Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
ClimateKG
Search
Search
English
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-10
(section)
IPCC
Discussion
English
Read
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== 10.8.4 Tools and Strategies to Enable Decarbonisation of the Transport Sector === <div id="h2-38-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div> Using the right tools and strategies is crucial for the successful deployment of mitigation options. Table 10.7 summarises the tools and strategies required to enable electromobility, new fuels for aviation and shipping, and the more social aspects of demand efficiency. '''Table 10.7 | Tools and strategies for enabling mitigation options to achieve transformative scenarios.''' {| class="wikitable" |- ! '''Tools and strategies''' ! '''Travel demand reduction (TDR) and fu''' '''el/veh''' '''icle efficiency''' ! '''Light vehicle electromobility systems''' ! '''Alternative fuel systems for Shipping and Aviation''' |- | Education and R&D | TDR can be assisted with digitalisation, connected autonomous vehicle, EVs and mobility as a Service ( [[#Marsden--2018|Marsden et al. 2018]] ; [[#Shaheen--2018|Shaheen et al. 2018]] ). Knowledge gaps on TDR exist for longer distance travel (intercity); non-mandatory trips (leisure; social trips), and travel by older people. Travel demand foresighting tools can be open source ( [[#Marsden--2018|Marsden 2018]] ). | Behaviour change programmes help EVs become more mainstream. R&D will help on the socio-economic structures that impede adoption of EVs, the urban structures that enable reduced car dependence, and how EVs can assist grids ( [[#Newman--2010|Newman 2010]] ; [[#Taiebat--2019|Taiebat and Xu 2019]] ; [[#Seto--2021|Seto et al. 2021]] ). | R&D is critical for new fuels and to test the full lifecycle costs of various heavy vehicle options ( [[#Marinaro--2020|Marinaro et al. 2020]] ). |- | Access and equity | TDR programmes in cities can be inequitable. To avoid such inequities, there is a need for better links to spatial and economic development (Marsden et al.2018), mindful of diverse local priorities, personal freedom and personal data (Box 10.1). | Significant equity issues with EVs in the transition period can be overcome with programmes that enable affordable electric mobility, especially public transit ( [[#IRENA--2016|IRENA 2016]] ). | Shipping is mostly freight and is less of a problem but aviation has big equity issues ( [[#Bows-Larkin--2015|Bows-Larkin 2015]] ). |- | Financing economic incentives and partnerships | Carbon budget implications of different demand futures should be published and used to help incentivise net zero projects ( [[#Marsden--2018|Marsden 2018]] ). Business and community pledges for net zero can be set up in partnership agreements ( [[#10.8.3|Section 10.8.3]] ). | Multiple opportunities for financing, economic incentives, and partnerships with clear economic benefits can be assured, especially using the role of value capture in enabling such benefits. The nexus between EVs and the electricity grid needs opportunities to demonstrate positive partnership projects ( [[#Zhang--2014|Zhang et al. 2014]] ; [[#Mahmud--2018|Mahmud et al. 2018]] ; [[#Newman--2018|Newman et al. 2018]] ; [[#Sovacool--2018|Sovacool et al. 2018]] ; [[#Sharma--2020|Sharma and Newman 2020]] ). | Taking R&D into demonstration projects is the main stage for heavy vehicle options and these are best done as partnerships. Government assistance will greatly assist in such projects as well as an R&D levy. Abolishing fossil fuel subsidies and imposing carbon taxes is likely to help in the early stages of heavy vehicle transitions ( [[#Sclar--2019|Sclar et al. 2019]] ). |- | Co-benefits and overcoming fragmentation | Programmes that focus on people-centred solutions for future mobility, with more pluralistic and feasible sets of outcomes for all people, can be successful. They need to focus on more than simple benefit-cost ratios and include well-being and livelihoods, considering transport as a system rather than loosely connected modes, as well as behaviour change programmes ( [[#Barter--2000|Barter and Raad 2000]] ; [[#Newman--2010|Newman 2010]] ; [[#Martens--2020|Martens 2020]] ). | The SDG benefits of zero-carbon light vehicle transport systems are being demonstrated and can now be quantified as nations mainstream this transition. Projects with transit and sustainable housing are more able to show such benefits. New benefit-cost ratio methods that focus on health benefits in productivity are now favouring transit and active transport ( [[#Buonocore--2019|Buonocore et al. 2019]] ; [[#UK%20DoT--2019|UK DoT 2019]] ; [[#Hamilton--2021|Hamilton et al. 2021]] ). | Heavy vehicle systems can also demonstrate SDG co-benefits if formulated with these in mind. Demonstrations of how innovations can also help SDGs will attract more funding. Such projects need cross-government consideration ( [[#Pradhan--2017|Pradhan et al. 2017]] ). |- | Regulation and assessment | Implementing a flexible regulatory framework is needed for most TDR ( [[#Li--2018|Li and Pye 2018]] ). Regulatory assessment can help with potential additional (cyber) security risks due to digitalisation, autonomous vehicles, the internet of things, and big data ( [[#Shaheen--2019|Shaheen and Cohen 2019]] ). Assessment tools and methods need to take account of greater diversity of population, regions, blurring of modes, and distinct spatial characteristics ( [[#Newman--2015|Newman and Kenworthy 2015]] ). | With zero-carbon light vehicle systems rapidly growing, the need for a regulated target and assessment of regulatory barriers can assist each city and region to transition more effectively. Regulating EVs for government fleets and recharge infrastructure can establish incentives ( [[#Bocken--2016|Bocken et al. 2016]] ). | Zero-carbon heavy vehicle systems need to have regulatory barrier assessments as they are being evaluated in R&D demonstrations ( [[#Sclar--2019|Sclar et al. 2019]] ). |- | Governance and institutional capacity | TDR works better if adaptive decision-making approaches focus on more inclusive and whole-of-system benefit-cost ratios ( [[#Marsden--2018|Marsden 2018]] ; [[#Yang--2020|Yang et al. 2020]] ). | Governance and institutional capacity can now provide international exchanges and education programmes based on successful cities and nations, enabling light vehicle decarbonisation to create more efficient and effective policy mechanisms towards self-sustaining markets ( [[#Greene--2014|Greene et al. 2014]] ; Skjølsvold and Ryghaug 2019). | Governance and institutional capacity can help make significant progress if targets are backed with levies for not complying. Carbon taxes would also affect these segments. A review of international transport governance is likely ( [[#Makan--2018|Makan and Heyns 2018]] ). |- | Enabling infrastructure | Ensuring space for active transport and urban activities is taken from road space will be necessary in some places ( [[#Gössling--2021b|Gössling et al. 2021b]] ). Increasing the proportion of infrastructure that supports walking in urban areas will structurally enable reductions in car use ( [[#Newman--2015|Newman and Kenworthy 2015]] ) ( [[#10.2|Section 10.2]] ). Creating transit activated corridors of transit-oriented development-based rail or mid-tier transit using value capture for financing will create inherently less car dependence ( [[#McIntosh--2017|McIntosh et al. 2017]] ; [[#Newman--2019|Newman et al. 2019]] ). | Large-scale electrification of LDVs requires expansion of low-carbon power systems, while charging or battery swapping infrastructure is needed for some segments ( [[#Gnann--2018|Gnann et al. 2018]] ; [[#Ahmad--2020|Ahmad et al. 2020]] ). | In addition to increasing the capabilities to produce low- or zero-carbon fuels for shipping and aviation, there is a need to invest in supporting infrastructure including low-carbon power generation. New hydrogen delivery and refuelling infrastructure may be needed ( [[#Maggio--2019|Maggio et al. 2019]] ). For zero-carbon synthetic fuels, infrastructure is needed to support carbon capture and CO 2 transport to fuel production facilities ( [[#Edwards--2018|Edwards and Celia 2018]] ). |} <div id="frequently-asked-questions" class="h1-container"></div> <span id="frequently-asked-questions-faqs"></span>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to ClimateKG may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
ClimateKG:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-10
(section)
Add languages
Add topic