Social and economic indicators integration toward a holistic consequential Life Cycle Assessment Application to a Bus Rapid Transit project in France A. DE BORTOLI, A. FERAILLE, F. LEURENT
Anne de Bortoli PhD candidate UPE, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts ParisTech
[email protected] SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016
CONTEXT Decision-making support and transportation assessments in France
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Transportation development process GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT POLICY
MASTER PLAN CONCEPT DESIGN (Opportunity study & Feasability study)
PROJECT PROCESS
CBA EIA Assessments
PRELIMINARY DESIGN PUBLIC INQUIRY Declaration of public utility
PROJECT EXECUTION SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Cost-benefit analysis of infrastructure in France • Compulsory for public-funded infra (Instruction of 2014, June 26th) •
Indicator : socio-economic Net Present Value (IRR): =
+
,
,
+
,
,
• Current CBA « light » on environmental externalities – Perimeter mostly restricted to operation – Compulsory environmental externalities : • C02eq emissions • effect of air pollution on health SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Life Cycle Assessment as a support for transportation decision-making in France • Not compulsory => voluntary actions • Special interest after the Grenelle Roundtable (2009) mostly for roads ⇒ French volunteer convention for public works sustainability (de Bortoli 2015) ⇒ Road eco-comparators : Ecorce, Seve, Variways… ⇒ Road LCA (CEREMA and ENPC 2016)
• Other transport systems : rare punctual approches: – Ademe LCA comparison : electric veh Vs conventional veh – ENPC : LCA of a BRT line (de Bortoli et al 2016) – Mines ParisTech : software NovaEquer for district LCA + Efficacity work (R&D centre for energy transition) – Conurbation mobility LCA (Le Feon 2014) SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
METHODOLOGIES Comparison of CBA and LCA
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Approach
Cost-Benefit Analysis CONSEQUENTIAL
Life Cycle Assessment ATTRIBUTIONAL – Comparison of two variants
– A situation at T0 Mode A Vs Mode B – Two evolutive scenarios
or CONSEQUENTIAL Project Scenario Vs Reference scenario
– Assesment of the consequences of a decision « I do the project » Vs « I don’t do it »
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Impacts and indicators Cost-Benefit Analysis
Life Cycle Assessment ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
Socio-Economic Net Present Value •
(=SE-NPV) includes : •
Costs of the project
•
Mandatory externalities –
GHG emissions
–
Traffic noise
–
Traffic safety
– –
Air pollution Travel time
Optional externalities : travel time fiability, comfort, energy, macroeconomic & urban effects, rare resources,
=> Monetization of externalities, discounting, and calculation of SE-NPV
•
No standardized list for transport (for buildings : NF EN-15804) • Several indicators for one effect (characterization methods) Example of set of indicators for transport Mid-point indicators
Characterization methods
Unit
Energy consumption
Cumulative Energy Demand
MJ eq
Climate change (100 years)
CML
Kg CO2 eq
Depletion of abiotic resources
CML
Solid waste
Recipe
Kg Eq antimony kg
Radioactive waste
Recipe
kg
Acidification potential – generic
CML
Kg SO2 eq
Stratospheric ozone depletion
CML
KgCFC11 eq
Photochemical oxidation
CML
kgEthyleneEq
Eutrophication – generic
CML
kg PO43- eq
Freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity (100 years)
CML
kg1.4DCBeq
Marine aquatic ecotoxicity (100 years) Terrestrial ecotoxicity (100 years)
CML CML
kg1.4DCBeq kg1.4DCBeq
Human toxicity (100 years)
CML
kg1.4DCBeq
De Bortoli et al 2016
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Perimeter Cost-Benefit Analysis FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Project : Capex + Opex Mobility area : difference of global Opex
Life Cycle Assessment ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Most of the time, entire life cycle : • Construction • Operation • Maintenance • End-of-life
EXTERNALITIES ANALYSIS Mobility area : Effects of mode shift on operation impacts: GHG, road safety, noise, air pollution, travel time SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Perimeter Cost-Benefit Analysis FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Project : Capex + Opex Mobility area : difference of global Opex
Life Cycle Assessment ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Most of the time, entire life cycle : • Construction • Operation • Maintenance • End-of-life
EXTERNALITIES ANALYSIS Mobility area : Effects of modal shift on operation impacts: GHG, road
OBJECTIVES : adding whole life cycle environmental impacts of the modal shift
safety, noise, air pollution, travel time SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Proposal of a new methodology to assess transportation project impacts [Project benefits]pkm = [Impact without project]pkm – [Impact with project] pkm
A - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Calculating: 1.
2.
3.
4.
new project transportation
B - SOCIAL & ECONOMIC IMPACTS ECONOMIC IMPACT Calculating: 1.
Public CapEx of the project
mode impacts per pkm
2.
Public OpEx with & without project (/pkm)
average transport impact per
3.
User cost difference
pkm without the project
4.
Public and user cost differences /pkm
average transport impact per
SOCIAL IMPACTS
pkmwith the project
1.
Time savings (/pkm)
The difference before/after
2.
Safety savings (/pkm)
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Case study
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Design on the road section
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
LCA of the project
Subsystem modeling of the BRT line V3.1
Recipe CML CED EDIP
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
LCA results of the project 100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
-20%
Bus prod /year
Bus operation /year
Bus maintenance /year
Bus EoL /year
Infra construction /year
Infra maintenance /year
Some figures are from preliminary design, others are extrapolated: the aim of the presentation is to discuss methodology, not results
Traffic simulation and assumptions Million passenger.km/year
Million passenger.km/year Mode
Mode
No project (2017)
Project (2018)
Passenger car
144,93
143,48
Passenger car
Bus
34,67
36,12
Bus
Total
179,6
179,6
Total
No project (2017) Project (2018) 111,48
110,37
0,99
0,86
112,48
111,23
TRAFFIC SIMULATION Modal shift from passenger car to BRT : 1% ASSUMPTIONS No induced trips (neither motorized nor non-motorized) Constant demand : trips on removed bus lines are totally replaced by BRT trips
Holistic comparison of the road section with and without the project on one year 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0
No project
Project
Some figures are from preliminary design, others are extrapolated: the aim of the presentation is to discuss methodology, not results
Holistic consequential assessment of the project implementation Benefits with project 0,045 0,04 0,035 0,03 0,025 0,02 0,015 0,01 0,005 0 User vehicle costs (0,1€/pkm)
Noise (c€/pkm)
Road safety Road cleaning climate Human health Biodiversity (c€/pkm) and police change (DALY/pkm) (PDF/pkm) (c€/pkm) (eqCO2/pkm)
Bulk waste (kg/pkm)
radioactive waste (kg/pkm)
energy consumption (MJeq/pkm)
Some figures are from preliminary design, others are extrapolated: the aim of the presentation is to discuss methodology, not results
CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVES
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Some limits to method implementation •
Limit 1: EcoInvent average processes not specific to France Contextualisation work to do for average pkm (especially on infrastructures)
•
Limit 2: consumptions and emissions of the BRT based on WHSC measures (different from real emissions)
•
Limit 3 : no speed effect consideration (consumption, emissions) Coupling traffic dynamic simulation with LCA?
•
Limit 4: defining robust evolution scenarios – Transportation offer and demand – Mode performances – Prices (per market)
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
Some questions on the methodology •
Question 1: decision-making support and indicators •
Monetization? Proposing a set of non-monetized indicators? + the standard SE-NPV?
•
•
•
Public cost indicator : infrastructure works are from on side to another side of the street…
Question 2 : what perimeter ? •
Physical : trafic network effects…
•
Consideration of non-motorized trips (induced or modal shift) with new street design? Model?
Question 3: considering uncertainty?
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION Special thanks to Zakaria SEFRI And Jonathan NG YUK SHING who conducted the first LCA of TZen3 infrastructure (students at Ecole des Ponts et Chaussées)
SETAC Case Studies Symposium, Montpellier 20-23 September 2016, de Bortoli, LVMT, Ecole des Ponts
