Upload
embarq
View
1.044
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Case Study on Opportunities in Brazilian Cities – Belo Horizonte. By Dario Hidalgo. EMBARQ. Supported by Inter-American Development Bank. Presented at Latin American Carbon Forum, October 13-15, 2010. Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.
Citation preview
Scoping Post 2012 Climate Instruments: Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions –
NAMAs
Case Study on Opportunities in Brazilian Cities – Belo Horizonte
EMBARQ, The WRI Center on Sustainable Transport
Supported by: Inter-American Development Bank
Proposed Framework for the NAMA
Public policy objective
NAMA Components
GHG Mitigation
Co-Benefits
Financing
Institutional Settings
Monitoring, Reporting and Verification MRV
Risk Analysis
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/South_america_%281%29.jpg
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u252/rmcastanheira/BelaFoto.jpg
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
0.0%1.0%2.0%3.0%4.0%5.0%6.0%7.0%
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
Bicycle Baseline
Bicycel IMP
46.0%
48.0%
50.0%
52.0%
54.0%
56.0%
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
Public Transport Baseline
Public Transport IMP
42.0%
44.0%
46.0%
48.0%
50.0%
52.0%
54.0%
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022
Private Transport Baseline
Private Transport IMP
Go
als
Roadways Improvements
Bus Rapid Transit Implementation
Metro Expansion
Integration
Bicycle Infrastructure
Pedestrian Facilities
Land Use
Parking Policies
NAMA Components
TransportModel
CalibrationBase Year 2008
Roadwayand TransitNetworks
(Supply 2008)
Socio-EconomicCharacteristics
Origin-DestinationMatrix
(Demand 2008)
Travel Time Vehicle Kilometers
Emissions Factors2008
GHG Emissions2008
TransportModel
ApplicationBase Year 2008
Roadwayand TransitNetworks
(Supply 2020)
Socio-EconomicCharacteristics(Demand 2020)
Travel Time Vehicle Kilometers
GHG Emissions2020
Emissions Factors2020
Structure and Parameters
(2,000)
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Tota
l GH
G E
mis
sion
s Sav
ings
(100
0 to
ns)
GH
G E
mis
sion
s (1
000
tons
CO
2)
Year
Integral Mobility Plan
Baseline
Total GHG Savings
For 2030 expected reductions of 1million CO2eq
tons compared with baseline, for a cumulative value of 9 million CO2eq tons
($200)
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
(100)
(50)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Trav
el T
ime
Savi
ngs
Eco
no
mic
Eq
uiv
alen
t ($
mill
ion
s)
Trav
el T
ime
Savi
ngs
(mill
ion
ho
urs
)
Year
Public Transport
Private Transport
Economic Equivalent
In 2030 182 million hours saved in public transport and 170 million hours saved in private transport. Economic equivalent: USD 1,300 million
Air Pollutants
BaselineIntegral Mobility
Plan Difference
Bikeways (km) 14 300 286
Buslanes (km) 14 72 58
BRT (km) 0 80 80
Metro (km) 29 65 36
Road Investment USD Million 38.4 982.8 944.4
Capital Cost USD Million 1,551.7 4,215.2 2,663.5
Total GHG Emissions (CO2eq Ton) 44,775,918 35,624,604 -9,151,315
Climate Change Funding Potential
Where : Climate change funding [USD] : Baseline GHG emissions in year y (without the NAMA) : Scenario s GHG emissions in year y (with the NAMA)
: Emission reduction certificate market value (13.02 Euro equivalent to 17.58 USD per ton CO2eq according to http://www.ecx.eu/ April 15, 2010)
: Multiplier factor, we assume a value of 2. : Annual discount rate (e.g. 12%)
: Period of performance (e.g. lifecycle of the infrastructure 2030)
http://www.bogotacomovamos.org/datos/AE_14_Bogota_Como_Vamos_2009.pdf1600 surveys, error 2.6% with a 95% confidence level
ConclusionsFor 2030 the plan is expected to save 36% in GHG, 25% in travel time, 19% in transport costs and 39% in particulate matter as compared with a projected linebase (BAU)
The potential funding from climate change sources is small as compared with the funding needs, but a supported NAMA will help in removing implementation barriers.
Base GHG and co-benefits estimation in good transport planning:
Detailed modeling with good information on demand and supply
Integration of multiple elements under the plan: active and public transport, land use and transport demand management
Base climate change funding on the reduction potential, not the size of the investments
Base MRV on activity surveys (mobility objectives)