Making progress in impact assessment Gwyn Jones AEA 12 May 2009

Challenges AQMA Hotspots to be eliminated by 2011 (PM10) and 2015 (NO2) assuming compliance plan is acceptable Implies significant local measures will be necessary and should be assessed Gathering momentum for CO2 management at local level but not well integrated with LAQM. In any case the timescales for action are not aligned. Despite acute problems LAQM not a high priority in key government policies. E.g. Eco- towns and LTP guidance.

Delivery Apart from technical matters is a consensus needed between central and local government on: –How much to be achieved via national and how much via local measures? –Who will fund this? Should there be Directorate level responsibility for corporate emissions management (ie CO2 and pollutants)? Are there adequate tools to allow this?

Progress Central government compliance planning –Source apportionment predictions –Cost-effectiveness of options LAA emissions tool New emission factors and other data (CENEX) Good practice case studies (e.g. Oxford LEZ study) Well established methods for assessing cost- effectiveness and (if necessary) benefits

Goal Central and local government consensus on action to be taken ie targeted-based –Option A: prescriptive plan based on central government analysis –Option B: local government AP. This implies focussing on source apportionment results and developing simple tools (previous slide illustrated data that are available soon) that estimate change in emissions and costs for a range of options. Integrate these with CO2 management.