05% of all vehicles are LEVs. On a European level, the fast majority of new cars are still diesel vehicles (55%), followed by gasoline cars (42%) – and only 3% are LEV (hybrids, electrics, natural gas and ethanol-fuelled vehicles).17

Demand responses
Response   1st year 2-4 years 5 years 10+ years
The promotion of LEV has no effect on departure times.
  The change route effect will get smaller as vehicle technology and infrastructure are improved.
  The change in destination effect will get smaller as vehicle technology and infrastructure are improved.
  The more LEV, the fewer incentives will there be. The effect of increase of trips will be reduced.
  If a conventional car is replaced by a LEV, there is no modal shift.
  Promotion of LEV has an effect on vehicle purchases. With future increase of LEV market share, this effect will increase.
  The promotion of LEV has no effect on location of residence.
= Weakest possible response = Strongest possible positive response
= Weakest possible negative response = Strongest possible negative response
= No response
16 In 2013, the market share of electric vehicles was 0,03% of all vehicles. It is estimated that this figures increased to 0,05% of all bio-fuel and hybrid vehicles will be added.

Supply impacts

There will be three main expected impacts on supply: first, an increase in charging infrastructure, second a diversification of Low Emission Vehicles and third a shift in road space, given over to LEVs. The second one will go hand in hand with a further technological improvement of LEV.

According to the information given by AustriaTech18, 1.5 charging stations are needed per electric vehicle. These charging stations need to be at home, at work, at on-street parking facilities well as at shopping facilities. In Austria, the expected demand for charging stations until 2020 is 45,000 per year. To cover this demand, the supply of charging stations for electric vehicles will increase. There is a trend that charging stations will be provided by energy supplying companies as well as local and regional authorities.

Furthermore, in 2013 it was agreed on a common standard for plugs. The “Type 2“” plug (3.7 kW) is the common standard for the whole of Europe. A further supply of charging points with these plugs will therefore be expected.19

The diversification and further improvement of LEV will lead to cheaper and more efficient vehicle models. The automotive industry and national governments are investing a lot of money in Research & Development of LEV. Consequently there will be vehicles with even lower emission rates. For the electric market, predictions are given that cars will get cheaper, batteries will get smaller and more efficient, resulting in a better battery range. At present, EV batteries have a range of 100 to 120 km, which is sufficient for use in urban areas. For the future, a significant enlargement of the battery range is expected. Some models like “Tesla Roadster” have already a battery range of 500 km.20 With regard to the size, the near-future EV does not seem to be very different regarding the body, as lower-medium size sedans will most likely be the preferred model even in the future.21

In addition, there is the possibility that road space will be given over from conventional vehicles to Low Emission Vehicles. In this scenario, access to inner cities, tourist regions and other protected areas will be given to LEVs only.

18 AUSTRIA TECH (2013): E-Mobilität für Kommunen. Elektromobilität als Chance für die kommunale Entwicklung. Wien.

20 Ebd.

Financing requirements

The financial requirements vary according to the level of reference. At a European level, there are a few funding programmes to support the take up of Low Emission Vehicles. A study by TU Delft states that from 2008 to 2011, the total spending on Electric Vehicle Technology by national governments and the industry investments was 8.5 billion EUR. This figure is further specified, showing that several governments spend about 1 to 1.5 million EUR per year in supporting EV. The European Green Car initiative in 2009 had a budget of 1.000 million EUR.22

Within the H2020 program, the EU invests 129 million EUR for the section on “Green vehicles 2014”.23

With regard to financial requirements of infrastructural and pricing measures, it is better to look at the national or local level.
For the UK, it was recently announced that UK government is poised to spend 500 Mio £ (≈ 624 Mio EUR) on green vehicles over the next five years (2015-2020). Much of the investment will go on necessities to make the industry succeed, such as more public chargers and research grants to support development.24

In France, a future growth of the market of electric and hybrid vehicles is expected. The French government has plans to invest €1.5 billion on infrastructure measures to aim for two million electric and hybrid cars on the roads in France by 2020.25 It is supporting measures to make greener cars more attractive to consumers and to develop the industry in France for the global market. The government is giving subsidies on buying electric cars from €5,000 to a maximum €7,000 euros, and from €2,000 to €4,000 for hybrids.26

At a local level, the investments needed depend on the type of measure. Simple converting measures (e.g. allowing LEV to drive on bus lanes) are of course cheaper than comprehensive funding programs. The following table gives some examples:

MEASURE

COST

QUALITY DATA

Introduction / Use of priority lanes for Low Emission Vehicles

3,000 EUR per lane (costs for signposting / pictograms) and information of citizens

Own estimation

Opening of access restricted areas for LEV

1,000 EUR per lane (costs for citizen information)

Own estimation

Establishment of (green) environmental zones

>200,000 EUR (for citizen information, signposting and additional administrative work)

Example of Mannheim, Germany

Set up a network of fuelling / charging stations

Private small scale charging stations for electric vehicles (without calculation of costs per charging unit: 200-1,000 EUR
Half-public stations (e.g. in off-street parking): 1,000 – 4,000 EUR
Public stations. Fast charging. Calculation of costs, payment with debit/credit card etc.: 4,000-10,000 EUR

Example from Klagenfurt, Austria and study by Fraunhofer Institut27

Clean municipal fleet (LEV) as positive example

Cost per Electric Vehicle (e.g. Nissan Leaf): 30,000 EUR

www.nissan.at

Provision of renting facilities (Electric car rental)

150,000 EUR (fleet with 5 E-Cars, administrative work and small revenues from rental fee)

Own estimations

Introduction of E-Carsharing

Up to now, not profitable

 

Operate a clean bus fleet

+ 100,000 – 170,000 EUR more for a hybrid bus (instead of conventional diesel bus)

CIVITAS policy advice note

Parking discounts / free parking

20,000 EUR (depending on the number of inhabitants, the parking reduction)
Example Graz: Reduction of 0.40 Cent/hour, 100 users, 1 hour every working day à 9,600 EUR + costs for converting parking meters

Own estimations

Subsidies for purchase of LEV (Funding programs)

450,000 EUR
Example: Klagenfurt gives co-funding of up to 9,000 EUR for the purchase of an electric vehicle. These subsidies are limited to 50 applications.

CEMOBIL28

Expected impact on key policy objectives

The promotion and encouragement of LEVs will lead to significant environmental improvements, in particular with regard to use of renewable resources and a better air quality. In terms of transport, simply replacing conventional vehicles by LEVs won’t have a positive impact. Problems like urban sprawl (due to longer distances being travelled with motorized vehicles), a loss of attractiveness of urban space (due to space claimed by parking cars) as well as lack of enhancement of physical activity (due to the promotion of motorized transport instead of active travel) will remain.

To reach a positive impact, the promotion of LEVs must foster obligatory municipal fleets and vehicles for collective transport, e.g. Public Transport fleets or taxis. If this is implemented, the impacts are broader and include also the transport sector.

05Example: This picture shows a suburban area and “car friendly” area. If conventional vehicles are replaced one by one by LEVs, these expensive and resource-intensive land use structures will not change in future.

Source of picture: www.allposters.com/-sp/Urban-Sprawl-Taking-over-Agriculture-in-Ventura-County-California-Posters_i3277587_.htm

Contribution to objectives

Objective

Scale of contribution

Comment

  If the promotion of LEVs leads to more cars, there will be a negative impact on efficiency.
  Promotion of LEVs will lead to a reduction of noise and an improvement of air quality. Other negative effects (space is given to cars instead of people) will remain.
  The promotion of LEVs will lead to a substantial improvement in the environment (use of renewable resources, lower emissions, better air quality etc.)
  The promotion of LEVs has a slightly negative impact on equity and social inclusion. Motorised vehicles will remain inaccessible for some. In addition, investments in new vehicles might be requested in the future in order to keep the level of mobility (access restrictions)
  The lower noise level of EV will have small negative impacts on traffic safety – in particular in the transitional phase from conventional vehicles to EV.
  Assuming that technological innovations for LEVs as well as parts of the vehicles are produced in Europe, the promotion will lead to an economic growth. Financial inventive given to companies and consumers will ensure that the European market stays competitive with the US and Asian market.
  No effects on the financial market are assumed.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Expected impact on problems

As described above, the strongest impact on existing problems is the environmental improvement (less environmental damage). All other transport related problems (congestion, poor accessibility, social disadvantages and accidents) cannot be solved by the promotion if LEVs.

Contribution to alleviation of key problems

Problem

Scale of contribution

Comment

Congestion No effect on congestion.
Community impacts No community effects.
Environmental damage Positive environmental effects (use of renewable resources, lower emissions, better air quality etc.)
Poor accessibility Areas with a poor accessibility – that can only be reached by car, will remain like this. The shift from conventional cars to LEVs will not improve accessibility.
Social and geographical disadvantage The problem that people having disadvantages because they live a certain area or because they have a lower social status, is not solved by the promotion of LEVs. There might be a small increase of this problem because the pressure to buy a LEV will increase.
Accidents The problems of traffic accidents will not be solved. The lower noise level of EV will even have a small negative impact on traffic safety.
Economic growth A growing LEV-market will ensure that revenues and employment in the European automotive sector will stay stable. Without making cars “greener”, this industry will lose importance.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Expected winners and losers

There will be two main winner groups: on the one hand the vehicle producing industry and on the other hand residents, living in highly polluted urban areas – e.g. cities with bad air quality.

The main losers are those groups who have no access to Low Emission Vehicles (e.g. because of financial deficits). They will lose mobility because areas in the city are not accessible for them and because public funding might be shifted from PT and active modes to the promotion of LEVs.

  1. Vehicle producing industry
    A shift from conventional vehicles to LEVs is a chance for car manufacturers and suppliers to increase sales. The life time of vehicles will be shortened if new technologies become more popular, and if regulatory frameworks support the purchase of a new vehicle. Giving subsidies to consumers and companies for purchasing LEVs will increase the demand.

  2. Residents
    Citizens living in areas that suffer from bad air quality benefit from a shift to LEVs. There will be a decrease of emissions like carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and nitrogen oxides. This will have positive health impacts, in particular for sensitive groups like persons suffering from allergies or pedestrians, cyclists and children, who are more susceptible to vehicle emissions.

  3. Groups with no access to LEVs
    Among the main loser groups are those people that have no access to LEV, for example because of limited financial opportunities or because of their demographic situation (young and elderly people). If measures like access restrictions for vehicles with high emissions are further developed, and at the same time investments in LEVs restrict the available budget for sustainable mobility, social exclusion might happen. Thus, it is important to support LEV without passing costs to active modes. Investments in LEV should not cut the budget for the promotion of walking, cycling and public transport.

  4. High income groups
    Contrary to the third effect, groups with high income who can afford to buy a new LEV will profit by this measure.
Contribution to objectives

Group

Winners/Losers

Comment

Large scale freight and commercial traffic

They will slightly lose, in particular at the beginning, as freight fleets are harder to substitute by LEV than passenger cars. They suffer from access restrictions for high emission vehicles.

Small businesses

Small businesses will lose, as car-dominant infrastructure (e.g. shopping centres in the city outskirts with big retailers) will remain being frequently used.

High income car-users

High income car users can purchase LEVs without financial problems.
Low income car-users with poor access to public transport Low income car users won’t have the money to invest in LEVs. With poor access to public transport and further access restrictions with their “old” cars, they will lose.

All existing public transport users

Maybe they will slightly lose (in case money that would have been invested in public transport improvements will now go to the promotion of LEVs). On the other hand, the public transport fleet could also be substituted by LEVs, so users would benefits by new vehicles that are operating.

People living adjacent to the area targeted

People living in areas with air pollution because of transport emission will profit substantially.

Cyclists including children

Cyclists and children will profit by a better air quality. These important benefits might be reduced by fewer investments in cycling infrastructure and by traffic safety problems due to less noise of EV.

People at higher risk of health problems exacerbated by poor air quality

There will be a decrease if emissions like carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and nitrogen oxides. This will have positive health impacts, in particular for people at higher risk of health problems.

People making high value, important journeys

People travelling often over long distances benefit because LEV becomes more cost-efficient with longer distances. In addition, maintenance of cars and road infrastructure will be continued.

The average car user

Direct (financial) profit by incentives and subsidies to purchase a LEV.
= Weakest possible benefit = Strongest possible positive benefit
= Weakest possible negative benefit = Strongest possible negative benefit
= Neither wins nor loses

Barriers to implementation

The barriers for implementing measures to promote LEV can be divided into two groups: there are barriers linked to the negative effects of LEV in general, and measure-specific barriers.

(1) Barriers because of negative effects of LEV in general

The main barrier for a broad introduction of LEV is the purchasing price, which is for many potential customers too high. This affects private customers (aiming to buy a passenger car) as well as municipalities, investing in clear public transport vehicles or clean municipal fleets.

For example, the Stockholm Public Transport Authority estimated in 2006, 2% higher costs per year for the ethanol buses. A biogas bus or lorry costs 30,000-50,000 EUR more than an ordinary diesel bus.29 These differences are getting smaller, but they still exist and are one of the main reasons why clean vehicles still have a small market share. In addition to that, the incomplete infrastructure (e.g. charging/fuelling stations for bio-fuels or electricity) is another limiting factor. Specifically for electric vehicles, the small driving range, the long charging times and the need for a charging infrastructure are barriers that affect the use of LEV by both, private and public users.

At the national level, barriers to promote LEVs in general are mainly linked to the remaining negative environmental, financial and social effects of LEV. These are:

  • For cars running on alternative fuels (e.g. bio-fuels), areas of arable land need to be dedicated to grow biomass that could instead be used for food production.
  • Low Emission Vehicles are still vehicles that require space, e.g. parking spaces, traffic lanes and other elements of road infrastructure. The problem of limited space in particular in the inner city and the question of a fair distribution of traffic areas among all transport modes will not be solved by reducing the level of emissions of cars.
  • The money that local, regional and national authorities spend to build and maintain a road infrastructure stays at the same level. Active modes like walking and cycling as well as collective transport are more cost-efficient than motorised individual transport. Increasing the share of LEV will not solve this financial problem.
  • Supporting a motorised transport mode instead of active travel limits the benefit of improving public health by improving local air quality. Societies in Europe face serious problems of overweight and obesity. The latest World Health Organisation (WHO) projections indicate that at least one in three of the world's adult population is overweight and almost one in 10 is obese. More physical exercises are needed, e.g. by walking or cycling at least 30 minutes per day.30
  • Specifically for electric vehicles, traffic safety problems occur because vehicles are more silent than conventional ones. Transport users cannot hear an approaching car, which increases the probability of an accident.

(2) Barriers specific to pricing and infrastructural measures to promote LEV

For giving subsidies, tax reductions and incentives as well as for setting up fuelling infrastructure, public money needs to be invested. In times of shortages of governmental budgets, giving grants to promote LEV is challenging.

Apart from financial constraints, the following barriers can be identified:

  • The promotion of LEV requires extensive cooperation between local and national authorities as well as between municipal departments.
  • It is challenging to convince private companies if there are no clear economic benefits for them. In particular in the early stages with incomplete charging infrastructure / fuelling stations, it is a challenge to find followers.
  • One success factor is an ambitious and strong political will. Lack of political leadership is a high barrier for promotional activities to support the take up of LEV.
  • A proven success factor for the promotion of LEV is to start with the municipal fleet first – and by this give a positive example, convince private companies with rather big fleets (e.g. taxi or delivery companies) and finally to engage citizens. The fact that many municipalities have outsourced their fleet to private companies may be a barrier to overcome.
  • A common incentive for companies and private citizens is to reduce the parking fees or to give exempts from congestion charge. To do so, it is essential to clearly identify a Low Emission Vehicle in contrast to an ordinary vehicle. This is a main barrier to promotion measures and requires additional measures. For example, parking meters need to be converted.
  • Another barrier to reducing parking fees is a legal issue. Some states have national parking legislation, which cannot be changed by local authorities. Even if a city wants to incentivise the use of LEV, it may not have the legal permits to do so.
  • Finally, the economy of scale is another barrier to a preferential treatment of LEV. The more clean vehicles, the fewer the possibilities to give privileges. If bus lanes are opened for clean vehicles, this measure is only effective until a critical mass has been reached. Therefore, promotional measures are limited to the phase of market introduction.

29 CIVITAS TRENDSETTER (2006): Clean vehicles – a way to reduce emissions.

Scale of barriers
Barrier Scale Comment
Legal National parking legislation is a barrier for implementing measures like reduced parking tariffs for LEV.
Finance Both measures, financial incentives like tax reduction or the further development of infrastructure for LEV require large investments on all levels – European, national, regional and local. This is a barrier for authorities with financial problems.
Governance As this measure contributes to reaching national emission targets, it has minimal governmental barriers.
Political acceptability Because it improves air quality and contributed to reaching emission targets, these measures are very welcome. In addition, it requires no substantial change of the transport system and is thus easier to accept.
Public and stakeholder acceptability It is mostly accepted by the public. There is criticism that LEV and in particular EV are not environmental friendly if the whole life cycle is taken into consideration – and that it will arise new problems (e.g. crops used for bio-fuel production or recycling of lithium batteries). The challenge of Promoting LEV without causing damage to other countries / cultures is a barrier.
Technical feasibility There is no technical barrier.
= Minimal barrier = Most significant barrier

Clean vehicles in Stockholm

Since 1994, the City of Stockholm is engaged to support the take-up of clean vehicles in Stockholm, Sweden and Europe. By means of several initiatives, EU-funded projects and a very path-breaking strategy, the city has strongly contributed to the fact that by now, 40% percent of new car sales are clean vehicles and that each month about 10,000 new clean cars are registered.31

Context

In 1989, the city took the decision to investigate the possibilities of introducing environmentally friendly vehicles. To start with, the city purchased 10 electric cars (VW City Stormer) in 1990. By that time, electric cars had a driving range of about 50 km and the battery lifespan was limited to three years. Cars running on alternative fuels were not available in the early 1990s. Because the cars available on the market did not meet the expectations of the City of Stockholm, it initiated an Electric Vehicle Collaboration Group and started a national technology procurement in 1992. Two years later, the “Clean Vehicles in Stockholm” programme, run by the Environment and Health Administration, was founded. Until today, this administration office is in charge of promoting clean vehicles to reduce the negative environmental impacts of road traffic. 32

06

31 THE ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION IN THE CITY OF STOCKHOLM (2010): Clean vehicles in Stockholm. Historic retrospect 1994-2010. Stockholm.

32 Ebd.

The main barrier to overcome at the beginning was the so-called “chicken or egg” problem. Without a market, no cars – and without cars you cannot create a market. The technology for electric cars and those with alternative fuels was developed, but car manufacturers did not intent to build cars because there was no market. At the same time, possible customers could not create a market because no cars were available for sale. To break this deadlock, the city decided to follow a three step-approach for introducing clean vehicles:

  1. Removing obstacles and creating a demand
  2. Broadening the market
  3. Going from pilot country to a bigger market

(1) Removing obstacles and creating a demand

In the beginning, the main obstacles for the City of Stockholm were few car models, few refuelling facilities and rules and regulations that were both complicated and made it more expensive to buy and run clean vehicles. To give an example, the first three ethanol cars in Sweden were introduced in 1994, and the first filling station for E85 started to operate in 1996. Administrative difficulties included that for gas vehicles, the tank must be able to withstand minus 40 degrees and gas cars required two tests, one for the vehicle, one for the tank. Service providers were rare as well.

To overcome these barriers, the city built up its own municipal fleet of clean cars. The aim was to reach a critical mass of vehicles and thus to make the market self-sustaining in the long-term. For example, joint procurements were carried out to bring the first clean vehicles on the road. In 1997, the city replaced 300 conventional vehicles by clean vehicles and set itself the goal to increase this figure to 600 by 2000.

To receive financial support, the city of Stockholm participated in several EU-funded projects, e.g. ZEUS (1996-2000), ELCIDIS (1998-2002) and CIVITAS Trendsetter (2002-2006). The city used this EU-funding to implement existing action plans. By the help of these projects, new technology (e.g. hybrid trucks) was tested, new filling and charging stations were installed, joint procurements were done, national regulations (e.g. unfair text rules) were changed, a national definition of clean vehicles was introduced and finally, internal information communication campaigns were implemented (to convince the managers of city fleets, to offer training etc.). The focus was put on technology procurement for different vehicles types, to drive market players to introduce new models to the market and to reduce the purchase price of clean vehicles. For instance, within ZEUS a buyers’ consortium of 5 European cities bought together 174 zero emission passenger cars and 37 light vans.

(2) Broadening the market

After efforts to adapt regulations and legislation and to increase the range of clean vehicles showed the first results, work entered the second phase. Here, the focus was to encourage more people to choose clean vehicles. To do so, the following measures were implemented:

  • Introduction of monetary incentives for clean vehicles (through tax reliefs, a long-term taxation strategy and labelling of clean vehicles)
  • Introduction of a purchase subsidy for transport companies and taxi companies
  • Free parking for all clean vehicles used by residents and for commercial purposes from 2005 to 2008
  • Giving priority to clean vehicles (e.g. at the airport there was a separate queue / fast lane for ecotaxis)

In addition to that, many information and communication campaigns focussing on external stakeholders were started. A website with neutral product information was launched, monitoring of LEV improved (e.g. national statistics now distinguished between conventional cars and LEV) and test driving for companies was offered.

In this second phase, the activities no longer addressed internal staff of the city administration, but targeted external companies operating bigger fleets, such as transport companies and taxi companies.

(3) Going from pilot country to a bigger market

The measures to promote clean vehicles in Stockholm have been successful. In 2009, almost 40% of all new car sales were clean vehicles in Sweden, making the country a pilot region for clean vehicles. However, car manufacturers require a bigger market to bring out new generations of clean vehicles. To support this development, the aim of the third phase is to increase the demand for vehicles inside and outside of Sweden.

Latest measures to promote the use of LEV among private persons were:

  • From 2007 to 2012, clean vehicles entering the inner city were exempted from paying congestion tax
  • From 2007 to 2009, the government set aside SEK 815 million (EUR 87 million)for a clean vehicle premium, paid to private individuals who bought a clean vehicle
  • Lower fuel prices for clean fuels

In addition to that, the city continued to build up an international network to promote clean vehicles. The city of Stockholm organised conferences, held presentations at mobility events, organised study visits etc. to encourage the use of clean vehicles outside Sweden.

Impact on demand

The graph below shows the development of new registrations of clean vehicles in Stockholm County. It shows that ethanol vehicles have the highest share among all clean vehicles. The number of vehicles increased since 2001 with a major increase between 2007 and 2008. Today, nearly 40% of all new registrations are clean vehicles. Therefore, the measures to promote LEV in Stockholm had a very positive impact on the demand.

07

In addition to that, evaluation studies show that more than 900 private vehicles were subsidised by the clean vehicles premium and that, from 2011 on, only eco-taxis were allowed at the airport. The demand of biogas has also increased – from 180,000 Nm³ in 1999 to 7.5 million Nm³ in 2009.

By the end of 2008 the share of clean vehicles in the Swedish vehicle stock was approximately 5 percent and all government organizations in Sweden are forced to only procure clean vehicles, which will support a further uptake of clean vehicles.

Impact on supply

There are about 3,500 refuelling stations in Sweden and about 1,400 of them supply alternative fuels. Most of them, about 1,300, supply E85 (85 percent ethanol and 15 percent petrol). Only 90 refuelling stations supply methane gas: 41 sell natural gas and 49 sell biogas.

The refuelling infrastructure supplying E85 has grown rapidly since the introduction of the renewable fuel obligation: from 305 in 2006 to 1,293 in November 2008. This obligation (“the pump law”) requires refuelling stations of a certain size to supply at least one alternative fuel. The number of biogas and natural gas pumps has grown from 62 to 90 during the same time period (2006-2008).33

Clean vehicles in Klagenfurt

The following case study describes how a medium sized city can effectively encourage the use of LEVs. The case study looks at Klagenfurt on Lake Wörthersee, a city of 100.000 inhabitants in Austria.

Since 2010, the environmental department of the City of Klagenfurt has been involved in three main projects to promote electric mobility as one form of low emission mobility. By means of a comprehensive strategy, the transport sector contributes to reaching crucial long-term goals.34

Aims and objectives of the City of Klagenfurt

The city of Klagenfurt on Lake Wörthersee aims to demonstrate that e-mobility does work in cities and that effective and sustainable improvement in environmental quality in cities is achievable without imposing undue restraints on individual mobility. The city has set four main environmental goals:

  • Improvement of air quality
  • Climate protection
  • Noise reduction
  • Innovation

Strategy: participation in EU and nationally funded projects

To achieve these goals, the city is participating in several EU-funded or national funded projects, such as REZIPE, eLog, CEMOBIL and E-Share. REZIPE and CEMOBIL both started in 2010 and run until 2013 and 2015. eLog started in 2013 and E-Share in 2014.

The aim of the city of Klagenfurt is to have a broad multimodal approach and to shift conventional vehicles to electric vehicles not only in car passenger transport, but also in public transport and freight transport.

The first project, REZIPE, was thus focusing on setting up the basis for e-mobility in Klagenfurt. The city administration itself started the process and leases five electric cars (Mitsubishi i-Miev). Furthermore, five e-charging stations and a photovoltaic panel were installed and were available for municipal employees as well as for citizens. The total cost of the investments was EUR 42,765.

The project CEMOBIL led into the same direction, further developing this initiative. Within CEMOBIL, 66 electric vehicles (44 passenger cars, 10 E-bikes, 10 scooters, 1 E-bus and 1 solar boat) were purchased and tested and at the same time, 50 charging stations were built up in Klagenfurt and its surroundings. Another 50 charging stations are aimed to be provided through private initiatives (e.g. residential building cooperatives, shopping centres etc.). Also these E-vehicles were made available for testing to private persons, public institutions, driving schools and taxi companies. Thus, Klagenfurt is building up a multimodal fleet of electric vehicles and charging stations to demonstrate the positive effects to the population.

Through the projects eLog and E-Share, these basic initiatives are extended: eLog is about setting up a fleet of 200 electric utility vehicles (20 Renault Twizy, 20 Renault Zoe, 100 Renault Kangoo, 40 Renault Kangoo Maxi, 6 Renault Maxity, 6 Evans, 5 e-Velotaxi Delivery Cruiser and 3 CityLogs cargo trams). E-Share is doing a feasibility study to prepare the introduction of an E-Carsharing System in Klagenfurt.

Measures to encourage the use of electric vehicles

Several incentives were introduced to promote the use of electric vehicles in Klagenfurt. These are among others:

  1. Exemption from short-term parking fee (environmental vignettes)
    E-car users can collect their environmental vignettes from the Citizens’ Service Office. This allows them to park their E-cars in Klagenfurt’s short-term parking zones for the specified period of time (max. 3 hours) free of charge. A parking disc must be displayed in the short-term parking zones. 08

  2. Subsidies for purchasing an electric vehicle
    Citizens of the city of Klagenfurt can get a subsidy for the purchase of an electric car. The subsidy granted is 12% of the respective sales price; the maximum amount is EUR 3,500. Eligible for funding are exclusively new, purely battery-operated two-tack production vehicles. Cars equipped with range extenders and hybrid drive systems are excluded. The e-car must be approved for a speed of at least 80 km/h. In addition, each recipient of co-funding receives a charging box and may obtain free electricity from all “Lebensland charging stations” for a period of 48 months.

  3. Subsidies for implementing e-charging stations
    Private persons or companies who install an e-charging station receive a subsidy of 1,300 EUR. 09

  4. Test driving
    The e-cars purchased in the context of CMOBIL are not only available to residents in Klagenfurt, but may be tested by any person living in Carinthia and holding a driver’s licence. Interested persons can choose from the following models: Twziy, i-Miev, Kangoo, Biro, and Nissan LEAF. The e-vehicles can be booked at the Department of Environmental Protection of the Municipality of Klagenfurt on Lake Wörthersee for a week at a rate of 60 EUR. Students are granted a reduced rate of 30 EUR when renting a Twizy.

    Since 2010, more than 1,300 car rentals have been registered. Each test driver filled in a questionnaire to report about his/her experience with the electric vehicle. These data will contribute to scientific studies about the needs and expectations of users.10

  5. Introduction of a E-taxi fleet
    Since 2013, five e-taxis of the brand Nissan LEAF are in operation in Klagenfurt and the surrounding area. The e-taxis can be used instead of conventional taxi cars or in addition as rental cars within the scope of the company’s licence. For the users, there are no changes in the operation of the taxis: the taxi fares are the same and night-taxi coupons are accepted, too.

    Taxi companies can test an e-taxi for a period of up to three months and have thus the opportunity of integrating e-mobility into their everyday working life. The vehicles are assigned to the taxi companies in the order of application. A quick charging station, which is in operation around the clock, is available at the company Sintschnig. Charging costs do not arise for the companies, but the taxis may also be charged at any station in the city free of charge.

  6. Changes in regulations: New parking space guideline in Carinthia
    Charging stations are an important infrastructure and frame condition for the promotion of electric vehicles. To push external stakeholders to construct charging stations, the state of Carinthia has changes its parking space guidelines. From 1st January 2014 on, it is obligatory to prepare the construction of e-charging stations in every new development.
    The following requirement must be contained in every notice of decision:
    Steps need to be taken to provide 230V/400V power connections for at least 10% of all new car parking spaces , which allows charging of electric vehicles at the car park. The requirements and definitions of the Austrian standard ÖVE ÖNORM EN 61851-1 apply.

    Car parks that are suitable for charging EV need to be marked in a standardised colour. Further information can be found here.

    To give an example, the required number for commercial premises is:

    • 1 charging station with 2 dedicated e-parking spaces in the case of 11-50 mandatory parking spaces,
    • 2 charging stations with 4 dedicated e-parking spaces in the case of 51-100 mandatory parking spaces,
    • 3 charging stations with 6 dedicated e-parking spaces in the case of 101-200 mandatory parking spaces, etc.
  1. Image campaign to promote e-mobility
    To further raise awareness for e-mobility among the population, a large-scale promotional campaign was started by Klagenfurt Marketing GmbH in June 2012. From June to the end of August 2012, 900 posters were up in the urban area of Klagenfurt.

Impacts of the promotion of electric vehicles

Because all projects are still running, it is too early to assess the medium- and long-term impacts of these measures.11

First evidence is shown by the test drivers as well as the number of purchased electric cars in Austria. More than 1,300 persons tested the e-cars in Klagenfurt, the cars are fully booked for months in advance – this can be seen as a success. In addition, 10% of all electric cars sold in Austria are registered in the state of Carinthia, although only 6% of the population of Austria live in Carinthia.

34 www.cemobil.at (Source: 07.07.2014).

Clean vehicles in London

The city of London plans to have a minimum of 100,000 electric vehicles and 25,000 charging stations by 2015. At least 1,000 vehicles of the “Greater London Authority” will be electric too. To reach this goal, large financial investments are planned. The costs for setting up the infrastructure are estimated at 67.7 million EUR. In addition to that, financial incentives are given to residents in order to encourage the use of LEV by people and businesses.

Since 2008, the city has run incentives to promote the use of Low Emission Vehicles: LEVs are excluded from CO2 taxes and from the congestion charge. The Congestion Charge is an £11.50 daily charge for driving a vehicle within the charging zone between 07:00 and 18:00, Monday to Friday. Cars or vans which emit 75g/km or less of CO2 and that meet the Euro 5 standard for air quality qualify for a 100% Greener Vehicle Discount on the Congestion Charge. However, these discounts have now closed to new registrations.35 Since April 2013, the introduction of a new Ultra Low Emission Discount (ULED) replaces the Greener Vehicle Discount (GVD) and Electric Vehicle Discount (EVD). This is a first indicator that financial incentives to promote the use of LEVs are only a temporary solution that loses its effect after a critical mass of LEVs has been reached.

Furthermore, a Low Emission Zone (LEZ) operates to encourage the most polluting heavy diesel vehicles driving in London to become cleaner. The LEZ covers most of Greater London and is in operation 24 hours a day, 365 days of the year.

12

Further information about congestion charging in London can be found here.

The graph below demonstrated that the number of LEVs that have registered for the discount from congestion charge have increased substantially from less than 1,000 in January 2011 to more almost 30,000 in September 2013.36

13

35 VERKEHRSCLUB ÖSTERRICH (2009): Potenziale von Elektro-Mobilität. Wien.

Assessment – Stockholm

Contribution to objectives

Objective

Scale of contribution

Comment

  There is only a very small increase in the efficiency of the transport system. There might be less congestion, no evidence can be given.
 

Possibly small benefits because of possible noise reduction.

No evidence on the impacts of this measure to residential areas.
  The higher and growing proportion of clean vehicles led to a better air quality and a decrease in GHG emissions from transport. In 2008, about 5% of all vehicles in Sweden were clean vehicles. The level of GHG emissions per capita in Stockholm is 4 tCO2e, which is for instance far lower than Now York (6,5 tCO2e) and Portland (10,5 tCO2e).38 Greenhouse gas emissions from transport were declining during the last years (expect a small peak in 2010).
  No evidence of effects on equity and social inclusion.
  No evidence of effects on safety.
  No evidence of effects of economic growth.
 

No income is generated, but investments need to be made to finance the subsidies for private persons and for companies. Investments in the purchasing of new municipals cars were made, too.

The construction of more charging stations and a system for levying a more differentiated climate tax is somewhere between several hundred million Swedish kronor and half a billion Swedish kronor.39
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Assessment – Klagenfurt

Contribution to objectives

Objective

Scale of contribution

Comment

  No evidence of effects on transport system efficiency.
 

Possibly small benefits because of possible noise reduction.

No evidence on the impacts of this measure to residential areas.
 

The substitution of conventional vehicles by clean vehicles led to a reduction of GHG emissions. There is a study on the CO2 savings ongoing, but the results are not yet published.

The aim of the City of Klagenfurt is to reduce transport emissions by 1.900 t CO2 per year.
  No evidence of effects on equity and social inclusion.
  No evidence of effects on safety.
  No evidence of effects of economic growth.
 

The funding for the purchase of EV is given by the state of Carinthia. Therefore, there is no financial effect for the municipality.

= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Assessment – London

Contribution to objectives

Objective

Scale of contribution

Comment

  No evidence of effects on transport system efficiency.
 

Possibly small benefits because of possible noise reduction.

No evidence on the impacts of this measure to residential areas.
  There are positive environmental effects, but no evidence is given for the case of London.
  No evidence of effects on equity and social inclusion.
  No evidence of effects on safety.
  No evidence of effects of economic growth.
  The costs for setting up the infrastructure are estimated at 67.7 million EUR.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Contribution to objectives

Contribution to objectives
Objective Scale of contribution Comment
  If conventional vehicles with a combustion engine are replaced one by one by Low Emission Vehicles (LEVs), there are no effects on the efficiency of the transport system. There is no impact on traffic flow, congestion, cost-efficiency of the transport system etc.
  The promotion of LEVs will lead to a reduction of noise and an improvement of air quality. This is a benefit for residential areas. While there is less noise and cleaner air, other negative effects of motorized transport remain and limit the positive effects.
  Both, theory and practice have provided evidence that the use of LEVs has positive effects on the environment. The use of renewable resources, lower GHG emissions and a better air quality through less CO2, NOx and PM10 are the main benefits. Sensitive groups like children and elderly people profit the most.
  There are slightly negative effects on equity and social inclusion. The purchase of new vehicles is expensive and individuals who cannot afford this new technology might be excluded from activities in the future.
  Electric vehicles (having a big share among all LEVs) are more silent than conventional vehicles. Less noise is beneficial for people living in areas with a lot of traffic, but in terms of traffic safety it is unfavorable because people cannot hear approaching cars.
  Assuming that technological innovations for LEVs as well as parts of the vehicles will be produced in Europe, the promotion of LEVs will lead to an economic growth in Europe. Thus, the European market stays competitive to the US and Asian market.
  The financial investments vary from city to city. Generally, there are investments needed for all infrastructural and pricing measures: from subsides for purchasing LEVs to setting up new charging infrastructure. There are also less revenues from reduced parking tariffs.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Contribution to problems

Contribution to to alleviation of key problems
Objective Scale of contribution Comment
Congestion Of conventional cars will be replaced one by one by LEVs, there will be no effect on congestion.
Community impacts Liveability is improved due to less traffic noise and less harmful transport emissions.
Environmental damage High contribution to avoid environmental damage through the use of renewable resources, though lower emissions, and because of a better air quality.
Poor accessibility The shift from conventional cars to LEVs will not improve accessibility (Apart from LEVs that are allowed to enter restricted areas)
Social and goegraphical disadvantage

No effect.

Accidents The problems of traffic accidents will not be solved. The lower noise level of EV will even have a small negative impact on traffic safety.
Economic growth A growing LEV-market will ensure that revenues and employment in the European automotive sector will stay stable. Without making cars “greener”, this industry will lose importance.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Appropriate contexts

Appropriate area-types
Area type Suitability
City centre
Dense inner suburb
Medium density outer suburb
Less dense outer suburb
District centre
Corridor
Small town
Tourist town
= Least suitable area type = Most suitable area type

Adverse side effects

The major negative aspect of the promotion of LEVs is the fact that it is still a support for motorised mobility and that, by doing so, other transport problems like congestion and a loss in the attractiveness of cities because of too many cars is not solved. It is therefore important to focus also on active modes like walking and cycling.

Another aspect is that the energy/fuel to run the vehicles needs to be produced and that – in case this is not focused on renewable resources – other industries and economies will suffer in the end.

AUSTRIA TECH (2013): E-Mobilität für Kommunen. Elektromobilität als Chance für die kommunale Entwicklung. Wien.http://www.austriatech.at/files/get/c16f6fe26b8d00a9af5c99c294e18ab2/handbuch_e_mobility_2013_final_v2.pdf (Access: 28.06.2014).

BUNDESMINISTERIUM FÜR VERKEHR, INNOVATION UND TECHNOLOGIE (2011): Verkehr in Zahlen. Wien.

CEMOBIL (2014): Website of the EU-LIFE-Project CEMOBIL. Published by city council of Klagenfurt. http://cemobil.at/index.php?id=5&ID1=5&sprache1=en (Access: 30.06.2014).

CIVITAS (2010): Cleaner vehicles and alternative fuels. Policy Advice Notes 02

CIVITAS TRENDSETTER (2006): Clean vehicles – a way to reduce emissions.

CONROY, S. (2013): Congestion Charging and Traffic Enforcement. Transport for London. Presentation slides.  http://fsr.eui.eu/Documents/Presentations/Transport/2013/130930EUrbanTRF/20130930CONROYSean.pdf (Access: 07.07.2014).

DOLL, C./ GUTMANN, M./ WIETSCHEL, M. (2011): Integration von Elektrofahrzeugen in Carsharing-Flotten. Simulation anhand realer Fahrprofile. Published by FRAUNHOFER INSTITUTE. Karlsruhe. http://www.carsharing.de/sites/default/files/uploads/alles_ueber_carsharing/pdf/fsem_elektromobilitaet_und_carsharing_fin-2011-05-06_tcm243-90486.pdf (30.06.2014).

E-CONNECTED / KLIMA- UND ENERGIE FONDS (2014): Die Vorteile von e-Mobilität auf einen Blick. http://www.e-connected.at/content/die-vorteile-von-e-mobilitaet-auf-einem-blick (Access: 30.06.2014).

EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2014): Clean Vehicle Europe. Info for member state Sweden. http://www.cleanvehicle.eu/info-per-country-and-eu-policy/member-states/sweden/national-level (Access: 07.07.2014).

EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2013): EU launches clean fuel strategy. http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kallas/headlines/news/2013/01/clean-fuel-strategy_en.htm (Access 30.06.2014).

EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2014): Horizon 2020. Green Vehicles 2014. http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/news/green-vehicles-2014 (Access: 30.06.2014).

EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2011): Market observation for Energy. Key figures. Presentation slides. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/observatory/countries/doc/key_figures.pdf (Access: 28.06.2014).

EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2014): Reducing CO2 emissions from passenger cars. http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/vehicles/cars/index_en.htm (Access: 30.06.2014).

FRANCE 24 (2012): France on green ‘offensive’ to save auto industry. http://www.france24.com/en/20120725-french-green-vehicles-offensive-save-auto-industry-psa-peugeot-citroen-government-economy/ (Access: 04.07.2014).

GREENMOTORSBLOG (2011): Elektroautos – ADAC: E-Autos doppelt so teuer wie konventionelle Autos. http://www.greenmotorsblog.de/elektroautos/elektroautos-%E2%80%93-adac-e-autos-doppelt-so-teuer-als-konventionelle-autos/4241/ (Access: 16.04.2014).

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS TIMES (2014): UK Government Spending £500m on Green Car Investments Confirms Clegg. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/government-geared-huge-green-car-investment-says-deputy-prime-minister-1446527 (Access: 30.06.2014).

KPMG (2013): KPMG’s Global Automotive Executive Survey 2013. http://www.kpmg.com/Global/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/global-automotive-executive-survey/Documents/2013-report-v4.pdf (Access: 30.06.2014).

THE ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION IN THE CITY OF STOCKHOLM (2010): Clean vehicles in Stockholm. Historic retrospect 1994-2010. Stockholm. http://www.stockholm.se/Global/Frist%c3%a5ende%20webbplatser/Milj%c3%b6f%c3%b6rvaltningen/Milj%c3%b6bilar/Dokument/In%20english/MIS_historia_eng_webb.pdf (Access: 07.07.2014).

THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL ON CLEAN TRANSPORTATION (2013): European Vehicle Market Statistics. Pocketbook 2013. Berlin. http://eupocketbook.theicct.org/ (Access: 30.06.2014).

THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE (2013): Stockholm. Green Economy Leader. London. http://files.lsecities.net/files/2013/06/LSE-2013-Stockholm-Final-Report-webhighres.pdf (Access: 07.07.2014).

TRANSPORT FOR LONDON (2014): Congestion charge. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/congestion-charge (Access: 07.07.2014).

UMWELTBUNDESAMT (2014): Geräuschbelastung im Straßenverkehr. http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/themen/verkehr-laerm/verkehrslaerm/strassenverkehrslaerm (Access: 28.06.2014).

VAN ESSEN, H./ KAMPMAN, B. (2011): Impacts of Electric Vehicles – Summary report. Delft. http://www.cedelft.eu/publicatie/impact_of_electric_vehicles/1153 (Access: 30.06.2014).

VERKEHRSCLUB ÖSTERRICH (2009): Potenziale von Elektro-Mobilität. Wien. http://www.vcoe.at/de/publikationen/vcoe-schriftenreihe-mobilitaet-mit-zukunft/details/items/potenziale-von-elektromobilitaet (Access: 07.07.2014).

WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION (2014): Overweight. Situation and trends. http://www.who.int/gho/ncd/risk_factors/overweight_text/en/ (Access: 30.06.2014).

ZEIT ONLINE (2014): So sauber ist das Elektroauto. In: Zeit Online, Bereich Mobilität. http://www.zeit.de/mobilitaet/2014-01/elektroauto-energiebilanz/ (Access: 28.06.2014).

ZHANG, F./ COOKE, P. (2009): The Green Vehicle Trend: Electric, Plug-in hybrid or Hydrogen fuel cell? Cardiff. http://www.dime-eu.org/files/active/0/Cooke-09-Fang-Green-vehicle-Review.pdf (Access: 04.07.2014).