TL: THE GREENPEACE AUSTRALIA TRANSPORT POLICY - AS PART OF THE GREENPEACE AUSTRALIA GREENHOUSE STRATEGY SO: Greenpeace Australia DT: 1990 Keywords: atmosphere climate change greenpeace australia australasia gp pr / Greenpeace Australia has joined with other Greenpeace offices around the world to run an international campaign to call a halt to pollution driven Global Climate Change in response to the 'Greenhouse Effect' or 'Global Warming'. WHAT IS GLOBAL WARMING A natural greenhouse effect exists which keeps the earths atmosphere 30 degrees c warmer than it would otherwise be. However through human activities additional greenhouse gases are being added to the atmosphere causing an enhanced "Greenhouse Effect". Greenhouse gases have the effect of trapping heat and causing the earth's atmosphere to rise in temperature. The main greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide which is released when fossil fuels are burnt for the generation of energy. C02 contributes to half of the global warming effect. Since the Industrial revolution the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere has increased by 30% to its current level of 350 ppm. Other gases include methane, the chlouroflourocarbons and nitrous oxides (NOX) which also trap heat. Since the Industrial Revolution, there has already been a recorded .7 degrees C rise in temperature. Model calculations estimate that for a doubling of carbon dioxide, global mean surface temperature will increase from 1.5 to 4.5 degrees C. THE POLITICS OF GLOBAL WARMING Global Warming as an environmental issue is now well and truly placed on the International environmental agenda. In October -November 1990, all nations will be attending, The Second World Climate Conference in Geneva to consider carbon dioxide emission reduction targets and the drawing up of a convention to control and regulate greenhouse gases. At the first conference on Climate Change in Toronto in 1988 a 20% reduction in C02 emissions was recommended as a first step to be taken by all nations. In Toronto working groups were set up under the auspices of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess the science, and impacts of Global Warming and finally to advise on policy responses to it. The Final Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) compiled by the world's leading atmospheric scientists and climatologists was released in August 1990. In this report the scientists stated they were certain that, "emissions resulting from human activities are substantially increasing the atmospheric concentrations of the greenhouse gases and these increases will enhance the greenhouse effect resulting on average in an additional warming of the Earth's surface." They further predicted, "A rise by the year 2000 in the global mean temperature of 1.8 degrees C above pre-industrial levels, with a probable range of 1.3 to 2.5 degrees C, and a global mean precipitation increase of 3%. ......and by the year 2070, a projected temperature increase of between 2.4 and 5.1 degrees C, and precipitation increase of around 7%. " A sea level rise of 20cm by 2030 and 1/2 metre by 2070. This rise is accounted for from thermal expansion of the oceans and the melting of some land ice; regional effects will vary from the global mean. Impact from melting of the main Greenland and Antarctic ice masses is not expected until after 2070." This should end discussion on whether global warming is theory or fact. Furthermore they stated that, they "calculate with confidence that the long lived gases would require reductions in emissions from human activities of over 60% to stabilise their concentrations at today's levels; methane would require a 15-20% reduction." This should end discussion on whether action need or need not occur. Dr Jeremy Leggett head of the Greenpeace UK Science Unit and editor of the book, "Global Warming - The Greenpeace Report" stated that, "the uniquely frustrating thing about global warming - to those people who see the dangers - is that the solutions are obvious. But there is no denying that enacting them will require paradigm - shifts in human behaviour - particularly in the field of co-operation between nation states - which have literally no precedents in human history. That is the challenge for the 1990s. There is no single issue in contemporary affairs that is of greater importance." The Greenpeace report was commissioned as a shadow IPCC document. It recommends solutions that the policymakers were reluctant to make. In the book the solutions are outlined which involve the adoption of energy efficiency and renewable technologies in all sectors of the economy including; transport, industrial and domestic etc. Many governments have already adopted the Toronto target which includes the combined Germany, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, and New Zealand. The United Kingdom, Canada and Japan have agreed to a stabilisation of C02 at today's levels. Australia has not yet agreed to the Toronto target along with the United States, The Soviet Union, China and Saudi Arabia. Australia must agree to emission reduction targets along with the rest of the world or face the prospect of economic non-competitiveness in the new field of energy efficient technologies and renewable energy sources championed by the Japanese and Swedish. Victoria and NSW, the two most populous states in Australia have agreed to the Toronto target and should now adopt policies which are consistent with the target. In NSW the opposition policy on Energy released by Mr Bob Carr is more sound than the government's policies. It recommends a comprehensive set of energy efficiency measures and the promotion of renewable technologies which should be adopted by all state governments particularly labour governments in power. The weakness in this report lies in the transport section which fails to recognise the environmental benefits of increased use of public transport. GLOBAL WARMING AND TRANSPORT: The annual contribution of fossil fuels to global warming in Australia will rise from 44% to over 50% in the next few years due to the phasing out of CFCs. This proportional increase will be compounded by projected growth in energy consumption of 40-50% by 2010, making the potential fossil fuel contribution up to 65% of total annual Australian Greenhouse emissions. Transport, which is mostly dependent on oil, is responsible for 26% of all CO2 emissions in Australia and 17% of emissions globally. Transport, including road, rail, air and sea as well as mobile machinery in agriculture, mining and construction, are mostly fuelled with petroleum products. The transportation sector uses large amounts of fossil fuels. In Australia, oil accounts for 53% of all energy used in mobile transport and diesel oil accounts for a further 30% of all energy used in mobile transport. In Australia, 75% of our oil is used for road transport; an increase of 60% since 1980. Oil based transport equates basically to all road transport ie; cars and trucks. It is this mode of transport which have the most serious consequences for the escalation of global warming. In the current international political environment where targets are being set, every sector of the economy will be assessed for greenhouse reductions. Transport will not be exempted from this process. Changes are required to the way society currently moves both passenger and freight around the country to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in order to help stabilise global climate. OIL AND THE TRADE DEFICIT: Apart from the greenhouse implications of oil-based transport, the economic pressures resulting from the decline in Australian oil production should result in our government taking a role in aggressively restricting future growth in oil imports. One way to achieve this would be to limit future transport energy demand. Oil imports are predicted to create a balance of payments problem within 10 years which will cost the Federal government several thousand million dollars annually. Even though the contribution from future oil discoveries is very uncertain, governments insist on relying on heavy investment in exploration for oil rather than in developing alternatives. The Department of Primary Industry and Energy is promoting petroleum exploration in it's, "Offshore Strategy" which will mean the entire Australian coastline with the exception of The Great Barrier Reef is under threat from oil exploration. The Commonwealth government energy strategy has been based on offsetting the expected deficit from increasing oil imports with increased exports of coal, gas and uranium. However, such a strategy is unsound when considered against the need for Greenhouse Emission Reduction Targets, which are clearly required from the IPCC Science Report (referred to above). THE GREENPEACE VIEW OF FUTURE TRANSPORT Generally it can be said that, from a long term global warming perspective, the transport sector needs to change direction away from a sprawling individual-car based society dependent on fossil fuels to a medium density public transport based society utilising renewable sources of energy for individual and mass transport. In the shorter term, significant CO2 reductions can be achieved through the use of smaller energy efficient vehicles, and less car use through less km/hours driven and boosted use of public transport. Currently, there is some debate within the various transport departments state and federally as to whether public transport options ought to be adopted or whether fuel emission standards and downsizing of the fleet ought to be pursued. Greenpeace believes that both options are required considering the inevitable size of the cuts in C02 required and the immediacy of the problem. FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATION The Australian and state governments should adopt, " Clean Air Acts" to control all atmospheric pollutants including greenhouse gases from all sources, cars, utilities. This would address the global warming problem in concert with more localised air pollution problems. Australian citizens would also gain - with cleaner air - from reductions of other transport emissions, eg carbon monoxide and nitrous oxide. PUBLIC TRANSPORT AND CITY DESIGN IN AUSTRALIA Urban Sprawl particularly the extensive outer suburban growth is the general reason given for the poor public transport service found in most Australian cities. This has made car ownership the only alternative for economic and social survival. The current public transport system must be significantly improved, in frequency, extent and efficiency of service, in order to entice commuters away from their cars. Newman and Kenworth from Murdoch University have classified cities into "public transport" categories, based on the population density per hectare. They have found that high density sections of cities, usually the inner city, are well suited to an expanded public transport network. In the long term, changing urban design by encouraging decentralised employment and recreational nodes, to reduce commuting and increase the use of public transport, could reduce reliance on private transport and thus reduce transport fuel usage in Australia cities by up to 20%. There are definite ways to encourage greater rates of participation on public transport. Some of these include: 1) linking modes of transport much more ie light rail, train, bus and tram interchanges; 2) providing car and bicycle parking at interchanges, thus decreasing the length of car trips from the interchange to the outer suburbs; 3) decreasing the availability of parking in the city itself; 4) providing for urban consolidation ie medium to high density housing in a 5km radius along light rail and rail lines, bus routes etc; 5) providing electric buses to service a community area available from the interchange. FEDERAL FUNDS FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT A new accounting system is required which takes account of externalities such as environmental degradation and road accidents etc when assessing the environmental and economic benefits of one mode of transport over another. A new term which is gaining coinage amongst scientists and environmentalists is called, "Social Cost Accounting". Some of the funds generated under The Federal," Fuel Excise Tax" should be targeted for the redistribution of wealth through social costing to environmentally and greenhouse friendly solutions such as public transport. Currently this tax provides around $3 billion dollars annually which the Federal government is proposing to spent totally on roads. However, in line with the "Polluter Pays Principle" (because cars and trucks cause the C02 problem and other environmental problems) a proportion should be made available from the Federal government to the states for public transport expenditure. No other OECD country spends there total fuel excise tax revenue on roads. STATE GOVERNMENT INIATIVES Many state governments fail to request federal funds available to the states for public transport. In NSW, the government needs to request federal funds for the upgrading of the heavy rail system in Sydney as a matter of priority. The Australian Railways Union have launched a report by Jacana consulting titled, "A Rail Strategy for the Sydney Region". This report outlines the first step required to change the radial focus on the city of Sydney to a greater focus on the city of Parramatta and to provide cross city links as well. Greenpeace Australia will be looking at research of this kind with an interest in determining the effects on C02 levels to be gained by an expanded rail system in the Sydney region. Other capital cities which deserve attention include, Adelaide and Perth. There is a lack of co-ordination between the various public transport modes which means that competition between rail and buses exists and time tabling is not co-ordinated. One body should be responsible for all the public transport modes. A co-ordinated and complementary system is essential. Major trips should be provided by heavy rail with a complementary fleet of buses and light rail systems for the shorter trips. Public transport patronage can be encouraged along transport lines by changing the zoning from residential to medium density. Other measures include public-transport dedicated express road lanes. In NSW an opportunity exists in The Eastern Suburbs to establish a fast unimpeded light rail system from the city to the airport. However the NSW government has decided to sell off the corridor for development. It is now NSW labour Party policy to maintain all transport corridors. Greenpeace agrees with the maintenance of all transport corridors in all states particularly in densely populated areas where public transport is known to be successful. The reduction of parking in the CBDs of the capital cities is essential to discourage the use of cars in the cities. RAIL TRANSPORT - THE HIDDEN BIASES Governments fail to recognise their in-built biases towards roads and prejudice against rail when they undertake their costing of the two modes. The impact of trucks on the national highway system is not being assessed in the costing of road freight movements. Articulated vehicles averaged 78,600 km/yr/ vehicle in 1988 up from 71,700 km/yr/ vehicle in 1985 and heavy vehicle traffic is expected to grow by more than 30% by the year 2000. The impact of road accidents on the Australian economy and the contribution of the car and freight movements to greenhouse gas emissions is also neglected. For example the annual cost of road accidents in Australia is estimated at $ 6 billion by the BTCE (Rail Industry Council Report). The Australian government owned railways use 5% of the total primary energy consumed for domestic transport to carry out 19% of the domestic freight task and 4% of the domestic passenger task. It thus appears that even with 19th century track alignments and aging rolling stock, railways are still more efficient in their fuel usage, than the highly visible semi trailers which use our roads. (ACF & ARU Report - Towards A Clean Environment). Expenditure on maintaining roads and building expressways simply creates more traffic and increased fuel use (Newman et al 1989). The expansion of car based cities such as Los Angeles is unsustainable (Jamrozic 1989). Australia allocated in the last budget $1.6 billion on roads most of which could be transfered to public transport, bus rail and trams for the movement of people and rail for the movement of freight. The Federal government since 1983 has spent $3000 million on the national highway system compared to $29 million on national rail lines in the same period. Federal funding for the railways has been practically non- existent for the past 21 years. In fact, rail allocations in this period amount to only 44% of one year's Federal road funding (ACF & ARU Report). Even worse, $105 million paid to the federal government in a rail fuel excise tax has gone directly into federal road investments with the balance going directly into federal consolidated revenue (ACF & ARU Report). A paper presented at the CSIRO Greenhouse and Energy Conference in December 1989 reported that a major realignment and improvement of the Sydney to Melbourne rail link would cost $500 million. This amount would pay for less than 100 km of rural freeway. Realignments and other improvements also need to be made to the amalgamated 19th century branch lines between Sydney and Brisbane. This would result in greater energy efficiencies and make rail more competitive with road. Urban rail networks in most capital cities have had very few extensions made to them since the 1940s. It is interesting that the Eastern Suburbs heavy rail extension opened during The NSW Wran labour governments term of office enjoys one of the highest patronages of any branch line. Public transport, particularly rail, is more energy efficient meaning it contributes less to the Greenhouse Effect through C02 emissions than road-based individual transport. For example, - Rail is 3.5 times less energy intensive per passenger km than a car and 8 times less energy intensive during peak times. - Trams are 4.5 times less energy intensive per passenger km than a car and 8 times less energy intensive during peak periods. Yet in Australia trams have been removed from many cities to make way for the car. - Buses are 2 times less energy intensive per passenger km than a car and 3.5 times during peak times. (ACF and ARU "Towards a Clean Environment, P14) NON - URBAN PASSENGER SERVICES RAIL FREIGHT: Rail freight has suffered the same neglect over the years as the passenger rail network. The track alignments have not been upgraded, the signalling equipment is outdated and the rolling stock is also inadequate, such that road transport for freight is perceived by Industry and governments as the most preferable way of moving freight around the country (RIC Report). Even so rail manages to carry out 19% of the domestic freight task. Rail has been able to develop markets where it has a competitive advantage in bulk hauls, such as coal and minerals. This market has increased by 70% between 1980- 1981 and 1984-5. But rail freight should also carry general inter-city freight. An environmentally sound 'Fast freight train' would increase rail's market share for general freight at lease in the Sydney - Melbourne corridor. A reduction of 5 hours on the transit times for the Fast freight train from 14 hours to 9 hours is technically and operationally feasible by improving the alignment, track work, structures and signalling so that freight trains can travel at 160 km/hr. The cost of improving the alignment would be between $330 million to $535 million. The alignment upgrading alone would also reduce passenger travel times to 7 hrs 30min from Sydney to Melbourne. Other optional improvements include double stacking of container loads which would require changes to the height of tunnels. BYCYCLES AN ENVIRONMENTALLT FRIENDLY FORM OF PRIVATE TRANSPORT Bicycles reduce car-induced urban problems while providing convenient private transport. Yearly nearly 100 million bicycles are produced world wide, 3 times the number of cars, but are generally found in widespread use only in developing countries, where not many people can afford cars. Yet 86% of all car trips in the UK are under 10 miles; this would suggest that the bike may be readily exchanged for the car in many situations. Australia has a set of planning and design guidelines for bicycles. However, State and local governments have not seriously implemented them. They apparently lacking a sense of commitment to transport options that do not revolve around the car. For long trips, linking bikes with mass transport holds great potential for reducing energy use and air pollutants, and for reducing congestion on the roads and the seemingly never-ending demand for more roads. Japanese census figures for 1980 show that 15% of total commuters rode bikes to work or to commuter rail stations. National legislation in Japan empowers local governments to require that railways and businesses build ample bicycle parking facilities, and clearly-marked separate bicycle-lanes exist in many Japanese cities. Such an approach in Australian cities would make bicycle/public transit travel more attractive to commuters. Car restraint is increasingly being pursued by many European cities but has yet to surface in Australia. Streets full of cars should be assessed in future as a sign not of economic prosperity but of a poorly planned transport system combined with a lack of environmental awareness. CARS / FUEL EFFICIENCY: Motor cars are the most common and widely used form of road transport. Pollution produced by cars include nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, lead, diesel particulates and hydrocarbons. These primary pollutants lead to the formation of secondary pollutants, including ground level ozone. Carbon dioxide slows down the removal of other greenhouse gases such as ozone and methane from the lower atmosphere. The main gaseous emission from cars is carbon dioxide and this is the gas responsible for 50% of the human induced global warming effect. Fuel efficiency and downsizing the size of the fleet (making cars smaller) are the main way of reducing emissions from cars. Currently vehicles are only 20% efficient. However, although fuel efficiency of cars and trucks has been improving through technological advances, the number of vehicles per person has been increasing, as has the distance travelled by each vehicle. Between 1976 and 1988 Australia's vehicle fleet grew by 43% bringing the number of vehicles to 9.3 million. The average fuel consumption of new passenger vehicles sold in Australia has declined by almost 20% since 1978. The Australian government should demand as a minimum a 30% fuel efficiency improvement on all new cars by 2005 and then fuel use would be approximately 20% less than current levels (I.J. Walker et al). The fuel efficiency of other mobile equipment could also be improved by up to 20% which would reduce petroleum demand (I.J Walker and K.D Lyall, The Potential for reduced C02 emissions through increased Energy Efficiency and the use of Renewable Energy Technologies in Australia). Features which should be used to improve fuel efficiency and hence lessen greenhouse gas emissions in vehicles include; lighter vehicles, less air resistance through better design, less road resistance through tyre design, energy storage systems to use lost braking power, continuously variable transmissions maximising gear efficiency, improved fuel consumption, variable operating cylinders, reduced engine warm up time, and recycling exhaust gases. Two vehicles presently exhibiting some of these features include the Volvo LCP 2000 which can travel a 100 miles to the gallon and the Renault Vesta which has a range of 124 mpg. There are significant hidden costs in private vehicle use which include; i) pollution ii) delays to motorists and others iii) costs of roads iv) costs of space to park in v) costs of accidents Accidents cost the Australian government around $6 billion a year (Railway Industry Council report, May 1990). John Pucher in his recent study of 12 countries in Europe and North America stated, " it is clear that when drivers are made to pay the costs of automobile travel through taxation of ownership and use, total mileage tends to decline." In Denmark, a 186% sales tax on new cars and high petrol prices to make cars more expensive to buy and operate is promoting use of alternative forms of transport which are more environmentally friendly. As early as 1907, the car was described by British Prime Minister H.H. Asquith as "a luxury that is apt to degenerate into a nuisance ", and recently the chief executive of Volvo called for governments worldwide to ban cars from city centres and urged transit authorities and their governments to invest in public transport. ALTERNATIVE FUELS FOR ROAD TRANSPORT: There is a need for the development of renewable alternative fuels to replace fossil fuels for transport. Currently, these fuels do not appear to have the potential to have a significant impact on the production of greenhouse gases over the period to the year 2005. However, whilst energy efficiency measures are being adopted, research and development needs to be funded into alternative fuels and renewable sources of energy. Unfortunately, many of the proposed alternative fuels which are still dependent on fossil fuels such as methanol and ethanol, also have drawbacks. And exceptions, such as LPG, could only satisfy 7% of the current petroleum market. In the long term, the replacement of vehicles powered by fossil fuels by hydrogen and electric vehicles should be encouraged. In Australia, research and development into solar and hydrogen vehicles must be vigorously pursued. This is happening in other cities in the world. For instance, in Los Angeles (L.A), as part of the L.A initiative to clean up the city environment, VEHMA International in conjunction with General Motors and Chloride Evare are supplying 1500 electric vehicles as phase 1 of the initiative. Eventually there will be 10,000 electric vehicles operating in L.A by 1995. COMPANY CARS: As subsidised private vehicles, Company cars contribute significantly to the number of vehicles on the road and therefore to greenhouse gas emissions. In Australia, 50%? of all new cars bought in any one year are company cars and 1/3 of the 151 million kilometres travelled each year is classified as business. In Sydney, the total increase in journeys to work by cars between 1971 and 1981 was accounted for by the growth in subsidised company cars. The use of company cars encourages motoring for the trip to work which is the most economically successful trip that public transport can perform. Generally company cars are larger than other cars and so produce more emissions. Under current taxation law company cars are a tax deductable item for executives and even many junior employees. This amounts to government subsidised motoring. Company car tax deductions need to be drastically altered or even scrapped. Instead companies should offer taxi vouchers, or public transport passes and if necessary only small very efficient cars where necessary. CONCLUSION: The global political environment requires urgent action to redress the now recognised global warming problem. It is inevitable that all greenhouse gas contributions will be dissected and assessed for reduction possibilities. The transport sector as a significant contributor to the problem must expect to take account of this issue when deciding strategies for the movement of both passengers and freight. It is also inevitable that in the long term perspective, the transport sector will need to change direction away from an individual-car based society dependent on fossil fuels to a public transport based society utilising renewable sources of energy. In the shorter term, significant CO2 reductions will have to be achieved through the use of smaller energy efficient vehicles, and less car use through less km/hours driven and a boosted use of public transport. Replacement with methanol fuel, which is made from natural gas or synthetic natural gas from coal, is only slightly advantageous with respect to its contribution to global warming but also results in the production of carcinogenic formaldehyde. Ethanol and methanol from waste biomass are problematic also. If the fuel is produced from crops grown specifically for this purpose a net increase in CO2 will occur due to land clearance and the energy required to transport and process the crops. The land required to grow the fuel would severely compete with food production and would never replace more than a small percentage of existing fuel usage. The production of oil from shale and coal is not energy efficient as it produces greenhouse emissions in the production stages and it encourages the use of a finite unrenewable resource. RENEWABLE ENERGY FOR ROAD TRANSPORT: ----------------------------------------------- Some gas is used in turbines in aircraft, coal is used in sea transport, electricity is also used in some trains and mining equipment.