Transport decarbonisation: Three difficult questions
Transport in Australia generates approximately 100M tonnes CO2e (carbon dioxide equivalent) per year and contributes approximately 20% of Australia’s GHG emissions. These are significant amounts, and so for Australia to reduce its overall carbon emissions, transport will need to contribute.
That is easy to say but not so easy to do. What, (or who) is transport? With its cars, trucks, trains, planes and ships, transport is very diverse. Its segments have wildly different needs and opportunities to decarbonise, and transport cost and effectiveness affect everybody.
This article originally appeared in our iMOVE Monthly newsletter — visit our Newsletter page to subscribe, and keep on top of what’s happening in smart mobility, intelligent transport systems, and more!
Compounding the problem, current societal trends are driving increasing emissions. Increasing population, increasing urban sprawl, the increasing freight task, our dependence on petrol and diesel, and our predilection for large cars, all put upward pressure on transport’s emission profile.
Decarbonising transport is going to be hard. While there are plenty of ideas floating around (like electric vehicles and hydrogen trucks), the harsh reality is that very few options are economically attractive. This is not least due to the financial inertia arising from transport’s dependence on costly, long-lived assets (cars, trucks, locomotives, aeroplanes, ships). Even if the low emission vehicle is cheaper to operate (as many EVs are) there is little willingness to fund the scrapping of the current ICE fleet and its replacement with new, but costly zero emission vehicles.
In nearly every case, options to decarbonise transport will impose additional costs on the community. These costs will arise from one or more of: costs of vehicle, costs of goods and services, taxation to fund government action, tougher regulations, and reduced choice.
However, to minimise damage to the planet from global warming, we must find a way through this conundrum. To do so we have to tackle three difficult questions:
- What are the most cost-effective options for decarbonisation?
- What level of cost is the community willing to bear?
- Who in the community should bear which costs?
Prepare for a long, possibly bumpy journey on the decarbonisation road!
Let’s talk!
We’re seven years in (with three to go!) but we s ever we welcome any opportunity to talk to you about your hopes and plans.
Discover more from iMOVE Australia Cooperative Research Centre | Transport R&D
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
There is huge potential for cities to decarbonise with more provision for cycling and walking. 60% of urban trips across the globe are shorter than five kilometers, with more than half of them currently traveled by motorised vehicle. Walking and cycling could replace a significant proportion of these short trips. Electric bicycles expand this potential even further.
An interesting topic. As infrastructure Minister Catherine King has observed, transport emissions are growing and may by 2030 be the largest source of emissions. Hence the interest in (long overdue) new vehicle emission standards, and bringing forward review of the National Freight and Supply Chain by a year. The result of this review is now awaited.
Oddly enough, the respected Bureau of Infrastructure etc (BITRE) who in the 1990s produced useful reports on reducing greenhouse gas emissions has not been tasked to do this at present.
It is not just economics, but a “car culture” (amazing how high petrol prices do not appear to dampen demand) and business as usual, that keep Australia transport emissions high.
More comment, if you like, is at: Australia’s freight used to go by train, not truck. Here’s how we can bring back rail – and cut emissions