Business
Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from U.S. Transportation
 | January 2011 By: David L. Greene and Steven E. Plotkin Download this paper (pdf) Project Director: Judi Greenwald Project Manager: Nick Nigro |
Executive Summary:
This report examines the prospects for substantially reducing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the U.S. transportation sector, which accounts for 27 percent of the GHG emissions of the entire U.S. economy and 30 percent of the world’s transportation GHG emissions. Without shifts in existing policies, the U.S. transportation sector’s GHG emissions are expected to grow by about 10 percent by 2035, and will still account for a quarter of global transportation emissions at that time. If there is to be any hope that damages from climate change can be held to moderate levels, these trends must change.
This report shows that through a combination of policies and improved technologies, these trends can be changed. It is possible to cut GHG emissions from the transportation sector cost-effectively by up to 65 percent below 2010 levels by 2050 by improving vehicle efficiency, shifting to less carbon intensive fuels, changing travel behavior, and operating more efficiently. A major co-benefit of reducing transportation’s GHG emissions is the resulting reductions in oil use and improvements in energy security.
It develops three scenarios that diverge from “business as usual,” based on the assumption that the United States is willing to change the incentives and regulations that affect the design of vehicles, the types of fuels that are used, the choices made by individuals and businesses in purchasing and using vehicles, and how communities and their transportation infrastructure are built and used.
This report is an update of the Center's 2003 report on Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions From U.S. Transportation
Related white papers on Transportation Reauthorization:
Primer on Federal Surface Transportation Authorization and the Highway Trust Fund
Saving Oil and Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions through U.S. Federal Transportation Policy
About the Authors:
David L. Greene is a Corporate Fellow of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Senior Fellow of the Howard H. Baker, Jr. Center for Public Policy and a Research Professor of Economics at the University of Tennessee. He is an author of more than 200 publications on transportation and energy issues. Mr. Greene is an emeritus member of both the Energy and Alternative Fuels Committees of the Transportation Research Board and a lifetime National Associate of the National Academies. He received the Society of Automotive Engineers’ Barry D. McNutt Award for Excellence in Automotive Policy Analysis, the Department of Energy’s 2007 Hydrogen R&D Award, and was recognized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for contributions to the IPCC’s receipt of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. He holds a B.A. from Columbia University, an M.A. from the University of Oregon, and a Ph.D. in Geography and Environmental Engineering from The Johns Hopkins University.
Steven Plotkin is a staff scientist with Argonne National Laboratory’s Center for Transportation Research, specializing in analysis of transportation energy efficiency. He has worked extensively on automobile fuel economy technology and policy as a consultant to the Department of Energy, and was a co-principal investigator on ANL’s Multi-Path Transportation Futures Study. Mr. Plotkin was a lead author on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report Climate Change 2007: Mitigation of Climate Change and has been selected to participate on the Fifth Assessment Report. He was for 17 years a Senior Analyst and Senior Associate with the Energy Program of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) and prior to that he was an environmental engineer with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Mr. Plotkin has a B.S. degree in Civil Engineering from Columbia University and a Master of Engineering (Aerospace) degree from Cornell University. He is the 2005 recipient of the Society of Automotive Engineers’ Barry D. McNutt Award for Excellence in Automotive Policy Analysis.
May 2013 Newsletter
Click here to view our May 2013 newsletter.
Learn about our new state policy maps, tornadoes and climate changes and keeping cool this summer.
Webinar: What is Climate Leadership? Examples and Lessons Learned in Supply Chain Management
Two 2013 Climate Leadership Award winners in the supply chain category will discuss how they set aggressive greenhouse gas reduction goals and how they are at the leading edge of managing GHGs in their organizational supply chains.
Mike Ray, Vice President of Business Integration and Transformation, IBM Integrated Supply Chain
Andy Renger, Supply Chain Manager, San Diego Gas & Electric
REGISTER FOR THE WEBINAR https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/606192074
The “Instability Ingredient” and Business Risk
Businesses have always had to predict and manage risks. Those risks include the potential impact of extreme weather such as floods, storms and drought on a company's supply chain, power supply, and property.
But now companies must find a way to factor in the "instability ingredient" -- climate change -- which is likely to make weather more unpredictable, extreme -- and costly -- in the future.
Market Based Climate Mitigation Policies In Emerging Economies
 | Market Based Climate Mitigation Policies In Emerging Economies December 2012 by Sara Moarif and Namrata Patodia Rastogi Download the full report (PDF) Press Release |
Summary
Used by governments for decades, market-based policies are mechanisms to control environmental pollution at various leverage points. They work by changing relative prices – raising the cost of emissions-intensive activities and/or lowering the cost of lower-emitting alternatives – to provide producers and consumers with a financial incentive to adopt the latter. Policies that can be considered market-based include taxes and fees, subsidies, and the use of pollution control trading systems. Market-based policy instruments provide financial incentive to elicit specific behavior from entities responsible for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, whether consumers or producers.
This brief provides an overview of market-based policies aimed at reducing GHG emissions in several major emerging economies: Brazil, China, India, South Africa and South Korea. By implementing regulatory and marketbased policy instruments across their economies, these countries are seeking to promote cleaner technologies and behavior change while also promoting economic development and growth.
Climate silence will cost the United States
I recently replied to ta question on the National Journal blog, "How is the absence of discussion about global warming going to affect our ability to do something about it?"
You can read more on the original blog post and other responses at the National Journal.
Here is my response:
Patience and policy needed on drive toward sustainability
I recently responded to a question on the National Journal blog, "What 's holding back electric cars?"
You can read more on the original blog post and other responses at the National Journal.
Here is my response:
Companies seeing impacts of climate change
At a time when the climate issue is being overshadowed in capitals around the world by economic concerns, some may be surprised that interest in climate change in both the investor and corporate communities remains strong. In a recent survey of the world’s 500 largest companies, 96 percent of the 379 responding said that climate change is dealt with at the senior executive or board level, while 78 percent have integrated climate change into their business strategies. In the same survey, 37 percent say the impacts of climate change are already affecting their operations, up sharply from just 10 percent two years ago.
To understand why, just look at the numbers.
