Options for air quality improvement and climate change mitigation: four selected problems

Air pollution is a generic term that comprises several problems, each with its own characteristics. They all interact with climate change in a different way. This section selects four major air pollution problems and examines them in detail, focussing on options for abatement. The aim is to give examples of options for air pollution and climate change mitigation in different geographical and political areas that may have a pro- nounced synergy. The technology and policy options implemented in response to the different problems will be assessed for their climate change mitigation impact in Section 6.4. The cases are:

- large-scale, transboundary acidification: US and Europe;

- urban air pollution in industrialized countries: Los Angeles and London; - urban air pollution in developing countries: Delhi, Mexico and Chongqing, and - Indoor air pollution.

The relevance of these cases for climate change interaction is illustrated by their - preliminarily determined - interaction with climate change (see Box 6.2). Two of the air pollution cases are located in industrialized countries, and two are primarily located in developing countries. The distinction between industrialized and developing countries has been made for the two urban air pollution cases due to the different stages of policy they are at. Impacts on ecosystems (transboundary acidification) and impacts on human health (indoor and urban air pollution) are also presented. The next section briefly discusses climate impacts of air pollution policy in the four cases.

Box 6.2 Cases interacting with climate change

Transboundary acidification: With respect to acidification policy, the early reductions in NOx and SO2 were

mainly achieved by end-of-pipe measures causing energy consumption - CO2 emissions therefore − to rise

slightly. Since acidifying emissions originate mainly from fossil fuel combustion, measures in the energy sector appear to be the most effective. When measures other than end-of-pipe regulation are considered, such as fuel switch, energy efficiency and switch to renewable energy, the climate effects will be positive.

Urban air pollution in industrialized countries: Transport remains the main source of urban pollution in indus-

trialized countries. In general, the reduction of air pollutant emissions by end-of-pipe measures causes a rise in fuel use and therefore enhances greenhouse gas emissions. Measures in the transport sector that promote the use of zero-emission vehicles, enhance the use of public transport and promote energy-efficient measures provide a synergy with climate change mitigation measures.

Urban air pollution in developing countries: Measures to address SO2 emissions of industry in the city can lead

to less CO2 emissions (mainly through fuel switch and efficiency improvement) but can also be negative in

terms of industry relocation and increased transport demand for the workers in those factories. Emission stan- dards and fuel switch usually benefit climate change mitigation, though the exact effects have not yet been quantified. Behavioural changes in transport are synergetic with climate change policy. The decrease in Chinese CO2 emissions in 1999 and 2000, despite a GDP growth of 7-9%, were largely due to the fuel switch for elec-

tricity production in several large Chinese cities (Sinton and Fridley, 2000). This is a good example of a synergy in specific circumstances.

Indoor air pollution: The poor are the target group for indoor air pollution in developing countries. As most of

the indoor air pollution is caused by lighting, heating or biomass cooking fuel, energy efficiency measures or a fuel switch for those activities usually leads to both better indoor air quality and reduced greenhouse gas emis- sions. These measures could also be cost-effective. Interaction with climate change may happen with fuel switching: e.g. use of diesel or gas instead of unsustainably obtained CO2-neutral traditional biomass. In terms

of the interaction between climate policy and policy to reduce indoor air pollution, there seems to be room for synergetic effects in the short term. The Clean Development Mechanism (see Chapter 2) could provide an op- portunity for this.

6.3.1. Large-scale, transboundary acidification

Transboundary acidification has its main cause in fossil fuel use in industry, coal-fired power generation and fuel production in refineries, particularly the case if only SO2 is considered. As these are all large stationary

emission sources, the reduction of SO2 emissions is relatively easy to regulate. However, there are various

causes of NOx emission, including diffuse and mobile sources that are difficult to manage (Erisman, 2004).

During the 1970s, the problem of acidification became so urgent and visible in Europe and North America that in 1979, around 40 countries adopted the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP). This Convention provides a framework for more detailed agreements on different substances. Un- der this framework, the ‘1985 Helsinki Protocol on the reduction of sulphur emissions or their transboundary fluxes’ and the ‘1988 Sofia Protocol on the control of Nitrogen Oxides’ were agreed upon, and entered into force (in 1987 and 1991, respectively). In general, the Protocols under the LRTAP lean very much on the command-and-control approach in policymaking. Most of them have either emission reduction targets in- cluding emission standards, or, at least, require relevant sources to make use of Best Available Technologies (BAT).

The 1985 Sulphur Protocol required Parties to reduce their SO2 emissions by 30% by 1993 (base year is

1980). Most Parties complied with this requirement and kept their emissions stable in the years after 1993. As a follow-up on the 1985 Sulphur Protocol, the second 1994 Sulphur Protocol (the Oslo Protocol on fur- ther reduction of sulphur emissions) was agreed on and has already become effective. This Oslo Protocol is another example of typical command-and-control policymaking, since it has mandatory requirements for the sulphur content of gas oil and mandatory emission limits exist. However, in this Protocol, the tendency to- wards more market-based instruments is visible, as it includes a provision to introduce market-based instru- ments in order to achieve the targets more efficiently.

The 1988 Protocol on Nitrogen Oxides required Parties to ensure that emissions at the end of 1994 did not exceed the emissions in 1987. It also required Parties to establish critical loads and timing for emission re- duction objectives. In addition, by 1993, the Parties had to have developed and applied national emission standards for major sources of NOx, mainly by applying economically feasible BAT.

The most recent Protocol under the LRTAP is the 1999 Gothenburg Protocol to Abate Acidification, Euthro- phication and Ground-level Ozone. This is unique among the LRTAP protocols in the sense that it is directed towards the effects of air pollution, rather than the emission sources. It does, however, set pollution effect- based ceilings for 2010 for four pollutants, including sulphur and NOx. The implementation of the Protocol

requires Europe to decrease its emissions of NOx by 41% and the sulphur emissions by 63% compared to

1990. Most countries in the European Union are parties to the Sulphur and Nitrogen Oxides Protocols. The United States plays an ambiguous role in the LRTAP. The country was a Party to the 1988 Nitrogen Protocol but not to the Sulphur Protocols. However, it decided to change the base year of the reduction target from 1987 to 1978 (LRTAP, 2004), which makes it essentially easier to meet the target.

The United States and the countries of the European Union follow a notably different approach. Whereas the European Union is an important driver behind the protocols under the LRTAP, the United States tends to follow its own policy, which is usually more market-based. Table 6.5 shows the effects of the different poli- cies (based on Erisman, 2004 and UNECE, 2001). The approach of the European countries has generally been more effective in terms of reducing pollutants. However, this does not mean that this is due to the choice of command-and-control policy instruments. If in an emissions trading system, the cap, had been ap- plied on a more ambitious level, this would also have been reflected in the policy achievements.

Table 6.5 The contribution of fossil fuel combustion to SO2 and NOx emissions, applied policy and actual

effects on the emissions in the United States and Europe (Erisman, 2004)

United States Europe

NOx 94% 88%

Contribution of fossil fuel combustion to

emissions SO2 95% 76%

Policy instruments

SO2 emissions trading for power

utilities

NOx performance standards

SO2 direct emission regulation

NOx permit systems, emission standards

NOx +1% -21%

Policy achievements (Change in emissions

1990 - 1998) SO2 -18% -41%

6.3.2. Urban air pollution in industrialized countries

The cities of London and Los Angeles are considered here. The causes of city smog in the USA are mainly stationary fuel combustion sources, road transport and industrial processes (EPA, 2003). In London, emis- sions were historically caused by concentrated industrial activity in the city (mainly causing SO2 and soot),

but most of the current air pollution problems are caused by transport. The meteorological conditions in the urban area, notably the wind velocity and the solar radiation, exert a considerable effect on the severity of the air pollution impacts. The wind can disperse pollution and the photochemical reactions, leading to tropo- spheric ozone formation, require sunlight.

The policy on how to address air pollution in cities depends on the nature and cause of the problem. The pol- lutant that is responsible for most damage in industrialized cities is thought to be particulate matter. A study carried out in the USA and in Europe shows, independently, similar numbers for the impacts in terms of mortality and hospital admissions as a consequence of air pollution (WHO, 2003), which means that there is a comparable health improvement incentive for air pollution abatement in both regions.

Los Angeles

Road transport is the main anthropogenic source of pollutants, both NOx and particulate matter, in the city of

Los Angeles. Road transport is also a fast-growing sector: the number of vehicle miles travelled each day in the Los Angeles area increased by 90% between 1982 and 2001.

Los Angeles, surrounded by mountainous areas and the Pacific coast, is often burdened by health-threatening pollution episodes. City, state and federal regulation is in place to abate emissions. The Federal Clean Air Act has the following basic elements: national ambient air quality standards for major air pollutants, hazard- ous air pollutant standards, state attainment plans, motor vehicle emissions standards, stationary source emis- sion standards and permits, acid rain control measures, stratospheric ozone protection and enforcement pro- visions. (Alexis et al., 2003). The Act was first implemented in 1970 and last revised in 1990.

In 1996, the city of Los Angeles joined the US Department of Energy Clean Cities Program, which aims to enhance the number of Alternative Fuel Vehicle fleets in a number of different ways. However, this Program is unlikely to make a lot of difference to the total emissions because of its demonstration character.

Emissions of ozone precursors (NOx) have declined, inclusive of a decline in ozone concentrations of about

50% in 1982-2001. Particulate matter concentration, the main cause of the health problems, are more vari- able and also more persistent. Though a downward trend can be observed between the start of the measure- ments in 1988 and 2001, it is a slow process, and the 2001 maximum 24-hour concentrations were the same as the 1995 concentrations.

London

In 1956, the first Clean Air Act was approved by the UK Government, which was later amended and ex- tended into the Clean Air Act 1968. It limited pollution by smoke, grit and dust from domestic fires (by regu- lating the burning of solid, liquid and gaseous fuels), as well as industry (e.g. by controlling chimney heights). Regulation was therefore explicitly aimed at the causes of the Great Smog: particulate matter and

SO2. Concentrations of these two fell from 280 µg/m3 and about 400 µg/m3 in the 1950s, respectively, to less

than 20 µg/m3 each in 2000 (Greater London Authority, 2002a).

In 1993, the Clean Air Act was revised to incorporate other environmental concerns, for example, regulation of the quality of petrol and diesel fuels. In 1995, this was all incorporated into a single Environmental Act, which introduced standards and objectives derived from the EU Air Quality Framework Directive on SO2,

NO2, particulate matter, lead, CO and other substances (Greater London Authority, 2002a). Since the policy

on air quality policy in the city was started 50 years ago, the contribution of transport to air pollution has surged and other pollutants have become more important. For example, road transport is currently responsi- ble for about 35% of NOx and 40% of health-damaging PM10 emissions (Greater London Authority, 2002b).

This is why the Air Quality Strategy, with a specific focus on road transport, was launched in 2001. The fol- lowing measures will be implemented:

- reduction of traffic load through investment in the public transport network, congestion charging, and ap- propriate planning;

- reduction of emissions from individual vehicles by targeting emission reduction from heavy diesel vehi- cles (buses, coaches, trucks, taxis), the deployment of newer, cleaner vehicles and technology, the intro- duction of cleaner fuels, investigating the introduction of one or more low-emission zones that would be inaccessible for most polluting vehicles, and, in the long term, increasing the take-up of zero-emission forms of transport.

With respect to the purchase of cleaner vehicles, the Strategy proposes providing incentives for the purchase of the cleanest, alternatively fuelled cars, the switching of vehicles for city services (such as police etc.) and the promotion the cleaner fuels.

Other targeted sectors causing air pollution are air transport (measures: offering alternative transport and technology improvements), heating of buildings (measures: improvement of energy efficiency and promo- tion of, for example, solar water heating) and the construction sector (measures: best practices to reduce dust emissions).

Table 6.6 Comparison of air quality and air quality policy in Los Angeles and London (World Bank, 2003)

Los Angeles London

PM 38 23 Average annual concentrations (µg/m3) in 2000 NOx 74 77 Start of policy 1970 1956 Policy measures − Industry control

− Vehicle and fuel standards − Alternative fuel vehicles

− Industry control − Vehicle standards − Home fuel burning − Public transport

− Alternative fuel vehicles

Policy effects

Gradual decrease of most important pollutants − Prevention of extreme pollution episodes

− Sharp decrease of pollutants

Although emission reductions in the two industrialized metropolitan areas are impressive, emissions still cause considerable damage to human health in those areas.

6.3.3. Urban air pollution in developing countries

The substances causing urban air pollution in developing countries are generally comparable to those causing air pollution in urban areas in industrialized countries. The differences are generally in the faster rate of eco- nomic development in developing countries, compared to the more gradual economic development and asso- ciated air pollution in industrialized countries.

A synopsis of Chongqing, Delhi and Mexico City

Chongqing has only just started to reduce air pollution. Compared with air pollution management in Mexico City or in Delhi, the Chongqing urban air quality policy is therefore in the least mature state. However, this

policy has the potential to become more effective than the Mexican and Indian policies due to a more cen- tralized government and the possibility of leap-frogging. This is illustrated by the considerable drop in SO2

emissions within the space of two years as a result of a government decree. However, the transport sector, which is the polluter of the future, might be less susceptible to centralized policy incentives. It will take a long time before phase-out, emission standards, etc. have been implemented and are adhered to by the entire sector.

Delhi has recently switched all its public transport to compressed natural gas (CNG) and is currently building a metro system. In terms of traffic management, it has built a number of flyovers that streamline the flow of traffic in the city and therefore reduce air pollutant emissions from transport. Much industry has been relo- cated from the city centre. The emissions standards only apply to vehicles and not to industry. For old vehi- cles, inspection and maintenance programmes have been introduced.

Mexico City started relatively early with air quality policy, as the problems were extremely pressing due to the city’s rapid development (ahead of the Asian cities) and the unfavourable geographical characteristics. For the past ten years, the city has restricted vehicle emissions through vehicle standards. Public transport (buses and taxis) use LPG as a fuel instead of gasoline, and the metro system has been improved to enhance the use of public transport as well. The city has implemented an integrated approach, where different sectors are used to improve the general environment in the city. Mexico City has not only relocated industry from the city core, but has also imposed emission standards on it. Even ecosystem restoration around the city is being enhanced as part of the air quality programme. Table 6.7 gives an overview of the measures taken in Mexico City, Delhi and Chongqing.

Table 6.7 Overview of measures taken by the cities of Mexico, Delhi and Chongqing

Chongqing Mexico Delhi

Indu

stry

− Power production fuel switch from coal to natu- ral gas

− Replacement of coal-fired boilers with cleaner fuels

− New standards for NOx

and VOC emission − Heat generation: End-of-

pipe measures for NOx

reduction and gradual substitution of current plants with more efficient technology

− Stricter fuel quality stan- dards for combustion − Restructuring of fuel

prices to favour more en- vironmentally benign fu- els (such as LPG, natural gas)

− Use of prevailing tax in- centives, and of interna- tional crediting pro- grammes for financing the technology investments

− Industries directed to comply with emission and liquid efflu- ent standards

− Installation of meters for measuring emissions of par- ticulate matter

− Relocation of brick kilns out- side Delhi

− Closure of all (46) hot mix asphalt plants in Delhi − Closure of 168 hazardous in-

dustries in Delhi

− Coal-fired power plants should switch to beneficiated coal − Gradually increase mandated

use of fly ash in power plants

Transport

− Emission standards for motor vehicles

− Inspection by obligatory annual tests, random tests on the road, remote sens- ing

− Maintenance programmes − Training of technicians

for emission testing and repair

− Providing emission test- ing equipment in repair shops

− Use of the ‘Hoy no cir- cula’ programme to mod- ernize car technology by extending the travel re- strictions for polluting vehicles

− Increasingly strict stan- dards for new and exist- ing vehicles

− Extension of the verifica- tion system

− Progressive revision of the standards for fuels − Restructuring of surface

public transport and reor- ganization of the transit system

− Extension of non-

polluting modes of public transport: metro, trolley buses and trains

In-use vehicles, e.g. fixing lifespan of all vehicles, phase-out of taxis older than 10 years in 2000, ban on alteration of vehicles by replacing petrol engines with diesel engines Traffic management, e.g. traffic management of most-polluted junc- tions and areas by synchronized signals and diversion of traffic based on air quality monitoring data, expansion and greater use of cycle paths, construction of by- passes and motorways

Fuel quality, e.g. ban on loose 2-T