Luis A CifuentesP. Catholic University of ChileIn Session Workshop on Mitigation23 May 2005

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Integrated Environmental Strategies (IES) Program:

Local Benefits With Global Results

2

Contents

• Overview of the IES Program• Relevant results from some

participating countries• Conclusions

3

IES: U.S. EPA’s Integrated Environmental Strategies Program

• Established in 1998 as a capacity-enhancing co-benefits program with a focus on GHG reductions.

• Partners local teams in developing countries with experts and tools from U.S. EPA, other IES projects, and other organizations (e.g., U.S. AID, NREL).

• Identifies and analyzes integrated (i.e., greenhouse-gas mitigation and air quality) strategies and co-benefits.

4

What are integrated measures? Low-sulfur coal

Smokestack controls

Catalytic converters

Inspection and maintenance

Diesel particle traps

Evaporative controls

Clean fuels/renewables

Energy efficiency programs

Fuel switching

Public transport and land use

Retirement of older vehicles

Efficiency standards for new vehicles/appliances

Carbon sequestration

Forest management

Control of other GHGs (CH4, N2O, CFCs, SF6)

GeoengineeringLocal

Global

Integrated

IntegratedJason West et al (2002)

5

What are “co-benefits”?

• All the beneficial outcomes of a policy that reduces two or more air emissions simultaneously.

• For IES, reductions in emissions of greenhouse gases as well as local, conventional air pollutants.

• Includes human health benefits and associated economic benefits due to reduced local air pollution.

6

Co-Benefits Framework

Local/RegionalPollutant

Emissions

AmbientConcentrations

reductions

Short/mediumterm

benefits

Activities / Energy Use

GHGEmissions

GHGReduction

Targets

Global warmingpotentialreduction

Long-termbenefits

Policyoptions

Technologyoptions

AQStandards

7

IES goals• Identify strategies that reduce GHG emissions and

improve local air quality while meeting public health, economic development objectives.

• Provide stakeholders with quantitative estimates of global and local co-benefits of policies and technologies.

• Engage stakeholders to lay groundwork for implementation of cost-effective air quality management strategies.

• Build analytical, institutional, and human capacity for multidisciplinary analysis of GHG mitigation, health, and environmental impacts of alternative strategies.

• Transfer tools and methodologies for co-benefits analysis.

8

Participating Countries

Countries with IES projects: China, India, Philippines, South Korea, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico

9

Data

Models

IES analytical approach

Healtheffectsmodels

Energy & GHGmitigationscenarios

ProjectedGHG/pollutant

emissions

Projectedconcentrations

Projectedhealth benefits& end points

Energy/emissions

models

Air qualitymodels

Economicvaluationmodels

Projectedeconomicbenefits &end points

Datainputs

10

Challenges of the Analysis

• Emissions data• Moving from emission inventories

to exposure levels• Health Impacts Quantification• Cost analysis

11

How can IES help

• Provides expertise in key issues:– Emissions inventories– Transport modeling– Atmospheric Modeling– Health Impacts Quantification

• Two specific models for quantify and value reduced health impacts:– BenMap– Apheba

• Network of IES teams provides help and cooperation

12

Overview of BenMAP Model

(2) BenMAP data needs and data

input

(3) Characterizing air quality changes

(model and monitor data)

(4) Health impact functions

(incidence modeling)

(5) Aggregation and pooling of results

(7) Uncertainty analysis

(8) BenMAP flexibility and its application in

supporting specialized analyses and research

(6) Valuation functions(benefits modeling)

(1) OVERVIEW – incidence and benefits

calculation

13

BenMAP Data Needs – linkages and interdependencies

Demographic data (projected to future simulation year)

Baseline disease incidence & prevalence data (projected to future simulation year)

Health impact functions• chronic• time-series (ecologic)

GIS coverage (map) of study area

Monitored air quality data

Modeled (gridded) air quality data

Economic valuation functions

Income elasticity studies

Health effects incidence estimation

Benefits (monetary) estimation

14

APHEBA Air Pollution Health Effects Benefits Analysis model

15

Key Results from IES studies

160

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000T

ons

of P

M10

Baseline Scenario1

Scenario2

Scenario3

Scenario4

Annual PM10 Reductions

200020102020

1. In general, there is correlation between global and local pollutant emissions reductions

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

Tho

usan

ds o

f m

etri

c to

ns o

f ca

rbon

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Annual Greenhouse GasReductions

200020102020

Emission Reductions in Seoul

17

Reductions of emissions of GHG and PM2.5 precursors are usually correlated

Residential Kerosene to NG

Boilers: Diesel to NG

CNG Buses

CNG Conversion Kit

Diesel Particulate Traps

Taxi Renovation

Diesel-electric buses

Incandescent to CFLs

FL High Efficiency Reflectors (Peak)

Mercury to Sodium Lamps (Peak)

Wood to NG (deforestation)

Extended Buses Replacement

Retrofitting EPA 94

Congestion Taxes - High

Congestion Taxes - low

Executive Buses

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Carbon Reduction (%)

PM

2.5

Pre

cu

rso

rs R

ed

ucti

on

(%

)Santiago Study

18

2 Health benefits usually overcome the cost of measures

Hyderabad Study:

19

3 Health benefits are usually larger than GHG benefits:

Source: McKinley et al 2005. (CO2 reductions valued at US$ 7(2-22) per ton)

México City Study

20

4. The ranking of the measures changes when global benefits are considered

(Source: McKinley et al 2005) CO2 reductions valued at US$ 7(2-22) per ton

México City Study

21

Since the rankings are not exactly the same:Santiago Study:

Incandescent to CFL (P)

Mercury to Sodium (P)

CNG Bus (2000)

FL High Efficiency Reflectors (P)

Residential Wood to NG (def.)

Residential Wood to NG

Boilers - Diesel to NG

Hybrid Diesel-Electric Buses (2000)

Incandescent to CFL (B)

Taxi Renovation

Mercury to Sodium (B)

FL High Efficiency Reflectors (B)

CNG Conv. Kit (2000)

Hybrid Diesel-Electric Buses (1999)

Diesel Particulate Traps

CNG Bus (1999)

Residential Kerosene to NG CNG Conv. Kit (1999)

0

5

10

15

20

0 5 10 15 20

Rank Order PM2.5 Abatement Costs

Ran

k O

rder

C

arb

on

Ab

atem

ent

Co

sts

Source: Cifuentes et al 2000

22

5. IES results have found their way into local policy-making

Examples of IES Analysis Integrated into On-Going Planning Efforts – Santiago (Chile) Decontamination Plan– Shanghai (China) 10th and 11th Five –

Year Plan– Beijing (China) 2008 Olympics AQ Plan– Seoul (Korea) Air Quality Management

Plan– Mexico City (Mexico) PROAIRE Plan– Philippines Clean Air Act Evaluation

23

Summary: IES tools/resources• IES Handbook: Guidance document for policymakers,

technicians• International version of manual for EPA’s Environmental

Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP) software• Air Pollution Health Benefits Assessment Model (APHEBA)

users’ guide and training course. – Will provide a resource for conducting health benefits

assessments of changes in air pollution concentrations. • Training course and materials on health benefits analysis.

– Will provide basic information and training to country experts with conducting health benefits analysis as part of integrated environmental analysis projects.

• “Reduced form” analytical tools and methodologies – Will support analysis of air pollution and GHG mitigation

co-benefits where local data for detailed analysis of air pollution public health benefits is lacking.

24

Final Comments

• The IES program has so far succeeded in developing integrated analyses in many countries, engaging local policy makers and building local capacity. Many of these analysis would not have been performed otherwise.

• The analysis of integrated measures shows that most of them have a positive correlation between GHG and local air pollutant reductions

• However, for most measures, public health benefits are an order of magnitude bigger than the potential benefits from carbon reduction

25

For more information

Katherine Sibold, IES Program ManagerU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyWashington, DCsibold.katherine@epa.gov or +1 202 343-

9280

ies@epa.govhttp://www.epa.gov/ies