2. Disclaimer Much of the information presented is based on PB work for NCHRP 20-24(59). Contractor’s work is in progress and is not a NCHRP report nor does it represent the panel’s views. The NCHRP work is intended to inform AASHTO members' policy-development discussions and does not include making recommendations on matters of policy.

3. Climate Change is Real and Poses Major Risks Ÿ“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal…” -- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Ÿ“An overwhelming body of scientific evidence paints a clear picture: climate change is happening, it is caused in large part by human activity, and it will have many serious and potentially damaging effects in the decades ahead.” -- Pew Center on Climate Change

4. Projected Impacts of Climate Change

5. 150 Global Firms Seek Mandatory Cuts in Greenhouse Gas Emissions ŸCoca Cola, General Electric, Shell, Nestle, Nike, DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, British Airways, Shanghai Electric, et al. ŸSaid that the scientific evidence for climate change is “now overwhelming” ŸCalled for a legally binding agreement to “provide business with the certainty it needs to scale up global investment in low-carbon technologies” November 11, 2007

6. Public Concern is Substantial and Growing 60% -- effects of global warming are already happening 11% -- the predicted effects of global warming are unlikely 78% -- make homes more energy efficient 77% -- ride mass transit whenever possible 71% -- install solar panels on homes 62% -- buy hybrid cars 58% -- more drastic measures are needed -- Gallup Survey of Americans, April 2007

7. GHG Targets Are Daunting Climate scientists80% below 1990 by 2050 California, Montana, Florida80% below 1990 by 2050 Oregon75% below 1990 by 2050 Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island 75-85% below 2001 by 2050 Colorado80% below 2005 by 2050 New Mexico75% below 2000 Climate Security Act (Lieberman- Warner) S.2191 Up to 66% below current levels by 2050 Global Warming Reduction Act (Kerry-Snowe) S.485 62% below 1990 by 2050 Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act (McCain- Lieberman) S.280 60% below 1990 by 2050 United Kingdom60% below 1990 by 2050

8. Transportation is 28% of U.S. GHG – and Rising

9. Rail, 43 Waterborne, 58 Air, 171 Heavy Vehicles, 350 Light Vehicles, 1113 Pipeline/Other, 47 Internat'l./Bunker, 84 U. S. Transportation Carbon Emissions by Mode, 2003 (Million metric tons CO2) Highway Vehicles, Especially Passenger Cars and Light Trucks, Account for 78% of Transportation C Emissions

10. Transportation GHG Reduction is a Four-legged Stool The 3-legged stool: –Vehicles –Fuels –VMT The 4 th leg: –Vehicle/System Operations

11. 1 st & 2 nd Legs: Vehicles & Fuels Ÿ50% cut in GHG/mile is feasible by 2030 from conventional technologies and biofuels ŸAlmost complete decarbonization of transport vehicles/fuels by 2050 is a “realistic ambition,” with advanced technology/fuels ŸElectric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are promising paths to decarbonization – but many technology and economic issues must be overcome ŸLow CO2 electric plants are key to low CO2 electric vehicles

12. Actual and Projected GHG Emissions for New Passenger Vehicles by Country, 2002-2018

13. 3 rd Leg: VMT Slowing U.S. VMT growth to 1% annually may be necessary to meet GHG targets

14. 3 rd Leg: VMT (continued) Ÿ1% VMT growth allows increase in VMT/capita (pop growth = 0.9%/year) ŸIn near-mid term, slower VMT growth is especially valuable to GHG targets ŸVMT growth is already slowing down, due to fuel prices and demographic changes

15. 4 th Leg: Vehicle/System Operations 10-20% LDV GHG reduction potential: ŸManage speed (40-50 MPH is optimal) ŸReduce congestion, accel-decel ŸITS to reduce poor signal timing could reduce 1.315 MMT CO2/yr Ÿ55 MPH speed limit + enforcement could reduce road fuel use 2-4% ŸReduce idling and encourage “eco driving” by drivers

16. What About Federal Cap and Trade Legislation? S.2191 (Lieberman-Warner): ŸImposes a declining cap on GHG for power plants, oil importers and refiners, industrial sources ŸReduces U.S. GHG 66% below 2005 levels by 2050 ŸHas lower effect on transportation GHG ŸIncreases energy prices, with gas prices $1.40 higher by 2050 ŸAllocates $171 billion to transit over 38 years ŸLowers U.S. GDP 0.9-3.8% in 2050

17. Prices Are Key to GHG Reduction ŸHigher energy prices are essential to promote energy conservation and new technologies in all sectors ŸIn transport, pricing can be powerful: - PAYD Insurance - Mileage fees - Parking pricing - Congestion pricing - Vehicle “feebates”

18. Fleet Characteristics Influenced by Fiscal Incentives

19. What About Land Use? Ÿ“It is realistic to assume a 30 percent cut in VMT with compact development.” Ÿ“… smart growth could …reduce total transportation- related CO2 emissions from current trends by 7 to 10 percent as of 2050.” ŸAssumes: –67% of development in place in 2050 is new or rehab –60-90% of that development is “smart growth” (equivalent to 15 housing units per acre) -- “Growing Cooler” by ULI, CCAP, et al, 2007

20. What About Transit? Transit serves 1% of PMT and 0% freight in the U.S. APTA: Transit reduced GHG by 6.9 MMT in 2005* (1/3 of 1% of U.S. transportation GHG) European Ministers of Transport caution: “Modal shift policies are usually weak in terms of the quantity of CO2 abated …. Modal shift measures can be effective when well targeted, particularly when integrated with demand management measures. They can not, however, form the corner-stone of effective CO2 abatement policy…..” * APTA includes 3.0 MMT reduction for transit’s effect on congestion reduction

21. What About Transit? (Continued) ŸHas huge popular support ŸServes other goals ŸIs seen as key to land use changes ŸIn Gallup survey, 77% cite transit as GHG strategy

22. Many States Are Developing Aggressive Climate Action Plans

23. State Climate Action Plans – Transportation Elements Are All Over the Map StateYearVehicle Low Carbon Fuels Smart Growth and Transit Other AZ202040%7%25%28% CA202054%6%38%2% CO202040%26%22%13% MT202061%24%8%7% NM202031%21%16%31% OR202580%14%6%0% WA20208%23%64%5%

24. Statewide Climate Action Plans – Transportation Elements are All Over the Map StateYearVehicle Low Carbon Fuels Smart Growth and Transit Other MN202515%35%25% NC202035%12%38%15% SC202014%55%29%1% CT202051%38%8%2% ME202053%25%21%1% MD202524%12%45%20% NY202059%11%27%4% PA202545%36%18%0% RI202046%10%31%14% VT202821%14%49%17%

25. How Much Will it Cost to Reduce GHG? -- McKinsey & Company

26. Four Views on Reducing Transportation GHG 1.David Greene and Andreas Schaefer, for Pew Center on Climate Change (2003) 2.European Council of Ministers of Transport (2006) 3.Sir Isaac Stern, “The Stern Report to the U.K. Government” (2007) 4.ULI “Growing Cooler” report (2007)

27. 1. David Greene and Andreas Schaefer, for Pew Center ŸA comprehensive, tailored set of policies could cut U.S. transportation GHG in half by 2030

28. Ÿ“The most effective measures available include fuel taxes, vehicle and component standards, differentiated vehicle taxation, support for eco-driving and incentives for more efficient logistic organization, including point of use pricing for roads. “ Ÿ“More integrated transport and spatial planning policies might contain demand for motorized transport.” ŸMode shifts … cannot … form the corner-stone of effective CO2 abatement policy and the prominence given to modal shift policies is at odds with indications that most modal shift policies achieve much lower abatement levels than measures focusing on fuel efficiency.” Ÿ“Ultimately higher cost energy sources …. will be required if there are to be further cuts in transport sector CO2 emissions.” 2. European Council of Ministers of Transport (2006)

29. Ÿ“Transport is one of the more expensive sectors to cut emissions from because the low carbon technologies tend to be expensive and the welfare costs of reducing demand for travel are high.” Ÿ“Transport will be among the last sectors to bring its emissions down below current levels.” Ÿ“ [I]n the period beyond 2100, total GHG emissions will have to be just 20% of current levels. It is impossible to imagine how this can be achieved without a decarbonized transport sector.” 3. “Stern Review” for U.K. Government (2007)

30. Ÿ“…the U.S. transportation sector cannot do its fair share … through vehicle and fuel technology alone. We have to find a way to sharply reduce the growth in vehicle miles driven….” Ÿ“Require transportation conformity for GHG” Ÿ“Enact “Green-TEA” transportation legislation that reduces GHGs… yet another paradigm shift… further address environmental performance, climate protection, and green development” Ÿ“Provide funding directly to MPOs” -- Similar recommendations are in Brookings reports 4. ULI “Growing Cooler” Report, 2007

31. Climate Adaptation Will be as Important as GHG Reduction Ÿ“Climate change will affect transportation primarily through increases in several types of weather and climate extremes… very hot days; intense precipitation events; intense hurricanes; drought; and rising sea levels, coupled with storm surges and land subsidence.” Ÿ“The impacts …. will be widespread and costly in both human and economic terms and will require significant changes in the planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of transportation systems.” -- TRB Special Report, March 2008

32. A Top 10 List for Consideration by State DOTs GHG Strategies 1.Support/invest in vehicle & fuel improvements 2.Increase ridesharing/transit/bike/ped programs 3.Promote/support land use improvements 4.Support/implement pricing strategies 5.Manage speed/congestion Process Strategies 1.Develop expertise in GHG/energy reduction 2.Develop expertise in climate adaptation 3.Establish links with MPOs and environmental organizations 4.Involve/educate legislatures, the public and key civic groups 5.Estimate cost-effectiveness of strategies BONUS: Develop a proactive state DOT climate/energy action plan