Milieuschadekosten van luchtverontreining Toegevoegde waarde en beperkingen van

Milieuschadekosten van luchtverontreining Toegevoegde waarde en beperkingen van de economische analyse Leo De Nocker 14 maart 2001 1

Agenda Achergrond en definities Methodologie gezondheidseffecten fijn stof economische waardering broeikaseffect onzekerheden Voorbeelden van toepassingen vergelijking van technologieën : elektriciteit, transport accijnzen voor wegverkeer baten van milieumaatregelen : scenario analyse kosten-baten analyse maatregelen Conclusies 2

Achtergrond Externe kosten : alle kosten die niet worden gedragen door wie ze veroorzaakt Bijv. voor verkeer en transport: • Ongevallen • Files • Luchtvervuiling In opdracht van, met dank aan : De Europese Commissie, DG XII De Belgische federale overheid (DWTC) De Vlaamse overheid (Vliet bis) Exern. E netwerk 3

Extern. E project Extern. E = Externe kosten van Energie Onderzoeksproject EC, Joule, 1991 -2000 Extern. E netwerk : + 50 wetenschappelijke Instituten van verschillende disciplines in alle EU landen + VS. 4

Extern. E Methodologie Wordt door VITO toegepast en verder ontwikkeld. Resultaten voor : – Elektriciteit België – Transport : België – Energiegebruik Vlaanderen (Draft, 2001) Wordt gebruikt door – Europese overheden m. b. t. beleid luchtkwaliteit – UN-ECE Göteborg protocol – Vlaamse overheid (Mira S, SMER ) – Electriciteitssector (Electrabel, Europa) – nationale & regionale studies – Wereldbank, EBRD, 5

Toepassingen Milieuschadekosten zijn een monetaire indicator van milieuimpacts die kunnen gebruikt worden : om verschillende milieu-impacts samen te vatten en te wegen in één enkele indicator. Om verschillende technologieën, lokaties, brandstoffen ed. te vergelijken. Emissies naar lucht Directe impacts zoals geluid in kosten-baten analyses van beleidsopties kosten-baten van emissiereducties taxering van brandstoffen, nieuwe technologiën internalisatie van externe kosten 6

Agenda Achergrond en definities Methodologie impact pathway analyse gezondheidseffecten fijn stof economische waardering broeikaseffect onzekerheden Voorbeelden van toepassingen vergelijking van technologieën : elektriciteit, transport accijnzen voor wegverkeer baten van milieumaatregelen : scenario analyse kosten-baten analyse maatregelen Conclusies 7

De schadefunctie methode 1. Technology description 2. Emissions and burdens 3. Impact on environment Extern. E LCIA detailed bottom up modelling Top down simplified analysis work 4. Changes in welfare 8

De schadefunctie methode 9

Economic valuation Valuation based on societal preferences, measured by means of willingness to pay of the individuals (man in the street ) for environmental goods or services differs from valuation schemes based on e. g. expert judgements or policy decisions Willingness to pay is measured by : Revealed preferences : – market prices – prices from related markets : e. g. differences in house prices for a less noisy neighbourhood Stated preferences : – Contingent Valuation = questionnaire approaches 10

non welfare-based methods 11

Different type of values 12

Which tool for which value type 13

Discounting Difficult issue in welfare economics No reason to use different discount rates for environment then for similar policy questions No agreement on one best social discount rate to use so we use a set of discount rates Discount rate has different components discount rate = time preference + opportunity cost of capital within one generation : 1% and 3 % future generations : no time preference : 0 % to 1. 5 % 14

Bestudeerde polluenten & impacts 15

Afbakening van impacts naar ruimte naar tijd 16

Externe kosten per ton polluent 100% ecosystemen 80% landbouw 60% materialen Morbiditeit 40% Mortaliteit 20% 0% SO 2 NOx-direct Deeltjes NOx-ozon 17

Overview of impacts covered 1 Air pollutants : detailed assessment and valuation for J Public Health : dominant impact category, shows the importance of impacts from particles, aerosols and other pollutants on public health, for some quantification remains uncertain 18

Impacts on public health Air pollution kills ? – acute and mid term impacts form very small particles on mortality – relevant for PM, ammonium sulphates and nitrates – based on epidemiological studies Relative big impacts – linear dose-effect function – no threshold at population level – small increments x large population affected = large impact for PM Big uncertainties for mortality impacts from PM: – – biological mechanism ? is PM 2. 5 and particle mass the right indicator for a mix of pollut. ? Quantification (esp. chronic mortality ) monetary valuation 19

Valuation of public health impacts Morbidity – cost of illness (market prices ) + labour loss + suffering (questionnaire studies) – data available for all endpoints – smaller impacts are very important – consistent with DALY approach Mortality – we do not value life, but a change in risk of dying earlier – a lot of studies on ‘value of a statistical life’ : mid estimate for EU is 3. 4 million EURO = 140 X GDP/capita – for air pollution impacts : the right approach is to value the years of life lost. Value of a year of life lost in Extern. E : 100. 000 Euro – issues not accounted for : age dependent (? ), context, quality of life years lost – more specific studies are needed, aimed at air pollution issues 20

Overview of impacts covered 1 Air pollutants : detailed assessment and valuation for J Public Health : dominant impact category, shows the importance of impacts from particles, aerosols and other pollutants on public health, for some quantification remains uncertain J Agriculture : not controversial but not complete (valuable crops) J Materials : not complete, (soiling, stock at risk, historic buildings) K Ozone impacts : hard to model, big difference between marginal and aggregated analysis (for NOx for Belgium ) L Ecological impacts : impacts on critical loads can be quantified, but impacts hard be monetise and data transfer 21

Overview of impacts covered 2 K Global Warming : positive and negative impacts : range of data is available, large uncertainties, importance of assumptions blanks : not all impacts-categories are included, data limited to impacts to 2100 or 2200 Water and soil, some air pollutants Exposure assessment, Toxicity rankings and expert panel valuation FAs our understanding chances, data need to be updated FComparisons between pollutants, impacts may be difficult FCombine valuation with sustainability indicators 22

Lokale versus regionale impacts 23

Uncertainty analysis Types of uncertainty Parametric uncertainty of models, dose-response functions, : add lower and upper boundaries uncertainty in emissions, traffic data monte carlo analysis transferability and applicability of data, d-r functions, … sensitivity analysis importance of blanks in the analysis add sustainability indicators Uncertainty in policy studies stratified uncertainty analysis 24

Agenda Achergrond en definities Methodologie gezondheidseffecten fijn stof economische waardering broeikaseffect onzekerheden Voorbeelden van toepassingen vergelijking van technologieën : elektriciteit, transport accijnzen voor wegverkeer baten van milieumaatregelen : scenario analyse kosten-baten analyse maatregelen Conclusies 25

Vergelijking brandstofcycli meth 98 26

Vergelijking met k. Wh prijs meth 98 27

Onzekerheidsanalyse: totale onzekerheid 28

Onzekerheidsanalyse: stratified uncertainty analysis 29

Onzekerheid: actualisatie resultaten : Vergelijking brandstofcycli en technologie meth 2000 30

Onzekerheid: actualisatie resultaten : Vergelijking externe kost met marktprijs meth 2000 31

Results : vehicle and fuel related factors 32

Impacts hangen af van het traject Externe kosten per voertuig kilometer Van Brussels naar Luik Stad 28 km/h 14 Snelweg 110 km/h Brussel, centrum 12 Eurocent/voertuig. km Stad 28 km/h Borgerhout 10 8 Luik, centrum Leuven 6 Roccourt 4 Ring Bertem Tienen 2 Awans Berloz 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 kilometer 33

Invloed bronparameters hoge schouwen België (Extern. E 98) 34

Milieuschadekosten en accijns op diesel 35

Milieuschadekosten van wegtransport personen 98 - 2010 Totaal BAU 1. 6 Euro 0 Euro 1 1. 4 Euro (miljard) 1. 2 1 Euro 2 Euro 3 Euro 4 Onzekerheid 0. 8 0. 6 0. 4 0. 2 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 36

Milieuschadekosten van wegtransport vrachtwagens 98 - 2010 37

Goederentransport vgl. van de verschillende modi, gebruiksfase 1. 8 1. 6 Diesel trein (gemiddelde) Diesel truck >32 t Euro 2 1. 4 Eurocent/ton. km 1. 2 1 0. 8 0. 6 Binnenschepen Kempenaar & Duwvaart Elektrische trein 0. 4 0. 2 0 -0. 2 geluid (Infras IWW 2000) Electr. (fossiele mix) Klimaat CO Carcinogenen Sulfaten SO 2 Nitraten PM 2. 5 ozon -0. 4 Kanaal Gent-Terneuzen Spoorweg Gent-Lokeren Willekeurig traject E 17 snelweg Antwerpen-Gent Traject 38

Goederentransport vgl. van de verschillende modi 1 Goederentreinen Eurocent/ton. km 0. 75 Binnenschepen Diesel 373 ton Elektrisch 430 ton Truck Euro 2 16 ton Kempenaar Duwvaart 550 ton 10800 ton Infrastructuur 0. 5 Voertuig cyclus Brandstof cyclus Gebruiksfase 0. 25 0 Albert kanaal Herentals-Mol Willekeurig traject Landelijke weg 39

Conclusions on air pollution Air pollution Externalities of transport can be significant the total annual environmental air pollution damage cost of Belgian passenger traffic is estimated to be about 1. 25 % of GDP. primary and secondary particles are the dominant source of impacts, 2010 : air quality problem solved ? • PM : no threshold : what is the acceptable level ? • Is particle mass the right indicator ? • Impacts not quantified will remain important – acidification and eutrofication : above critical loads for Belgium – ozone : peak levels controlled but not the background level – global warming Uncertainty analysis other methods, sustainability indicators needed 40

Baten voor MIRA S 41

ruimtelijke spreiding impacts 42

Milieuschadekosten luchtverontreining 1998 Vlaanderen , mia BF 43

Baten van maatregelen van MIRA S 44

Baten van maatregelen van MIRA S 45

Milieuschadekosten luchtverontreining 1998 Vlaanderen , mia BF 46

Conclusions on air pollution Air pollution Externalities of transport can be significant the total annual environmental air pollution damage cost of Belgian passenger traffic is estimated to be about 1. 25 % of GDP. primary and secondary particles are the dominant source of impacts, 2010 : air quality problem solved ? • PM : no threshold : what is the acceptable level ? • Is particle mass the right indicator ? • Impacts not quantified will remain important – acidification and eutrofication : above critical loads for Belgium – ozone : peak levels controlled but not the background level – global warming Uncertainty analysis other methods, sustainability indicators needed 47

Onzekerheidsanalyse: stratified uncertainty analysis 48

Cost benefit analysis SO 2 abatement 49

Cost benefit of air pollution in Europe A combination of sustainability indicators (critical loads ) and environmental benefits for public health was used to assess costs and benefits for the new protocol on long range air pollution in Europe. Context : multi-pollutant - multi effect analysis The costs to reduce around 50 % of the exceedance of critical loads for acidification, eutrophication and ozone were compared with the public health benefits in monetary terms of these measures (mostly PM related benefits) For most countries : benefits > costs Cost benefit analysis based on stratified uncertainty analysis Future : include PM analysis in multi-pollutant protocols Need other ways to take account of sustainability indicators 50

Conclusions on cost benefit analysis Benefit estimation : to use or not to use ? J J J L For a number of air pollutants, data are available F F F Data should not be used as a ‘black box’ figure based on ‘state of the art’ of our understanding of issues and they offer added value for decision making there are important blanks (esp. ecological impacts) and uncertainties uncertainty & sensitivity analysis in function of context of use ; data can be completed, but not mixed-up, with other indicators 51

conclusies : milieu-economie Vraag naar identificatie en kwantificatie van de baten van milieubeleid is terecht, en brengt vooral duidelijkheid in het debat, ook over de grenzen van ons weten Veel vragen draaien rond wat we willen betalen voor de beheersing van risico’s van milieuverontreinging en (milieu-)economie kan hier nog verder een bijdrage brengen 52