IES Studies in Mxico

							                   IES Studies in México
Leonora Rojas Bracho and Miriam Zuk, National Institute of Ecology

                            July 2004
      IES Studies in
         México

    Leonora Rojas Bracho
         Miriam Zuk

Instituto Nacional de Ecología
         July 13, 2004
                    Content
• Background

• IES Projects:
   – Co-Control


   – Co-Benefits:
      • Phase I
      • Phase II




                              2
                                Background
   Percentage of Days that exceed the hourly Ozone standard




                                                  Annual Average PM10 Concentrations
     Greenhouse Gases
• 350,000Gg/yr of GHG in 1998
• 18% increase over 1990




                                                                                       3
                        Background (1)
      Air Quality Management in MCMA
• PICCA 1990 – 1994
  (Programa Integral para el Control de la Contaminación Atmosférica)
   – Introduction of two-way catalytic converters
   – Phase-out of leaded gasoline
   – Establishment of vehicle emissions standards

• PROAIRE 1995 – 2000
  (Programa para Mejorar la Calidad del Aire en el Valle de México)
   – Introduction of MTBE in gasoline
   – Fuel quality improvement:
       • Restrictions on the aromatic content of fuels
       • Reductions of sulfur content in industrial fuel

                                                                      4
                 Background (2)
• The Metropolitan Environmental Comission (CAM) was
  created in 1996 to coordinate policies and programs in the
  the Mexico City Metropolitan Area

• PROAIRE 2002-2010
   – 89 control measures targeting mobile, point and area
     sources
   – Includes education and institutional strengthening
     measures
   – Several measures have already been implemented



                                                            5
                Co-Control (1)
Coordinated by Dr. Jason West (2002)

Objectives
  – To explore the relationships between controls of
    local pollutants and greenhouse gases

  – Develop a tool based on linear programming to
    identify least cost strategies for meeting multiple
    pollutant targets simultaneously


                                                          6
              Co-Control (2)
Results
• Harmonized database of costs and emissions
  reductions of GHG controls and PROAIRE
  measures
• Implementation of the PROAIRE measures
  would reduce projected CO2 emissions by 3.1%
  in 2010
• PROAIRE targets could be met at 20% lower
  cost


                                                 7
  Co-Benefits – Phase I (2002-2003)
INE with the participation of INSP
Coordinated by Dr. Galen Mckinley


Objectives
   – Quantify the GHG and urban air quality benefits of
     pollution control measures
   – Develop a policy-relevant analysis tool with explicit
     treatment of uncertainty



                                                             8
              Co-Benefits – Phase I
               Control Measures

Evaluation of five control measures 2003-2020:

Transportation
   1. Metro expansion
   2. Taxi fleet renovation
   3. Hybrid buses introduction

Industry
   4. Co-generation

Residential
   5. Home stoves LPG leaks

                                                 9
              Co-Benefits – Phase I
                  Framework
                          Cost and Emissions
GHG Emissions
                                                      Local Emissions
    Costs
                              Air Quality
                                                      Concentrations,
                                                        Exposures

                            Health Impacts
                                                   Mortality and Morbidity

                              Valuation
                                                     Monetary Benefits



            Benefit/GHG       Cost/Benefit     Net Benefits          10
                  Co-Benefits – Phase I
                    Methodology (1)
•   Analysis of Measures
     – Change in emissions and costs for 5 control measures
     – Annualized results for 2003-2020, 5% discount
     – Uncertainty not quantified

•   Air Quality
     – Reduced-form models derived from field measurements and
       photochemical models

•   Health Impacts
     – Concentration-response methodology for 19 impacts

•   Economic Valuation
     – Willingness to pay, cost of illness and productivity loss


                                                                   11
                                        Methodology (2)
                                      Taxi Fleet Renovation

• 80,000 vehicles replaced by 2010
• Fuel efficiency increases: 6.7 to 9 km/L
• Compliance with Tier I standards

                        SO2 (ton/yr)                                                                 CO2 (ton/yr)
    540                                                                  2,500,000

    520
                                                                         2,000,000
    500

    480                                                                  1,500,000
    460

    440                                                                  1,000,000
                                                                                                   Control Scenario
    420
                                                                          500,000
    400                                                                                            Base line
    380                                                                         0
          2003   2005   2007   2009   2011   2013   2015   2017   2019               2003   2005   2007   2009   2011   2013   2015   2017   2019




                                                                                                                                               12
                     Methodology (3)
           Reduced Form Models (PM10)

                                                            Geologico 45 %
•   Source apportionment           Fi
    analysis from 1997                                      Primaria de
                                                            combustion 25%
    campaign                                                SO2 11%

                                                            NOx 7%
•   Particulate constituents
                                                            HC 2%
    attributed to sources (Fi)
                                                            otras 10%
                                        Chow et al. 2002

•   Fractional emission change                5
                                                                 ∆Ei
    implies fractional PM        RFPM 10 = ∑ Fi ⋅ RFi      RFi =
    change (RFPM)                            i =1                 Ei


                                                                     13
                    Methodology (4)
                       Health Impacts
• Acute Mortality              • Chronic Mortality
  Total, Infant Mortality        Total, cardio-respiratory, lung cancer


• Chronic Bronchitis           • Hospital Admissions
                                  Respiratory and cardiovascular

•Emergency Room Visits         • Restricted Activity Days
  Respiratory causes, asthma
• MRAD                         • School Absenteeism



All outcomes were analyzed, however not all were included in the final
                  valuation to avoid double-counting
                                                                      14
        Co-Benefits – Phase I
            Results (1)
Implementation of these five measures
Exposure
 1% Reduction of annual PM10 concentrations
 3% Reduction of annual O3 concentrations

GHG
 2% reduction
 1.5 million tons/yr reduction of CO2 equivalent


                                                   15
         Results (2)
      Economic Benefits

Implementation of All 5 Measures
                        Net benefits:
                        $160 million USD/yr

                        •Public Health Benefits:
                        $210 million USD/yr
                        [95%CI:80, 400]

                        •Costs:
                        50 million USD/yr


                                            16
            Co-Benefits – Phase I
                Conclusions
• Air pollution mitigation measures can have:
   – Benefits >> Costs
   – Significant GHG reductions

• Uncertainty is large
   – Emissions and costs uncertainties are not quantified here

• Transportation sector is key
   – Politically difficult
   – Future research should focus here




                                                                 17
            What comes next?
1. Communication strategies of Co-Benefit-Phase I




2. Analysis of Mexico City’s Bus Rapid Transit
   System Project




                                                 18
         Communication strategies of
            Co-Benefit-Phase I
Sponsored by EPA/FUMEC
October 2004

Media workshop
Objectives:
        Educate the media on basic concepts of air pollution, health
        effects and climate change and transportation’s influence
        Present recommendations for improving the transportation
        system’s impact on air pollution and climate change including the
        results from Co-Benefits Phase I

Decision makers meeting
Objectives
        Present the results from Co-Benefits Phase I
        Promote solutions to minimize transportation’s effect on air
        pollution and climate change

                                                                            19
        Analysis of Mexico City’s
      Bus Rapid Transit System Project
Exposure Analysis
     Compare commuters’ exposure to air pollutants before
     and after the implementation of the BRT system
     Funded by EPA/FUMEC, EMBARQ/CTS, and INE


Co-Benefits Analysis
     Estimate emissions reductions and health benefits
     from the implementation of the full BRT system
     Funded by EPA/NREL and INE
     In collaboration with GDF


                                                         20
           BRT Exposure Analysis
                      Motivation
• Very high personal exposures during commuting in
  MCMA (Gómez Perales et al. 2004; Shiohara et al., 2003)
     CO - 11 ppm
     PM2.5 - 65 µg/m3
     Benzene – 3 ppb
     Formaldehyde – 24 µg/ m3


• BRT system could reduce exposures
     Improving bus technologies
     Reducing commuting time
     Reducing congestion

                                                       21
             BRT Exposure Analysis
       Personal Exposure Measurements
  Assessment of personal exposures in buses and micros on
  Avenida Insurgentes

• Before the construction of the BRT system: May to August
  2004
• After the construction of the BRT system: Summer 2005

     PM2.5 and PM10 - SKC pumps
     CO - Langan monitors
     Benzene – 6-liter stainless steel canisters with flow control
     devices

                                                               22
        BRT Exposure Analysis
       PM2.5 Ambient Measurements
Indoor/outdoor ratios:
• Northern and southern portions of Avenida
  Insurgentes

Corridor impact:
• Two parallel streets at each point




                                              23
          BRT Exposure Analysis
               Laboratory Analysis
Gravimetric Analysis
• PM 2.5 and PM 10

Gas chromatography
• Benzene

Thermal optical reflectance
• EC/OC - two weeks of the campaign

XRF
• Elemental analysis - two weeks of the campaign


                                                   24
         BRT Co-Benefits Analysis
                        Motivation
• Transportation is major emission source in MCMA

• Co-benefits – Phase I found that transport measure
  provide the greatest potential for both local air pollution
  and greenhouse gas control

• BRT system has the potential to reduce congestion and
  improve air quality in the MCMA

• Quantification of air quality and GHG benefits of BRT
  system could help promote its implementation in other
  cities
                                                                25
         BRT Co-Benefits Analysis
                  Methodology (1)
Estimation of emissions reductions and costs
• Analysis of 33 dedicated corridors
• Tranus and Synchro models to estimate changes in VKT
  and average speeds
• Mobile6 – Mexico to estimate emissions factors

Air quality modeling
• Cluster analysis to identify representative modeling
  periods
• Application of CAMx to evaluate reductions in
  concentrations of PM and Ozone


                                                         26
        BRT Co-Benefits Analysis
                Methodology (2)
Health impacts analysis
• Update concentration-response functions from most
  recent literature
• Estimation of avoided cases of mortality and
  morbidity due to the implementation of the BRT
  system

Valuation
• Use of WTP values for Mexico and international
  values adjusted to the Mexican income

                                                      27
        For Further Information

                       Website:
http://www.ine.gob.mx/dgicurg/cclimatico/cobeneficios.html


                      Email:
                lrojas@ine.gob.mx
                mzuk@ine.gob.mx




                                                             28