Speakers

Amit Bhatt

India Managing Director, ICCT

Amit Bhatt is the ICCT’s Managing Director for India. He is based in New Delhi and has over 20 years of experience in transportation, urban development, and management. Before joining ICCT, Amit was Executive Director for Integrated Transport at WRI India for 12 years. Prior to the World Resources Institute he worked with the Urban Mass Transit Company, India’s leading urban transport consultancy, and with Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services. He has also served as an adjunct faculty member at the School of Planning and Architecture in New Delhi.

Amit has a bachelor’s degree in architecture and a master’s degree in transport planning from the School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi. Amit also has a master’s degree in economics and a diploma in transport economics and management.

Vaibhav Kush

Researcher, ICCT

Vaibhav Kush is a Researcher with ICCT’s India team, leading the Low Emission Zones work there. He engages with sub-national administrations to accelerate adoption of Low- and Zero Emission Zones in India. He has been working in the Sustainable Mobility sector since 2016, with expertise in safe systems, policy formulation and stakeholder engagements. Before joining ICCT, Vaibhav was associated with WRI India’s Sustainable Cities program for over six years, leading projects under Botnar CRS Challenge. He was actively involved in Haryana Vision Zero, pedestrianisation of Delhi’s Chandni Chowk, development of IRC guidelines on urban transport, etc. Prior to WRI India, Vaibhav has worked as an Architect and was involved in the design of large scale green building projects like corporate parks, Inter-container Depots, universities, etc.

Vaibhav has a bachelor’s in Architecture and a Master’s in Urban Planning from the School of Planning and Architecture, Delhi. He is a member of several professional bodies including International Sociological Association, Institute of Town Planners India, Council of Architecture, Indian Roads Congress, Indian Institute of Architects, Indian Buildings Congress, among others.

Sudhendu J. Sinha

Adviser, NITI Aayog

An alumnus of St. Stephen’s College, Delhi did his Major in History. He has experience of over 29 years in operations, infrastructure planning, coordination and management at field and policy making levels in Indian Railways with considerable success and appreciation.

His performance has been recognised and awarded twice at the National level (National Award for e-Governance- 2019-20, for ‘Excellence in providing Citizen – Centric Delivery’ by Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances, Govt. of India, ‘National Award for Outstanding Service’ Ministry of Railways Govt. of India -2006) and thrice at the Ministry (of Railways) level. He also served as Dean of the Indian Railway Institute of Transport Management (IRITM), Lucknow, and General Manager Web Applications at the Centre for Railway Information Systems (CRIS). He has training and enrichment from Japan (Railway Management), Malaysia (ICLIF – Advance Management), Singapore (INSEAD – Advance Management), Germany (UIC) and the US (Oracle).

He is the Adviser at the NITI Aayog (National Institution for Transformation of India), the apex ‘Think Tank’ of the Govt. of India.

 

The post National Workshop on Low-emission Zones in Cities appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

This study is part of a two-part series on private charging access in IZEVA jurisdictions. An accompanying report, Policies and innovative approaches for maximizing overnight charging in multi-unit dwellings, examines policies and business models to address the charging needs of apartment dwellers.

The post A technical analysis of private overnight charging access in IZEVA jurisdictions appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

The report categorizes potential solutions into six main areas: regulations, financial incentives, innovative business models, technology for load management, education and awareness, and solutions for dwellers without access to private parking. The analysis addresses community concerns, including fire safety and the impact on housing affordability, based on insights from stakeholder interviews presented in the appendix.

This study is part of a two-part series on private charging access in IZEVA jurisdictions. An accompanying technical report examines the influence of dwelling type on the cost of refueling an EV.

The post Policies and innovative approaches to maximizing overnight charging in multi-unit dwellings appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

Elektro-Pkw erreichen die erste frühe gesellschaftliche Mehrheit

Von Januar bis Oktober 2023 erreichten Elektro-Pkw 18 Prozent Marktanteil an den Neuzulassungen in Deutschland, der gleiche durchschnittliche Anteil wie im Jahr 2022. Damit hat die Marktakzeptanz der Technologie das Stadium der ersten „frühen gesellschaftlichen Mehrheit“ erreicht.

Technologieakzeptanzkurve und Anteil von Elektro-Pkw-Neuzulassungen in Deutschland seit 2019.

Elektro-Pkw erreichen die erste frühe gesellschaftliche Mehrheit

Von Januar bis Oktober 2023 erreichten Elektro-Pkw 18 Prozent Marktanteil an den Neuzulassungen in Deutschland, der gleiche durchschnittliche Anteil wie im Jahr 2022. Damit hat die Marktakzeptanz der Technologie das Stadium der ersten „frühen gesellschaftlichen Mehrheit“ erreicht (vgl. Abbildung).

Technologieakzeptanzkurve und Anteil von Elektro-Pkw-Neuzulassungen in Deutschland seit 2019.

Neue Elektro-Pkw werden vor allem im Norden, Westen und Süden Deutschlands zugelassen

Neuzulassungen von Elektro-Pkw sind in Deutschland geografisch ungleich verteilt. Die fünf Regionen mit den höchsten Anteilen von Elektro-Pkw an den Neuzulassungen im Jahr 2022 befinden sich im Norden, Westen und Süden des Landes.

Anteil von Elektro-Pkw-Neuzulassungen an den gesamten Pkw-Neuzulassungen im Jahr 2022 nach Kreisen und kreisfreien Städten.

Der gewerbliche und private Elektro-Pkw-Markt entwickelt sich unterschiedlich

Es gibt einen deutlichen Unterschied zwischen dem gewerblichen und dem privaten Pkw-Markt: Gewerbliche Halter, auf die in den vergangenen Jahren etwa zwei Drittel der Pkw-Neuzulassungen entfielen, entschieden sich im Jahr 2022 bei Neuwagenkäufen zu 14 Prozent für Elektro-Pkw. Bei Privatpersonen, die etwa ein Drittel der Pkw-Neuzulassungen ausmachen, lag der Anteil von Elektro-Pkw-Neuzulassungen im Jahr 2022 bei fast 25 Prozent.

Entwicklung der monatlichen privaten Pkw-Neuzulassungen nach Antriebsarten (links, Liniendiagramm). Marktanteile von privaten bzw. gewerblichen Pkw-Neuzulassungen nach Antriebsarten im Jahr 2022 (rechts, Säulendiagramme).

Elektro-Pkw sind finanziell wirtschaftlicher als vergleichbare benzinbetriebene Varianten, aber nicht immer

Die Gesamtbetriebskosten von vergleichbaren Elektro-Pkw und benzinbetriebenen Pkw im Kompakt- und Kleinwagensegment über einen Zeitraum von vier Jahren fallen unterschiedlich aus. Im Kompaktwagensegment hat der analysierte Elektro-Pkw einen deutlichen Kostenvorteil. Unter Berücksichtigung der staatlichen und herstellerseitigen Kaufprämien liegt dieser bei 12.300 Euro gegenüber der vergleichbaren benzinbetriebenen Variante; ohne Kaufprämien liegt der Kostenvorteil bei 5.100 Euro. Im Mini-Segment ist der Kostenvorteil mit 1.100 Euro deutlich geringer, allerdings ergibt sich dieser Kostenvorteil nur unter Berücksichtigung der Kaufprämien.

Gesamtbetriebskosten ausgewählter Benzin- und Elektro-Pkw-Modelle im Kompaktklasse und Mini-Segment über eine Haltedauer von vier Jahren (Morrison & Wappelhorst, 2023).

Monatliche Entwicklung von öffentlichen und halbföffentlichen Normal- und Schnellladepunkten zwischen Januar 2021 und Dezember 2022.

Kumulative Anzahl von vollständig öffentlich zugänglichen Normalladepunkten im Dezember 2022.

Kumulative Anzahl von vollständig öffentlich zugänglichen Schnellladepunkten im Dezember 2022.

Kosten für neue Pkw belasten untere Einkommensgruppen überproportional

Die Gesamtbetriebskosten eines neuen Pkw über einen Zeitraum von vier Jahren belasten vor allem untere Einkommensgruppen überproportional. Allerdings sind diese Kosten im monatlichen Durchschnitt für die analysierten Elektro-Pkw im Vergleich zu den benzinbetriebenen Pkw geringer. Im Kompaktwagensegment liegen die durchschnittlichen monatlichen Kosten über eine Haltedauer von vier Jahren für den Elektro-Pkw bei 87 Prozent des Haushaltsnettoeinkommens, für den vergleichbaren Benzin-Pkw bei 96 Prozent. Im Mini-Segment liegt der Anteil bei 47 Prozent (Elektro-Pkw) bzw. 49 Prozent (Benzin-Pkw).

Gesamtkosten für den Besitz ausgewählter Fahrzeugmodelle als durchschnittlicher Anteil des monatlichen Haushaltsnettoeinkommens in Deutschland inkl. einmaliger Kaufprämien für Elektro-Pkw beim Neuwagenkauf (Morrison & Wappelhorst, 2023).

The post ICCT-Monitor 2023: Ist der Übergang von Verbrenner- zu Elektro-Pkw sozial gerecht? appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

Figure 1. Overview of supplementary financial support measures along LEZs/ZEZs targeted at private individuals and businesses in most financial need covered in this paper.

The findings highlight that these supplementary financial measures vary between cities, with aid amounts depending on the specific support measures, types of vehicles, and beneficiaries. Such measures aim to enhance equitable outcomes for LEZs and ZEZs, with positive effects observed in cities like Brussels and London, particularly among households in the lowest income brackets and in areas with higher levels of multiple deprivation. These case studies can serve as examples for other cities looking to implement similar zones while ensuring social equity and inclusion for all.

The post Low- and zero-emission zones and social equity: Supporting the urban transition to zero-emission vehicles and alternative transport modes appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

In Germany and France, the two largest passenger car markets in Europe by new sales, the market for BEVs is evolving rapidly with new registrations reaching 18% and 13%, respectively, in 2022. But low-cost BEV models are still rare compared to internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs). A new battery electric Dacia Spring, a small car in the lower price segment, still seems out of reach for many—its price tag roughly equals the median yearly disposable income per capita in Germany (about €23,000) and France (about €20,000). Both countries have already made important efforts with a variety of tax and purchase incentives designed to make BEVs more affordable in general. But what policies exist to support people dependent on a car who have lower incomes?

Three key aspects matter in this respect when designing national income-based policies for BEVs: how purchase incentives are defined according to income levels, the price cap on vehicles that qualify for a purchase incentive, and what type of vehicle is eligible, being it a new or a used model. Other policy types, such as those supporting leasing options like the planned social leasing program in France, can also be a game-changer making BEVs more affordable for people in lower income groups.

Providing income-based incentives for new BEVs purchases

When buying a new BEV in Germany or France, the maximum subsidy amounts differ slightly, as do the eligibility requirements. In Germany, all private buyers receive the same amount of assistance independent of income. The one-time purchase bonus from the government is worth a maximum of €4,500. With the €2,250 (net) contributed by the automakers, any buyer can receive up to €6,750.

France, on the other hand, distinguishes between households with lower and higher incomes. Individuals who earn up to €14,089 (annual per capita reference tax income) can receive a purchase bonus up to €7,000, while those above this threshold are offered a maximum aid of €5,000. The maximum aid amount in France is capped at 27% of the vehicle’s gross purchase price.

As shown in Figure 1, reducing the purchase price of a Dacia Spring by applying only the national and manufacturer’s purchase bonuses would lead to a similar final price tag with less than a €400 difference—around €15,600 in Germany and €15,200 in France for people with lower incomes. In the case of France, the maximum bonus is not applicable for the comparably low-priced BEV model.

Figure 1. Effects of national one-time purchase bonus for the purchase of a new battery electric Dacia Spring on the final purchase price in Germany and France.

Providing income-based incentives for used BEV purchases

If government policies aim to target drivers with lower incomes, there may be an even better case for incentivizing used BEV purchases. These vehicles are often the first option for people with lower incomes due to their lower price tag compared to new models. Both Germany and France provide purchase incentives for used BEVs, although not based on income.

In Germany, the government purchase bonus for a used BEV is €3,000, and manufacturers offer an additional €1,500. While the German bonus appears to be high, a variety of preconditions have to be met. For example, a new purchase bonus cannot have already been applied to the vehicle, the BEV can only have been registered for a maximum of 12 months and have a maximum mileage of 15,000 km. In France, the purchase bonus for a used BEV is €1,000. To qualify, the vehicle must be at least two years old from the first registration, purchased from a dealer, and kept for at least 2 years. The used BEV bonus can be awarded a maximum of once every 3 years.

While neither Germany or France have adopted a purchase bonus for used BEVs dependent on income, such policies exist outside Europe, such as in the states of California and Pennsylvania in the United States.

Implementing vehicle price caps on incentives for new and used BEV purchases

Setting price caps on BEVs that qualify for purchase incentives can prevent giving money to those who can afford a new, high-priced car. In Germany, the maximum government bonus amount of €4,500 is paid if the new BEV’s net list price is below €40,000; the bonus is reduced to €3,000 if the net list price of the new BEV is between €40,000 and €65,000. For the purchase of a used BEV, the price cap is €65,000. In France, only purchasers of a new BEV below €47,000 can receive a bonus, and there is no price cap for used BEVs.

Introducing income-based incentives for BEV leasing

Leasing options can be a good alternative to limit high upfront costs for purchasing a new or used BEV. In Germany, bonus amounts for leasing a BEV depend on whether the leased vehicle is new or used, the leasing duration, and the vehicle’s net list price. In France, bonus amounts for new and used BEV leases are the same as for purchases.

Making leasing amounts dependent on income can further support people in lower income groups. France plans to introduce a new “social BEV leasing program,” stating in the announcement that “those who need it most” should be able to lease a BEV for €100 per month. However, no further details are available regarding vehicle eligibility or lease duration. For comparison, a new Dacia Spring Essential is available in France from €120 per month for a long-term rental (37 months) after an initial contribution of €2,500 and taking into account the €5,000 purchase bonus. The Peugeot e-208 starts from €150 per month for a long-term rental (36 months). A similar program is not yet planned for in Germany.

Providing income-based supplementary incentives for new and used low-emission vehicles

Beyond the policies listed above, France offers other income-based policy measures to support the purchase of BEVs in addition to low-emission ICEVs. These include a national income-based conversion bonus which supports the replacement of an older car with a cleaner zero- or low-emission version, and the clean vehicle microcredit for those with lower incomes to acquire a new or used zero- or low-emission car through a long-term rental or rental with the option to purchase.

Introducing a bonus-malus vehicle tax system

France introduced a bonus-malus tax scheme in 2008, which ensures that the malus is paid by those that can most afford it. Purchasers of a new high-emitting car, who are typically people in higher income groups, pay a higher one-time registration tax at the time of purchase—starting in 2023, the maximum amount is €50,000 for vehicles emitting 225 g CO₂/km (based on WLTP) or more. The amounts have been used in the past to finance bonus payments for both BEVs and plug-in-hybrid vehicles, and also to partially fund the conversion bonus. Germany does not have a similar bonus-malus tax scheme in place and purchase bonuses are indirectly paid for by all taxpayers.

Figure 2. Selection of “social” incentives and disincentives for private BEVs in Germany and France.

France and Germany are both making relevant efforts to make BEVs more affordable for people with lower incomes through national policy actions. Still, France is taking the overall lead in pursuing policies for people in lower-income groups, as shown in the Figure above. Germany might run the risk of a fragmented transition to BEVs, making it difficult for people with lower incomes who are dependent on a car in their everyday life to gain access to BEVs. Not leaving them behind can help the urgent technological transformation needed to meet our climate targets and mitigate air pollution and health risks

The post Making electric cars affordable: How Germany and France are targeting people with lower incomes appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

Last September, the ICCT published a study on how a frequent flying levy, a progressive taxation of air tickets as a function of how often an individual flies, could help generate revenue for the net-zero transition in an equitable way. That study estimated that an FFL tax on the world’s frequent fliers—the 2% of the global population who take about 40% of all trips—could generate more than 80% of the revenue needed for decarbonization.

An FFL enjoys widespread support in environmental and social justice communities but,  unfortunately, not so much from airlines. This shouldn’t surprise us. Aside from the practical and political questions about imposing a new tax worldwide, the FFL targets airlines’ most important customers. However, a flat increase in ticket prices could hit the poorest travelers hardest, as shown in our FFL paper. So, what strategies could airlines adopt instead of a tax on frequent fliers or across-the-board fare hikes?

Luckily, airlines have sophisticated ticket pricing structures to pass along costs to those that can most readily pay—business travelers. These rules, described in this excellent video primer, employ tactics like advance-purchase and minimum-stay requirements to distinguish business from leisure travelers. These rules allow airlines to sell the identical product (e.g., a premium economy seat) at a higher cost to business travelers while keeping costs low for more price-sensitive leisure travelers. There’s reason to believe that these same rules can be used to pass along the higher costs of clean fuels to wealthier frequent fliers.

That’s because people who fly frequently for work also fly frequently for leisure, according to data compiled by the International Air Transport Association (figure). Two-thirds of the passengers surveyed flew infrequently for work, defined here as taking four or fewer work trips per year. But flying frequently for business (five or more times per year) makes it three times more likely that someone also flies frequently for leisure. The effect is even more skewed for the super fliers who take more than 10 work trips per year. These road warriors are 15 times more likely than infrequent business fliers to fly more than 10 times per year for leisure.

Figure. Number of leisure flights taken each year by business fliers. Source: International Air Transportation Association 2022 Global Passenger Survey.

It’s well known that ticket purchasing behavior varies between business and leisure travelers; that’s the whole basis for making seats on short trips purchased close to the departure date more expensive because companies are more likely to pick up the bill, not individuals. However, it’s a reasonable guess that, if a person flies frequently for both work and leisure travel, their purchasing behavior will be more similar across both types of travel than not.

What does this all mean? It means that, when choosing how to pass along the costs of meeting net-zero targets to consumers, airlines concerned about equity should be able to leverage existing pricing structures to pass along more of the costs to work travelers and to wealthier leisure travelers. For example, an overall cost increase of 10% to finance emissions reductions might be broken down into a 15% cost increase for fare classes meant for work travel but only a 5% cost increase for fare classes commonly purchased for leisure travel.

This approach would assign a larger share of mitigation costs to companies, not consumers. And it would also raise prices more for those frequent leisure fliers who, just like business travelers, purchase higher-priced fare classes. An even more direct approach would be for airlines to assign more decarbonization costs to premium seating, which is clearly a luxury good. Infrequent leisure travelers will keep buying the cheapest tickets that—as in the example above—have a lower percentage of the total price going toward emissions reductions.

To be clear, I don’t expect this to be the only solution for covering the cost of the net-zero transition. Voluntary approaches to help cover the price premium of alternative jet fuels, through efforts like the Sustainable Aviation Buyers Alliance (SABA) and Lufthansa’s “Green Fares,” will also be needed. Likewise, disclosing emissions at the time of booking empowers consumers, as argued in this paper. Still, one important strategy—to use existing ticket-pricing strategies to pass on more of the costs to work and frequent fliers—could already be at the gate.

The post Fair fares for the climate appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

Expanding the EV market beyond cities is vital in an equitable, economy-wide transition to clean and low-carbon transportation. To help address the issue in China, “NEVs to the Countryside” programs have been implemented at the national and local levels. These have been a good approach to spur EV sales in rural areas and in nearby small cities and towns, and they are a good example for regions outside of China.

First, some economic context. While the average disposable income of residents of rural areas in China is lower than in urban areas, the average disposable income and spending in rural areas increased at a faster rate than in urban areas from 2015 to 2021. Over the same period, the number of vehicles per hundred households grew 130%, from 13 to 30, in rural areas; the growth was 67%, from 30 to 50, in urban areas. However, barriers such as high upfront cost and limited access to EV information, products, and service still hinder wider adoption of EVs in rural areas.

An EV in a rural area in Zhejiang province, China. This was rare a couple of years ago, but it’s becoming more common. Photo credit Lingzhi Jin.

NEVs to the Countryside started at the national level in 2020. NEVs are battery electric, plug-in hybrid electric, and fuel cell electric vehicles, and the term is used interchangeably with EV in this blog post. The program targets rural areas and small cities and towns. Small cities and towns that are close to rural areas serve as hubs for rural residents to get more services, including those related to automobiles. The program features a series of events at different locations during which local governments publish their supportive policies, if any, and eligible manufacturers showcase their participating NEV models and discounts. Approximately 25 manufacturers and 60–70 NEV models participated in the events in the past few years, including traditional manufacturers such as SAIC and Dongfeng and “new forces” such as WM Motor and Leapmotor. Partly due to this program, the portion of NEV sales that occurred in rural areas increased from less than 20% before 2019 to 29% in 2020, 31% in 2021, and 35% from Jan–May 2022.

Other than the national program, local governments are also encouraged to create their own programs and supporting policies. For example, Jiangsu province organized its own NEVs to the Countryside events in 2020 at 10 locations. Discounts on eligible models ranged from CNY 3,000 CNY to CNY 10,000. During Jiangsu’s 4-month event, 40,754 NEVs were registered in the province, a 174% increase over the same period in 2019; these vehicles were 54.7% of total new registrations in 2020.

It was not smooth sailing all the way, though. Some lessons learned include the need to showcase a diverse—but still targeted—array of models, and the importance of expanding sales channels and after-sales service to sustain the growth in these areas. For example, although microcars are usually considered most popular in small cities, towns, and rural areas in China, governments and manufacturers are trying to encourage the introduction of more diverse models to accommodate different needs while still considering the characteristics of these markets.

Figure 1 below shows that there has been an increase in model offerings in the national program over the past 3 years and in 2022, more cars in the A and B segments participated. The number of A00 models decreased in 2022; these models are less expensive, shorter-range microcars that resemble a Smart Fortwo.

Figure 1. Number of models by vehicle type participating in the national NEVs to the Countryside program.

There has also been a slight increase in the average all-electric range and price of models over the years (Figure 2). The average range of models offered in 2020 was approximately 300 km, and this can cover the needs of most trips in small cities, towns, and rural areas. This increased by around 4% in 2021 and another 14% in 2022. While the average price for participating models increased about 10% each year in 2021 and 2022, it’s still within the price range of vehicles typically sold in these areas. Based on the price of NEVs sold in Q1 of 2022, 73% of NEVs sold in rural markets were less than CNY 150,000; that’s a much higher percentage than the 43% in urban areas.

Figure 2. Average all-electric range and price of models participating in the national NEVs to the Countryside program. Data labels show percent change from the previous year.

Governments other than China have also been trying to expand EV adoption beyond cities. In the United States, for example, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 invests $7.5 billion to build out a convenient and equitable national network of EV chargers. This funding has a particular focus on rural, disadvantaged, and hard-to-reach communities. We’ve also done studies on rural regions in Europe and found that various actions were adopted to increase access to EVs, expand charging infrastructure, and raise consumer awareness in the rural regions with leading EV shares of new passenger car registrations. Only by providing support like this to areas beyond cities can we move more quickly as a whole to a future where clean air is for all.

The post Beyond cities: Efforts to expand equitable access to electric vehicles in China appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

The post Sozial gerechter Übergang von Verbrenner- zu Elektro-Pkw in Deutschland appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.

First, it provides theoretical background on the concept of equity, equality, and justice in the adoption of electric vehicles, and the manifold and interrelated causes of inequity in this context. Second, it focuses on the status of research on equity in Germany’s transition to electric vehicles and identifies knowledge gaps for further research.

Key findings include:

An equitable transition from ICEVs to BEVs is a multifaceted topic. An equitable electric vehicle transition involves factors related to vehicle purchase and ownership, but also other aspects ranging from information campaigns to lower-income households or access to charging infrastructure.

The causes of inequity in this transition are manifold and interrelated. To establish a common conceptual framework, this paper defines seven broad dimensions that cause inequity: economic, environmental, health, spatial, procedural, legal, and data.

The current transition from ICEVs to BEVs in Germany is not equitable, according to studies and registration data. Private buyers and users of electric cars are a small part of the population: mostly male, with a comparatively high income and a high level of education.

Further research should contribute to reviewing the current German policy framework on the adoption of electric vehicles. Marginalized groups who depend on a car for their everyday mobility should be the focus of future policies.

The post An equitable transition from combustion engines to battery electric vehicles: Theoretical framework and status in Germany appeared first on International Council on Clean Transportation.