Scenarios for future EV uptake in vehicle fleets for 5 European City Authorities WP3: Subtitle. Task 3.4

Transcription

1 Scenarios for future EV uptake in vehicle fleets for 5 European City Authorities WP3: Subtitle Task 3.4 Date April

2 Table of Contents 1 Introduction Methodology Step Step Step Exemplar Regions Amsterdam (NL) National context Regional Context Oslo (NO) National context Regional context London (GB) Prevailing Conditions Behaviours City Requirements Discussion Barcelona (ES) Prevailing Conditions Behaviours City Requirements Discussion Stuttgart (DE) Prevailing Conditions Behaviours City Requirements Stuttgart Specific Requirements Discussion Vienna (AT) Prevailing Conditions Behaviours City Requirements Discussion

3 8 CO 2 Reduction Potential Approach Results Amsterdam London Barcelona Stuttgart Vienna Conclusions References

4 1 Introduction The road transport sector is one of Europe s fastest growing sectors in terms of CO2 emissions; with a growth of 36% over the last 18 years (Pasaoglu et al., 2012). In response, and also to comply with its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, the European Union (EU) has taken a number of actions to significantly reduce dependence on imported oil and cut carbon emissions in transport. The EU aims to reduce overall CO2 emissions by 20% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 (European Climate Foundation, 2010). For transport, this involves a 60% reduction target for 2050, compared to 1990 levels (European Commission, 2011). To enshrine this commitment, a legislative framework was introduced in order to provide drivers for the EU automotive sector towards a set of specific CO2 reduction targets, thus in April 2009, the EU adopted Regulation 443/2009/EC which established a CO2 emission target of 130g/km for the average of new cars sold by Perhaps the most attractive option on this pathway towards implementing low-emission vehicles is electric propulsion, which is a market ready technology alternative to ICE (Hacker et al., 2009). Electric Vehicles (EVs) are especially challenging because the benefits of EV use accrue mainly to society and to the environment in the form of reduced pollution and carbon emissions, whereas the performance penalty (reduced range, long recharging time, inadequate facilities for recharging, higher purchase cost and uncertain rates of depreciation) accrue mainly to the owner or purchaser of the vehicle. Incentives provide a stimulus to the uptake of electro-mobility by responding to these market deficiencies. Across the EU incentives are in place that aim to increase uptake and use of electric vehicles. Yet how to measure the success of incentives is not clear. Incentives that are comparable in scope have different impact depending on the market into which they are applied. Comparative assessment of incentives is problematic due to different political, economic, social, technical, environment and legal structures. If the desired impact is to be achieved with the deployment of incentives, then the relationship between the incentive and the outcome needs to be understood at regional level. To achieve this aim we established the following objectives: To catalogue the different boundary conditions within regions. Boundary conditions are the institutional, economic and social factors that differentiate the various regions around Europe. These can include taxes, automotive manufacturing, urban topology (including traffic patterns, and parking conditions), energy generation, cost etc. To establish the development potential of EV fleets within selected regions based on current policies and initiatives. This would be 4

5 undertaken via a survey of key stakeholders involved with the electromobility value chain in each of the regions To map boundary conditions against development potential to provide an indication of how different regions and fleets are able to grow as well as assessing actions, making recommendations to changes to policies and initiatives to achieve further measurable results in the near term. To demonstrate that best practice sharing based on transferability will lead to an intensifying of EV uptake in vehicle fleets and support the sector in meeting its responsibility to European objectives for The above approach was demonstrated on four European cities: London; Barcelona; Vienna; and Stuttgart. In addition, the cities of Oslo and Amsterdam were studied to understand how these regions have been successful in promoting the acceptance and uptake of EV. The methodology, the development of the scenario for each city and the demonstration are described in the following sections. 5

6 2 Methodology To meet the objectives the following methodology was developed and adopted by the project partners (see Figure 1). The methodology has three steps, two of these associated with the collection of data and analysis, with the third and final step being the development of the scenarios a scenario is a portfolio of incentives and/or activities that meet the requirements of the city authority in terms of promotion of EV and other policy requirements, such as congestion alleviation or public transport promotion. Internal WP3 synthesis workshop Step 1 Boundary Conditions (FIER) Stakeholder Perceptions (survey) City Region Input (e.g. Amsterdam workshop) Proposals (one for each region) Data Collection and Analysis (WP3) Step 2 Model Development (Transfer) Demonstration (City Workshop) Data Collection (survey) Proposal Evaluation Data Collection and Analysis (WP4) Step 3 Refine Scenarios Model Development (Extrapolate) Assess CO2 reduction Presentation of Proposal Analysis (WP3 and WP4) 2 nd international city workshop Figure 1: Flow chart for the development and assessment of the proposals for each city region 6

7 A description of the methodology is provided below on a section by section basis. 2.1 Step 1 The initial step in the methodology related to the data collection and analysis in support of developing a proposal for each city. To develop a proposal that is both acceptable to the city and also meets the requirement for EV promotion requires that data is collected on the prevailing conditions, the perception of the stakeholders in terms of the impact of incentives in promotion of EV and the requirements of the city in terms of how EV would fit within the broader policy portfolio that the city is required to follow. Further details on the individual parts of step 1 are provided below. Internal WP3 synthesis workshop Step 1 Boundary Conditions (FIER) Stakeholder Perceptions (survey) City Region Input (e.g. Amsterdam workshop) Proposals (one for each region) Data Collection and Analysis (WP3) Figure 2: Data collection and analysis stage for proposal development Boundary Conditions The initial part of the data collection was focused on the prevailing conditions (those in place at the time of the study 1 ) and how these change between the different regions and cities. The approach adopted was to use the PESTLE framework. This is an established framework used to describe the political, economic, social, technical, legal and environmental factors. It is a useful strategic tool for understanding market growth or decline, business position, potential and direction for operations (Oxford Learning Lab, 2014). An expert working group was convened to decide upon the various factors that would be collected as part of the framework. The framework was then applied to a number of European city regions with the data collected by the ICVUE project partnership through consultation with national and local bodies in each of the regions. The city regions selected as part of this study were Vienna (AT), Amsterdam (NL), Barcelona (SP), London (UK), Stuttgart (DE) and Oslo (NO). These regions were specifically selected based on a proactive 1 Data was collected during 2014 lead by FIER and reported as part of T3.1 7

8 approach to the inclusion and promotion of EV within their vehicle fleets and demonstration of diversity in national policy towards electric-mobility. Stakeholder Perceptions To be able to draw constructive conclusions a call for evidence has to be done to study the actual attitude and experience of the stakeholders on buying and using EVs and to what extent they are influenced by incentives. This was the second part of the work within step 1. A general call for evidence was issued in Germany, the UK, Spain, Austria, The Netherlands and Norway. The questionnaire was designed to allow respondents to quantitatively score the impact of a spectrum of incentives and policy-driven initiatives on EV uptake. The structure of the questionnaire was based on a review of the external factors impacting the EV undertaken using a PESTLE framework (Davies et al., 2014). A qualitative section within the questionnaire also allowed respondents the opportunity to discuss their answers and communicate their experience, knowledge and opinions on the impact of policy on their investments. The call for evidence had a very positive response rate receiving 110 fully completed questionnaires containing some 50,000 words. The sample quality was also notable respondents spanned the entire spectrum of EV stakeholders from director or CEO-level, or equivalent, down to end user and represented a fairly balanced view of the EV landscape and the quantity of responses was appropriately balanced across the regions under discussion (for details about the survey response please refer to Davies et al., 2016) City Authority Input The final part of the work contributing to step 1 was to engage with the various city authorities. The policy framework within each city is structured in response to both the promotion of low emission transport (under which EV would be included), but also in response to numerous other external and internal drivers. Examples may include congestion alleviation, air quality targets, social issues, land use, etc. It is important to recognise where the promotion of EV sits within the bigger picture. Therefore there was engagement with the city authorities in the process of analysis of the data collected as part of the ICVUE activity. Output of Step 1 In combination with city authorities, the result of step 1 was the development of a number of specific scenarios (or incentive package). Each scenario was developed based on the learning from step 1. It considered what was desirable and what was possible to achieve in terms of transferring best practice in response to regional suitability. Each scenario considered how a change to local policies and initiatives would provide opportunity for EV 8

9 uptake and the potential to achieve the development goals described in the EU Transport White Paper. 2.2 Step 2 This step builds upon the results of step 1 by evaluating the overall impact of the changes to incentives and policies expressed by a change in the EV vehicle uptake. This evaluation would be supported by the development of a decision support model (or DSM) tool. The stages of the work involved the further development of the web-based Decision Support Model (DSM) tool created by ICVUE for the support of the fleet mentoring process is described below. Step 2 Model Development (Transfer) Demonstration (City Workshop) Data Collection (survey) Proposal Evaluation Data Collection and Analysis (WP4) Figure 3: Data collection and analysis stage for DSM tool development The DSM contains three modules: (a) TCO-based 2 test of monetary and non-monetary incentives for commercial fleets in specific environments (stage 1); (b) Transfer best practise cases from one region or city to another one with different boundary conditions based on the results of the ICVUE project WP3 (stage 2); (c) Extrapolate to country level the benefits of incentive policies for dedicated commercial fleets in terms of CO 2 reduction and EVs brought into the first and second hand market (stage 3). The DSM is based on calculation of the TCO. For a particular region with known boundary conditions the tool can be used to compare the TCO for an EV compared to a comparable internal combustion engine vehicle. The information for the DSM comes from the collection of the boundary condition data noted in step 1 of the methodology. The use of the TCO-based module for supporting the mentoring of vehicle fleet managers has previously been reported as part of the project deliverables (ICVUE, 2017). To support the transfer (stage 2) required additional data collection relating to consumer acceptance of non-monetary incentives the acceptance being considered as different depending on regional context. This data was collected via an on-line survey (ICVUE, 2016) and over 300 responses were 2 Total cost-of-ownership, TCO 9

10 received. The survey covered willingness to pay for features such as exemptions (from taxation and restrictions to use) and preferential access to infrastructure (road and parking). In addition, the support of the city authorities was maintained through a series of demonstrations of the DSM tool. The demonstration enabled the city authority to quickly visualise the way in which the tool functioned and the relationships between incentives and CO2 reduction. The tool used generic data at this stage that would be replaced by region/city specific data collected as part of the survey. 2.3 Step 3 Step 3 was the final part of this work and provided actual CO2 reductions for the city based on region/city specific data and scenarios Step 3 Refine Scenarios Model Development (Extrapolate) Assess CO2 reduction Presentation of Proposal Analysis (WP3 and WP4) 2 nd international city workshop Figure 4: Analysis of proposals using DSM tool The final iteration of the DSM enabled the user to extrapolate to country level the benefits of incentive policies for dedicated commercial fleets in terms of CO2 reduction and EVs brought into the first and second hand market. Each of the proposals developed in step 1 was assessed. The relevance of the proposal and the final results were discussed at a final workshop where each of the city regions was present. This workshop ensured that any refinement to the proposals and the model necessary to reflect the changing situation in the real world were incorporated. It also enabled cities to exchange knowledge and learn from other s experiences. 10

11 3 Exemplar Regions The ICVUE methodology proposed to evaluate a number of European city regions. As noted these would be the urban centres of Oslo (NO), Amsterdam (NL), London (UK), Barcelona (ES), Dortmund (DE) and Stuttgart (DE). Work within the ICVUE project identified Norway and The Netherlands as the two regions within Europe with a large share of electric vehicles. Therefore, it was decided to look upon these regions (and the cities of Oslo and Amsterdam) as exemplars. The idea behind the exemplar region is that different incentives, dependent on their proximity to the market, will have different acceptance by the consumer. Incentives that may be remote from the consumer may be successful in development of the market place, but may not be supported by the consumer to the same or similar extent as a near market incentive. Examples may include funding for infrastructure development cf. direct financial support for vehicle purchase. The exemplar regions will create a baseline for understanding what is acceptable in terms of support for different incentive types and hence provide a means of comparing performance in different regions to what is achievable. 11

12 3.1 Amsterdam (NL) National context The uptake of EVs in the Netherlands is shown in the following chart (Figure 5). Figure 5: EV uptake in The Netherlands The uptake of EVs can be considered relatively high in the Netherlands compared to other countries in the EU. In the ICVUE comparison based on collection of Boundary Conditions data (ICVUE, 2015), only Norway shows higher figures. In The Netherlands sales are primarily focused on the PHEV and it is also observed that there are large quarterly differences in respect of vehicle sales performance. In the final quarters of 2013, 2015 and 2016 there were changes in the Benefit in Kind (BIK) rules, resulting in an extreme uptake of EV s. In addition to the BIK there are of course several other financial incentives. A synopsis of the situation in The Netherlands market place is provided below 12

13 Financial Incentives There are several financial incentives in place within The Netherlands to stimulate the uptake of electric vehicles. - There is a benefit on registration tax (BPM), where zero emission cars are excluded and fuel efficient vehicles (such as certain PHEV s) pay less than more polluting vehicles. - There is a road tax exemption for zero emission vehicles, and low emission vehicles also pay less than more polluting vehicles. - For company usage there is a benefit of a higher and faster capital depreciation rule for EVs than normal vehicles resulting in a lower profit tax, (called MIA and VAMIL) which has a significant impact on the TCO - An employee who uses the company car for more than 500 private km s has to pay a benefit in kind (BIK), or in other words, tax on private usage. There is a large difference between EVs, PHEV s and ICE vehicles where of course the less polluting vehicles pay less - In the Dutch market, the business market is more stimulated than the private market. This is a different policy when compared to other countries. In these countries where the incentives are open for both business as well as private usage, there is also a limited success in the uptake in the private market because of the low incentives and high costs. - There are several countries with limited success on the stimulation of the uptake of EV s in the private market. The cost threshold is still too high to get the customer motivated to buy an EV. In the Netherlands there is an advantage in that there is already a lower level of purchase tax. The results of the incentives are illustrated below (Figure 6): 13

14 Figure 6: Comparison of the TCO for different drivetrains (Petrol, Diesel, Electric) for The Netherlands Non-financial incentives The non-financial benefits or so called operational benefits are not as well applied in the Netherlands as for example in Norway. There are some grants / subsidies in some regional governments / municipalities available for electric mobility. They are however often aimed at business usage and public transport. The subsidies for electric passenger vehicles are rare and often not high. There are environmental zones in several cities, but they are not very strict. Only really old, polluting vehicles are not allowed in the city. This is going to become more strict, but it is not expected to happen in the near future. 14

15 In the Netherlands there is also a well-developed charging infrastructure with regards to relative numbers, featuring interoperability which supports the uptake. Within the other countries where the charging infrastructure is less developed, the hassle of driving an EV can be a showstopper. At the same time there is also room for improvement in the Netherlands with regards to coverage, availability and the cost of charging using public infrastructure Regional Context The city of Amsterdam is in the middle of a large transition towards electric transport. ICVUE selected Amsterdam as one of the reference cities because the implementation is quite advanced. This was confirmed in June 2016 at the Electric Vehicle Symposium in Montreal, where Amsterdam city council received the E-visionary award for the second time in succession. Motivating the decision to award the prize to the city, the jury of the EVS said Amsterdam has a long and solid track record of promoting the use of electric vehicles in the city, putting an effective charging infrastructure in place and promoting in general the transition to electromobility. The targets and the ambitions and the timing set for zero emission taxis, buses, small delivery vehicles, light vehicles and even boats are a world leading and an example to all cities (Plan Amsterdam, 2016). The reason for the focus of Amsterdam on electric mobility is because of the air quality issues (Figure 7). Air pollution results in health risks, therefore the EU has published guidelines with set values for different types of hazardous emissions. In Amsterdam, and most other large EU cities, the air quality is below the set values. If the cities do not meet these values, they are not allowed to start the construction of new buildings within the city boundary. 15

16 Figure 7: NO2-concentration in 2009 monitoring tool 2010 Based on research performed by TNO (2015 fleet scan), Amsterdam selected different measurements for different target groups taking into consideration the hazardous emissions emitted by each of these groups. 16

17 Figure 8: Air pollution concentrations for Amsterdam in 2015 Local differences or initiatives on a regional level can be summarised as follows (these are in addition to those provided at a national level and noted previously). Next to all the national incentives, which in the Netherlands have a big impact on purchase costs and operational costs, the city of Amsterdam does not provide financial incentives for electric vehicles unless they are company cars. Full electric taxi s and other company cars can get subsidy, heavy freight vehicles can get up to subsidy. The city of Amsterdam has only small non-financial incentives in terms of low emission zones / environmental zones. This started in 2009 focussing on banning polluting LGV s from the city centre and have since become more strict. Currently passenger vehicles do not fall within the scope of these zones. In 2017 a zone for delivery vans will be created, in 2018 a zone for taxis, coaches and mopeds and in 2020 an even tighter regulation for lorries in the low emissions zone. Charging infrastructure investments by the city of Amsterdam were limited to financial and non-financial incentives, however they have invested intensively in the network of public chargers. Currently there are over charging points. In the beginning charging and parking with a full electric car was free. 17

18 Now Amsterdam has set a maximum price suppliers are allowed to charge electric drivers in order to ensure electric driving remains affordable. 90% of the users don t have a driveway, therefore Amsterdam has installed charging points at the request of inhabitants. It can take a while (up to 7 years) to get a parking permit for residential parking. EV owners get priority for these permits, along with the public charging point. The plan is to double the number of charging points up to in Figure 9: Distribution of charge points in Amsterdam (2018) Municipality fleet The municipality has to set the right example to the inhabitants of the city by investing in EVs within their own fleet. It is now mandatory that when a new vehicle is purchased, first there has to be a check to see if an electric vehicle can be used. If this is not the case, the most environmental friendly alternative will be selected. In the year 2025 all vehicles in use by the municipality will have to be electric. 18

19 Taxi There over taxis in Amsterdam, almost all of them are using diesel. A typical inner-city taxi journey is ideal for an electric car. Via multiple incentives there are currently already 400 electric taxis within the city. Also for taxi s there is a covenant signed by all licensed taxi companies to go for a full electric taxi fleet in Meanwhile there will be benefits for e-taxi s and discouraging incentives for polluting taxis. The city of Amsterdam gives subsidy per electric taxi. A unique system in Amsterdam is the priority status at certain hotspot locations. Taxi s at the main train station have to drive into the taxi parking area. They are allowed to drive to the pick-up point when their licence plate is visible on the screen. E-taxi s get priority. They can also use the time they are parked there for fast charging. At Schiphol Airport a tender was issued for taxi pick-up points at the best locations to pick up travellers. This resulted in a 100% electric e-taxi fleet in this area (incl. 170 Tesla s). 80% of the trips from Schiphol go into Amsterdam. Car Sharing Car2go is a car sharing scheme from Daimler. Although there were cities who had this car sharing scheme already at an earlier stage, Amsterdam is the first full electric one. It started in 2011, which also had a big influence on the demand for a comprehensive charging infrastructure. 19

20 3.2 Oslo (NO) National context In the ICVUE study there has been a special focus on Norway. The reason is that in Norway the success of relative EV uptake is the not only the largest in the study, but in the world. In 2015 the market share of EV s was already 22%, in % and the intermediate figures of January 2017 show 37%. Figure 10K: EV Sales in Norway This is due to the conditions of the Norwegian market, mainly the incentive package developed by both national as well as local authorities to promote zero emission cars. Since the early 1990 s, the incentive package has been gradually introduced by a broad coalition of different political parties. The principle The polluter pays is a common approach for supporting the uptake of EV s in Norway. An EV always has to be cheaper than an ICE vehicle according to this principle. This is to be seen in the actions of the governmental organisations Incentives are typical applied at the national level. For example: No purchase/import taxes (1990) Exemption from 25% VAT on purchase (2001) Low annual road tax (1996) 50 % reduced company car tax (2000) Exemption from 25% VAT on leasing (2015) These national incentives have a high impact on the purchase and operational costs for EV owners. In particular the VAT exemption has a large impact on costs for private owners. Next to the VAT exemption the import tax exemption also has a large impact. 20

21 According to a calculation of the Norwegian EV Association, the third most important incentive is the free use of toll roads. Because of the complex calculation and the substantial differences between regional/local incentives, this is not included in the TCO calculation done by ICVUE, but the willingness to pay has been included in step 2 of the methodology based on this observation. The following incentives started as national incentives, but are currently (being) transferred to the responsibility of the municipalities. No charges on toll roads or ferries (1997 and 2009) or municipal parking (1999) Access to bus lanes (2005) Norway has a consistent & long term stable incentive policy, including a logical incentive dismantling strategy which has been effectively communicated in advance of its implementation (Figure 11): Figure 11: Timeline for the dismantling of Norwegian EV incentives This has stimulated a gradual growth in EV uptake and there is a clear view of which incentives will be effective and for how long. This does not only effect the operational incentives, but also on the predictability of the residual value of the vehicles. When there is the knowledge of which incentives are still effective after the expected ownership duration, this has a positive effect of the residual value. It could lead to declining values as the incentives run out, but balancing this there will be a large proportion of EVs in the market so the vehicles will be normalised and likely achieve values based on their utility, desirability, age and condition as is the case with ICEs. 21

22 Example of effective local incentive: Finnøy Finnøy is an island near Bryne on the west coast in the southern part of Norway. 70% of all new car sales are EV s. An important reason for the strong sales performance is the toll road tunnel connecting the island to Stavanger. This toll road also happens to top the list of being the most costly toll road in Norway in 2012 (+/- 17). It is presently free when passing along it in an EV Regional context Emissions reductions from transportation are key as this sector accounts for 60 % of greenhouse gas emissions in Oslo The total market share of EV s in Norway was 22%, but already at that time the market share in the city of Oslo was 29%. Because of the high density of vehicles in the capital of Norway, this means there is also a high absolute number of EV s in the city. In September 2016 the numbers of EV s on the road in Norway was , of which were based in Oslo. Next to the national incentives the additional advantages of driving an EV in Oslo are the following: Free access on toll roads Since 1997 there is an incentive which excludes full electric vehicles from paying tolls on toll roads in Oslo. Per usage this saves an EV driver between 3,5 and 5. There are plans that the exemption for tolls for EV s will change from 0 to a maximum of 50% of the costs for an ICE. From March 2017 this will be higher for ICEs during the rush hour. 80% of the revenue raised by tolls goes into the budget to improve public transport. Because also EVs are creating traffic jams in the city, they also have to pay tolls, although at a significantly lower rate than ICEs. Free parking This incentive has a significant effect on the operational costs of an EV. This rule has been operational since The current effect is a cost difference of between 2 and 5 per hour. Bus/taxi lane Bus/taxi lanes have a large effect on the time spent in traffic. The access to bus and taxi lanes can save 10 min - 1 hour per day. This incentive has been in operation since There have been several impacts due to this policy.. The growth of the number of EV s using these lanes has had an effect on the time schedules of buses. Therefore in certain lanes a rule has been introduced that only EV s with more than one passenger are allowed in the bus lanes. This is for example applicable on the eastern corridors during rush hour. 22

23 Restrictions for Diesel In February 2016 the first day of a restriction on diesel cars was operational because of alarming air quality issues. Although this was only applicable for passenger vehicles, and therefore had an effect on +/- 10% of all cars the effect of the air quality was measurable. In addition to this effect, the incentive also has a strong symbolic value. It is not considered smart to purchase a new diesel vehicle. Closing down the city for vehicles There will be a large car free zone in the inner city of Oslo. This means that no passenger vehicles will be allowed, including EV s. Commercial vehicles have to be allowed for business purposes, as well as vehicles from public services and public transport. These will become electric only. This will result in more pedestrian areas, but has a large effect on the traffic flow into and around this area. New transport hubs will be built and play an important role in intermodality. Charging infrastructure This will kick-start the adoption, the City has contributed to the deployment of a robust charging infrastructure, and 2,000 charging points for electric vehicles have been established in the city. Although these charging points are not the most modern, the infrastructure seems to be effective. Charging speed is slow and most charging locations use an old type of plug. Interoperability is not yet an issue, since the charging is also free. Municipality fleet The City is replacing its car fleet (1100 cars) with EVs and is half way there. ICVUE has had several meetings with the municipality to support them in the search for introducing more vehicles into the fleet. 23

24 4 London (GB) 4.1 Prevailing Conditions Please refer to D3.1 report (ICVUE, 2015) 4.2 Behaviours The results for the stakeholder engagement are presented in Figure 12. Please note that incentives can have both a local context (London specific) and also a national context (applied over the whole of the UK). Where incentives have a local context, then the location considered is the Greater London Area. The survey responses quantitatively score the impact of a spectrum of incentives and policy-driven initiatives on EV uptake. The vertical axis is aligned with the PESTEL framework, with the Political incentives and Initiatives at the top and followed by the economic, social, technical, environment and legal aspects. What can be observed is that whilst there is broad agreement that the incentives and initiatives have a positive role in the promotion and uptake of EVs, there is divergence in the degree of support. Grants and dispensations that have a direct impact on the financial implications of supporting EVs tend to have a broader support than the less direct intervention strategies (industrial policy for example). 24

25 Figure 12: Survey results for the UK 25

26 Figure 3 shows the responses for the UK in comparison with the responses for all the survey responses. The positive responses are those that correlate to a strong or positive influence between the incentive or initiative, whilst the negative represent the negative responses in isolation. In interpreting figure 3, the following observations were made: The financial instruments (tax, purchase and fuel) have a greater positive response in the UK. They also attract very little in terms of negative criticism. National economic policy is not viewed as conducive in the UK, but also is not viewed as overly negative either. Public transport policy, pilots and consumer information schemes are less well received in the UK (in terms of a positive response), but as for the economic policy, the present approach is not having a significant negative impact on EV promotion and uptake. Besides inclusion of electric buses in public transport, the use of electric taxis and fleet electric vehicles make electric mobility more visible and influence market penetration. For the remainder of the incentives and initiatives, the UK acceptance is similar to that of the broader region under study in this piece of work. The one exception being the regional consumer incentives, that whilst not having a negative impact are viewed as less successful then the overall success level in the broader study region. The majority of stakeholders from United Kingdom believe that Low emission zones and London s 2020 Ultra Low Emission Zone are focussed on air quality with particular attention to NO2 and will help drive forward electric vehicle technology. However, respondents consider that the impact and influence of policies in the area of air quality would be more prominent in London in comparison with other regions of the UK. In summary the interpretation of the results shows that the incentive and initiatives that are being pursued in the UK are generally having a positive impact, with very little in terms of negative consequences. In certain areas, primarily those that aren t directly linked to the personal use of vehicles, the UK experience is behind that of the border region under study. 26

27 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% All - Posi ve UK - Posi ve All - Nega ve UK - Nega ve 10% 0% Tax incen ves Purchase subsidies Na onal economic policies Policy in the area of fuel taxa on Consumer informa on schemes Public transport policy Pilots trials or demonstra ons Governments grants for R&D investments Regional consumer incen ves Industrial policy Charging infrastructure Public policy in the area of energy genera on Public policy in the area of climate change Public policy in the area of air quality Figure 13: Comparison of the positive and negative responses for the UK respondents with all survey responses. (those regions included as part of the overall study) 27

28 The results of the survey based on measurement of attitudes were one part of the work undertaken to understand consumer motivation. The survey also collected written evidence. A thematic analysis of the written evidence was undertaken and the results present in the form of a word cloud (Figure 14). Figure 14: Thematic analysis of the written responses to the UK stakeholder survey The results of the thematic analysis are that the vehicle, cars, cost and charge are all concerns. Previous studies have consistently shown that consumers are concerned about the cost of electric mobility, not the overall cost but the way the cost is structured (the initial high investment and uncertain residuals), and the distribution and availability of charging. There is less in terms of occurrence in the thematic analysis of concerns around congestion and priority access to the road network or parking. The majority of respondents consider availability of dense public charging infrastructure, in particular at popular destinations, having a very strong influence on the uptake of electric vehicles as it removes the psychological barrier of range anxiety. The respondents believe that standardisation of public charging points (type of socket and charging speed) and smart two way chargers at home would be more influential. However, some respondents consider development in charging infrastructure as a chicken and egg problem. They are of the view that the installation of 1400 charging points in London has not stimulated the 28

29 market for electric vehicles. In terms of the market, a further key word noted in the analysis, the respondents believe that prevailing CO2 emission standards give room to major manufacturers to produce conventional vehicles compliant with such standards. This sways the consumers inclination towards conventional vehicles and the non-existence of a critical market in electric vehicles. They attribute these factors towards industrial policies having no strong influence on the penetration of electric vehicles in UK. Overall the stakeholder survey results show that the initiatives and incentives have broadly comparable support. The UK, in comparison to the overall picture across the regions investigated, has a higher acceptance of financial incentives (tax and purchase subsidy). The UK stakeholders however do not see incentives and initiatives that attempt to integrate EVs as part of a wider change to transport / mobility as beneficial as the direct financial incentives. The thematic analysis supports this with the main themes being related to the vehicles, the cost and the infrastructure. 4.3 City Requirements London aims to be the ULEV capital of Europe, with ULEVs as a core part of its sustainable transport. ULEVs include battery electric vehicles (BEVs), plugin hybrid vehicles (PHEVs), range-extended electric vehicles (RE-EVs) and hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs). London s world-class transport network means that public transport, walking and cycling are the obvious choice for most journeys in the region. However, travel by car is still needed for many journeys. When the Mayor of London set out his ambition for London to become the electric vehicle capital of Europe, this sent a clear message that encouraging ULEVs is a critical next step towards delivering a fully sustainable transport system for London. London has seen significant improvements in air quality in recent years. However, London still does not meet EU legal limits for nitrogen dioxide. London also has to take further action if the Capital is to meet its ambitious targets for reducing CO2 emissions. Moreover, London s efforts to reduce emissions need to be set in the context of the wider challenges facing the region, the greatest of which is population growth. With a growing population comes increasing travel demand. To continue to reduce emissions in this context, London will need to continue to encourage walking, cycling and public transport use, and in parallel, improve the environmental performance of private and commercial vehicles. Successful growth in a city is only possible with a sustainable transport system supporting it. Finally, London and the UK are in a global race for jobs and growth with other world cities. Investing in supporting infrastructure and encouraging the accelerated uptake of ULEVs will place London and the UK in pole position to benefit from the rapidly expanding green economy. 29

30 Transforming London s vehicle fleet will require time, investment and commitment from a wide range of stakeholders. To ensure that all ULEV users needs are met, in a cohesive and equitable way across the Capital, Transport for London (TfL) has set out seven guiding principles for delivering ULEV uptake: 1. TfL and the Greater London Authority (GLA) provide strategic direction 2. ULEVs are part of a sustainable transport system 3. An open, fair accessible market 4. The right infrastructure in the right place 5. London Boroughs play a vital supporting role 6. Incentivising early ULEV uptake 7. Working together to maximise benefits These principles form the backbone of the GLA and TfL s ULEV delivery plan and underpin all the actions within it. TfL is undertaking comprehensive research on likely ULEV growth in London and the infrastructure needed to support that growth. Along with consultation with key stakeholders, this research has informed their understanding of ULEVs in London and the actions to take to stimulate uptake. Purchase of ULEVs are approaching 100,000 to date and a remarkable surge in demand for ULEVs in the past three years. Growth in the ULEV market is strong in many areas of London and outpaces the national average of 1.5% of all new vehicle registrations. There are over 9,600 ULEVs licenced in London, including >8,500 ULEV cars and vans (UK DfT data, 2016 Q3). This demonstrates the impact of the supportive policy environment in London, with strong incentives such as the 100 per cent discount for the Congestion Charge and free parking and charging in many boroughs to encourage early adoption. It is this head start that London will build on. To understand likely growth in the longer term, TfL and the GLA commissioned a study into the spatial distribution of ULEV uptake across London. The study looked at two potential scenarios for uptake, a baseline and high BEV scenario (see Chapter 3 for an explanation of these scenarios). In the baseline scenario, it is projected that the number of ULEVs registered in the Capital will surpass 20,000 in 2020 and will be approaching 100,000 in This means a 25-fold increase in ULEV cars in London in 10 years in the baseline scenario. In the high BEV scenario, the number of ULEVs registered in London is projected to reach nearly 50,000 in 2020 and more than 220,000 in The following action plan will be implemented: 1. Support stakeholders aspirations for expanding the Source London EV charge point network 2. Identify priority charging and refuelling infrastructure locations, based on research and stakeholder insight 30

31 3. Work with car clubs to achieve a target of 50 per cent ULEVs in the London car club fleet by Deploy 1,000 vehicles in GLA Group fleets, including 120 ULEVs in TfL support fleet 5. Increase public awareness and acceptance of ULEVs 6. Deploy a rapid charge point network 7. Provide charging solutions for residents without off-street parking 8. Offer attractive incentives to stimulate ULEV uptake 9. Support the implementation of local air quality schemes 10. Streamline the ULEV and charging infrastructure procurement processes 11. Achieve zero emission capable taxis and PHVs on London s streets from Increase the uptake of ULEVs in freight and fleet organisations 13. Demonstrate and test new technologies and approaches 14. Test and evaluate the application of geofencing for zero emission capable vehicles 15. Ensure London is ready for the commercialisation of hydrogen transport As well as the specific actions, TfL will continue to build its relationships with stakeholders and partners, introducing new groups to improve coordination and implementation across London. For example, working with London Councils to set up a new working group to effect the deployment of rapid charge points and other charging infrastructure. TfL will meet regularly to further its understanding of all ULEV users needs and identify new solutions to enable mainstream uptake of ULEVs. TfL will also continue to look for new innovations and welcome new ideas that could be trialled in London. In addition to individual stakeholder conversations, it is important that the industry can discuss the issues specific to London. Therefore, TfL and the GLA will hold an annual ULEV event. These events will provide an open platform for all industry and public sector stakeholders to continue to share knowledge and ideas, helping to ensure TfL are on track to deliver on their actions and maximise the uptake of ULEVs in London. 4.4 Discussion The promotion and success of EVs in any region is determined by their fit with existing conditions, the support they would receive from stakeholders and how they contribute to meeting policy objectives. This was the focus of this study, to understand how the existing conditions, the stakeholder views and the city requirements combine to determine the success of ULEVs. Based upon this analysis and the comparison of the results with those for different regions, the work subsequently explored how changes to incentives could provide an additional benefit. It should be noted that this discussion is focused on the CO2 benefits of increased electrification of the vehicle fleet in the Greater London Area (GLA) and is intended to be exploratory in nature. There is already a mobility strategy in place for the Greater London Area and a summary is provided in section

32 In the analysis of the stakeholder data the issue of cost was significant. Exploring further, the UK stakeholders viewed the support provided to EV, in terms of purchase subsidy and on-going vehicle taxation, as positive in comparison to the other regions, whilst the differential in taxation between the different fuel types was seen as broadly comparable. In the UK it is the central government that has introduced a purchase incentive for ULEVs (based on zero emission range and CO2 emissions). The UK central government also determines the ongoing vehicle taxation class (again partially based on C02). Stronger incentives would undoubtedly increase the purchase of ULEVs, but would likely result in a shift to cleaner vehicles and not necessarily a change in overall demand for private vehicle use. The effect of stronger incentives in these areas in London would undoubtedly move a larger proportion of the vehicle fleet to lower emission vehicles, potentially increasing private vehicle circulation in London. Therefore, care must be taken to align with the GLA and TfL s policy direction of encouraging 'modal shift', which aims to move the populace away from car use and towards walking, cycling and public transport, except where travel by car is essential. The intention is to reduce the amount of kilometres travelled by car within London, especially in the Central Activity Zone, while increasing the percentage of those kilometres travelled by ULEVs. Therefore London s approach to incentivising car use is required to be highly nuanced spatially: encouraging people to trade in their conventionally fuelled vehicle for a ULEV in areas where there are sufficient public transport options is to be avoided. Yet consideration is to be given to the requirement for on-street charging infrastructure in urban centres of outer London (i.e. 'destination charging'), where the public transport network is not quite as cohesive. However, the higher prevalence of off-street parking (and commensurate availability of home chargers) in the outer boroughs could provide a resource that, while not easily quantified, may offset the need for an extensive network of on-street facilities, favouring a smaller number of rapid charging hubs at strategically important locations on the road network. The analysis of the survey data also highlighted that the stakeholders commented on the vehicles and the cars. Exploring further, the number of vehicles in circulation is low and hence familiarity with the vehicles is also low. To achieve policy objectives, such as increasing public awareness and acceptance of ULEVs, would require initiatives that raise their profile. In this regard the stakeholders felt that the initiatives in the UK were not as successful as in the other regions included as part of this study. In addition, the role of ULEVs as part of a broader transport mix, integrated with and part of the public transport provision, was not viewed as positively as for other regions. The policy objectives as described above were clear in the role that ULEVs should play in the overall transport provision in the Greater London area. The provision of priority access to infrastructure (road and parking) has been commented on as a driver for ULEV uptake. The results of the work show that the question of priority access is of lower interest to stakeholders than direct 32

33 financial incentives. The policy objectives of the city are also clear in terms of moving demand from private vehicles to other forms of transport within the urban areas. TfL is very concerned about air quality, it also has more direct say in the way certain parts of the vehicle fleet operate. Hence it will target policies that move the public transport fleet to clean forms of propulsion, but will not consider incentives that ease the experience of private car users (free parking, bus lane access, etc.) The final aspect is that of infrastructure. The stakeholders identify the charging infrastructure in terms of access and use as an issue that is limiting the growth in EV. The policy objectives of the city are also clear in terms of providing a charging infrastructure that is responsive to demand in terms of location and type. Based on the above there is a proposed structured hierarchy of incentives and initiatives that are to be explored for the Greater London Area Higher Priority Provision of infrastructure based on spatial considerations that take account of public transport activity levels (PTAL) and aligns to policy objectives Increase profile of ULEVs. This would be via increased use of ULEVs for transport provision in urban areas (taxis, shared vehicles, etc.) and demonstrations (pilots). Lower Priority Greater financial incentives for EV use and purchase. The UK is successful in this area based on stakeholder response. It is the responsibility of the UK central government. Moves towards greater financial incentives need to be accompanied by other actions to control private car use in urban areas. This would include revisions to criteria for defining limited access zones (e.g. ULEZ) Fuel taxation differential. The UK market is comparable to other regions. Changes to the above will be explored using the CO2 model developed as part of the ICVUE action and reported in section 8. 33

34 5 Barcelona (ES) 5.1 Prevailing Conditions Please refer to D3.1 report (ICVUE, 2015) 5.2 Behaviours A survey of stakeholders in the EV value chain (service provider and service users) was undertaken as part of the ICVUE project. The survey was in two parts with an initial quantitative questionnaire with responses classified based on the Likert scale. The second part was an opportunity for written responses to the survey questions and provided additional information not available through the quantitative parts of the survey. A summary of the responses to the quantitative part of the questionnaire is provided below (Figure 15). The order of the questions follows the PESTEL approach, with the questions relating to the political part at the top of the vertical axis with the economic, societal, technological, environmental and legal following. As would be expected for incentives, the overall picture is one where incentives are viewed as positive by the stakeholders. The incentives that provide a direct financial benefit attract the highest positive response. This correlates well with the fact that in Spain there are direct subsidies for the purchase of low emission vehicles. The high acceptance of these types of incentives is to be expected to an extent as the benefit to the user is immediately tangible. The issue with this type of incentive is the longevity. There is a cost to providing incentives and those that drive further economic benefit downstream are more viable as longer term incentives. Further observations are that the incentives that target a change in the energy generation (which can be a secondary benefit from electrification of the vehicle fleet) are viewed as less favourable. Within Spain, those stakeholders with negative views state that general policies favour the consumption of non-renewable energies and the production and commercialization of vehicles with conventional technology whilst actions in support are limited and not necessarily cohesive there are neither policies encouraging recharging networks nor active policies to discourage the use of combustion vehicles. The charging infrastructure is interesting as there is a clear polarisation with either a strong agreement or a negative view indicating that there may be issues surrounding access to or use of networks. 34

35 Figure 15: Survey results for Spain 35

36 Figure 16 shows the responses for Spain in comparison with the responses for all the survey responses. The positive responses are those that correlate to a strong or positive influence between the incentive or initiative, whilst the negative represent the negative responses in isolation. In interpreting Figure 16, the following observations were made: The response for purchase subsidy reinforces previous observations that Spain (along with the UK) is one country that offers generous incentives for the purchase of electric vehicles Fuel taxation presents as less favourable in Spain than for the overall picture across the regions studied as part of this work. High petrol and diesel prices help make the financial case for purchasing an EV, in line with economic theory regarding complementary and substitute goods, but the commentary accompanying the survey results has a word of caution that fuel taxation is a highly political and populist arena and that in one region at least the government has sought to back away from [the] previous policy of escalating fuel tax (as an incentive for buyers to select lower carbon vehicles) to reduce motoring costs reducing one of the motivators for change. Spain also had the highest percentage of respondents that expressed a negative view in the area of energy policy. In support of the above a number of interesting points emerged from the commentary. Various Spanish stakeholders commented on the regulation and the disincentive to take advantage of balancing energy load and demand via renewables the policies are not enough, contradictory and often have a negative impact Within Spain, commentary is divided between those stating that policy has a strong influence and those stating it has a partial influence as a question of public and collective awareness in Catalonia on the need to reduce air pollution but that for the present the most active policies are focussed on the field of energy saving, especially in the building and industry sectors. 36

37 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% All - Posi ve ES - Posi ve All - Nega ve ES - Nega ve 10% 0% Tax incen ves Purchase subsidies Na onal economic policies Policy in the area of fuel taxa on Consumer informa on schemes Public transport policy Pilots trials or demonstra ons Governments grants for R&D investments Regional consumer incen ves Industrial policy Charging infrastructure Public policy in the area of energy genera on Public policy in the area of climate change Public policy in the area of air quality Figure 16: Comparison of the positive and negative responses for the Spanish respondents with all survey responses. (those regions included as part of the overall study) 37

38 The results of the survey based on measurement of attitudes were one part of the work undertaken to understand consumer motivation. The survey also collected written evidence. A thematic analysis of the written evidence was undertaken and the results present in the form of a word cloud (Figure 17). Figure 17: Thematic analysis of the written responses to the Spanish stakeholder survey The analysis of the word cloud for the stakeholders in Spain shows that the key words are those associated primarily with the use and operation of an EV. Stakeholders mention parking and this is an area that Barcelona has focused on as it sits within the remit of the city authority (see following section). Other discussion points are those that consider the cost of operating an EV and the ability to recharge. The word cloud supports the analysis of the previous results in that the fit of the EV into a policy environment (contributing to cleaner energy generation, load balancing and cleaner air) are of lower priority than the potential savings that could be realised from switching to EV. This is a longer term issue as the cost savings realised from incentives that target the purchase and use phase have more of a short term benefit.

39 5.3 City Requirements The following is the summary of an interview with Angel Lopez the lead for the LIVE project. Barcelona has a public-private platform that stimulates e- mobility projects and connects different initiatives of the green economy. This project is overseen by the Barcelona City Municipality and is focused on the logistics and implementation of electric vehicles in Barcelona. The primary challenges for the LIVE platform are presented in Figure

40 Figure 18: Barcelona LIVE Challenges 40

41 What is the main motivation of the city of Barcelona to develop policies to promote the EV? First of all, there are environmental reasons (air quality and CO2). Another relevant aspect is the use of energy that can come from renewable energy sources and, as a consequence, free us from the limitations of non-renewable resources. Last but not least, the reduction of noise and technological innovation, which despite being secondary inputs provide additional value. What types of incentives (focused on the city) have been the most effective in Barcelona? There are two incentives to be highlighted (a monetary incentive and a nonmonetary incentive): Free parking in regulated zones (blue and green parking spaces): fee 0 for 2 hours, but there is still the time limit of 2 hours parking in order to maintain rotation of parking spaces and to optimise the regulation of the public space. Circulation in HOV lanes: EVs are not allowed to circulate in bus lanes in the city centre, as this implies lane changes made by the vehicles in order to overtake public transport. This zigzagging (taxis do it constantly) creates more congestion in the adjoining lane. This change will be a valid solution for bus lanes with metropolitan connections (lower bus density and fewer stops that would not imply a constant change of lane) for the planned HOV lanes in the short term. Last but not least, we should consider that Barcelona installed electric chargers in the loading and unloading zones, but this was of no not interest to drivers of commercial fleets as they see more value in other aspects, such as access to areas restricted to traffic (city centre). The access for EVs is being analysed but it becomes complicated during the daytime, given the interaction with pedestrians and the effect that this would have on road safety. However, urban goods distribution at night would be a more feasible element to be implemented. Currently, loading and unloading areas are awarded with 30 additional minutes of free parking. Which of them will be more effective in the future? The measures must be aimed at increasing the distance between the TCO of EV and the TCO of conventional vehicles to make the EV more attractive to companies, as the economic balance is a priority for them. Barcelona, as a city, can hardly include any more incentives for EV, and there is already a monetary incentive of 5,500 for cars (although there is also 1,500 for new conventional vehicles PIVE plan). On the other hand, there would be a chance to have larger penalties for conventional vehicles in the medium term, by implementing the low emission zones, using the recently approved Spanish labelling of vehicles (similar to the German car labelling framework). 41

42 The city council also defends the labelling of motorcycles in order to avoid a model shift from cars to the conventional motorcycle and facilitate the change to e-mobility. What is the role of the city as regards charging infrastructure? Barcelona has currently an optimal charging network, including 16 fast chargers. Public charging is currently considered as useful, but not for the future, as the charging point must be located where vehicles park and not the other way around. The public road parking model is not considered as sustainable. The vehicle is parked around 20 to 22 hours every day and the charging (standard) must be done at home or in underground public parking. Charging on open roads should only be made in case of a lack of autonomy or whenever the user forgets to charge. Therefore it would be a quick charging, subject to the payment of a fee. It is different in the case of motorcycles, as it would be necessary to develop a charging infrastructure for these vehicles on the surface. Barcelona has currently around 100 charging stations. Are there non-monetary incentives for specific mobility groups? Heavy vehicles: Barcelona is involved in the European project ZeEus. One of the goals is implementing ultra-chargers for buses and other types of heavy vehicles. Freight Distribution: There are charging stations in loading and unloading zones. Taxi: They need a fast charge once or twice a day. The idea is to promote taxi hubs with quick chargers. What are the main barriers for the implementation of electric mobility? The difference between the TCO of an EV and that of a conventional vehicle must be extended to make electric mobility more attractive for corporate fleets, as it has already been made successfully in other countries. Private users base their choice rather on functional aspects such as autonomy or the ease of charging at home. 42

43 5.4 Discussion The case of Barcelona considered the prevailing conditions (market, social and institutional, the views of stakeholders in the EV value chain (from service provider to user) and the role of the city authority (interview with Angel Lopez of the LIVE platform). The interview was conducted by the ICVUE partner ACASA. The role of EV in the policy framework of the city can be summarised as primarily providing environmental improvements (reduction in NOx pollutant, GHG and noise). A secondary benefit was identified as technology development. For the promotion of EVs, areas such as taxation and the differential taxation of different fuels is viewed less favourably in Barcelona than in other regions. However, altering these policies is not within the remit of the city. As for other cities discussed as part of this report, the role of the city authority in the promotion of the EV has to be considered in the context of the actions and activities of the central government. The focus has therefore been on the circulation of vehicles within the geographical limits of the city and the actions that the city can take to support this and achieve its policy objectives. What the city has been able to achieve in regards of vehicle movements (parking, use of HOV lanes, etc.) has resulted in positive responses from users. These actions have direct impact on the user experience of EVs. High Priority Whilst these user incentives are very important, the most important issue is to increase the distance between TCO of conventional and EVs to make EV more attractive: financial advantages (which are limited for the cities), free parking spaces, free tolls but maybe these should be extended to include restrictions to ICE vehicles. The public road parking model is not considered as sustainable. Vehicles are parked around 20 to 22 hours every day and charging (standard) must therefore be done at home or in underground public parking. Lower Priority Greater financial incentives for EV use and purchase. This has been successful based on stakeholder response. It is the responsibility of the central government. Moves towards greater financial incentives need to be accompanied by other actions to control private car use in urban areas. This would include controls on charging. 43

44 6 Stuttgart (DE) 6.1 Prevailing Conditions Please refer to D3.1 report (ICVUE, 2015) 6.2 Behaviours A survey of stakeholders in the EV value chain (service provider and service users) was undertaken as part of the ICVUE project. The survey was in two parts with an initial quantitative questionnaire with responses classified based on the Likert scale. The second part was an opportunity for written responses to the survey questions and provided additional information not available through the quantitative parts of the survey. A summary of the responses to the quantitative part of the questionnaire is provided below (Figure 19). The order of the questions follows the PESTEL approach, with the questions relating to the political part at the top of the vertical axis with the economic, societal, technological, environmental and legal following. The comparative costs (the difference between the carbon based road transport fuels and electricity) differ greatly between Norway at one extreme and Germany at the other extreme. The perception is that fuel costs are one of the limiting factors. Pilots and trials of EV technologies and mobility solutions have overwhelming support in Germany. The results support commentary from Germany that states current public policy has not yet made the connection between climate change and the need to electrify vehicles, forthcoming CO2 emission limits are the main lever for the introduction and commercialisation of these vehicles. Note: CO2-limits force manufactures to be active, but are of no interest to individual users. Fleet operators are only interested in CO2 generation since it is linked to cost of operation. Until 2015 there were no national subsidies for EV purchase in Germany, the commentary indicated that regional interventions, for instance, a grant for the purchase of electric taxis (tested in demonstration projects Schaufenster-projekte in Germany) were having a positive influence, although also cautioned that price alone was not the only business relevant factor. The role of EVs within the broader transport mix is unclear for some of the stakeholders who responded negatively, taking a view of EVs as competing with as opposed to complementing existing public transport 44

45 options displacing mass public transport in urban settings and being less than suitable in rural settings. Funding for research and development are crucial, particularly for not yet fully marketable technologies, to cushion the economic risk inherent in each technical innovation 45

46 Figure 19: Survey results for Germany 46

47 There several aspects that are perceived to have less effect on uptake: Tax incentives (in comparison to purchase subsidies), industrial policy, and public policy on energy generation. There appears to be strong consensus on the effectiveness of industrial policy on uptake. It is possible that this is perceived as too indirect to be effective, especially in comparison with Government grants for R&D investments (that would flow directly into the vehicle, but have a delayed effect, especially for research). The German responses were clearly lower than the average of all partners on the effect of tax incentives and public policy on energy generation. Although the average of responses was nearly the same for tax incentives and purchase subsidies, the German responses for tax incentives may be lower due the fact that vehicle registration tax is relatively low in Germany and often incorporated into Leasing packages for company cars. Sales tax is generally presented in prices that consumers see and is not applicable to company cars anyway. Purchase subsidies will have a direct benefit for fleets operated in a professional manner On Public policy in the area of energy generation, it is suspected that these responses could have two different origins. Public policy in Germany is quite complicated and not very transparent. The other possibility is that the question was too broad and thus responses were mostly neutral. 47

48 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% All - Posi ve DE - Posi ve All - Nega ve DE - Nega ve 10% 0% Tax incen ves Purchase subsidies Na onal economic policies Policy in the area of fuel taxa on Consumer informa on schemes Public transport policy Pilots trials or demonstra ons Governments grants for R&D investments Regional consumer incen ves Industrial policy Charging infrastructure Public policy in the area of energy genera on Public policy in the area of climate change Public policy in the area of air quality Figure 20: Comparison of the positive and negative responses for the German respondents with all survey responses. (those regions included as part of the overall study) 48

49 Cost is located prominently in the middle of the word cloud (Figure 21) below. In general the conditions are rather positive in Germany, particularly in Stuttgart, for electro-mobility, but the general impression is that the cost is still too high for vehicles that have known drawbacks when compared to conventional ICE. The cost situation has actually improved, since there are now financial incentives and manufacturers are now willing to give rebates to fleet operators somewhat similar to those for acquiring conventional vehicles. However, fleet operators would be limited in operation due to charging times and limited range. Some specific use cases work quite well, but in general there are still limitations. If municipalities are going to start restricting city access, this could be a very strong lever but from the analysis these are not evident when assessing the motivations of the stakeholders. Figure 21: Thematic analysis of the written responses to the German stakeholder survey 49

50 6.3 City Requirements The city of Stuttgart provided the following statistics in a set of slides with background information for the City Meeting in Amsterdam. Representatives of Stuttgart did not attend the meeting and the slides were not officially presented. The information is essential to understand the conditions in Stuttgart km of streets (67% with speed limit 30 km/h) Registered private cars in the city: Metro lines,16 Light rail lines, 56 Bus lines with a total of km route length and 897 stations 1 Million public transport users per day in the Stuttgart Region 160 km cycle paths (300m difference in altitude in the city) Public bike rental system with 400 bikes and 100 pedelecs World s leading car sharing city with cars per 1 Mio. Inhabitants. The city centre of Stuttgart has about 600,000 inhabitants, the region has about 2.7 million inhabitants. The city is relatively green, which means that 40% is under landscape protection. It is also home to leading manufacturers in the automobile industry. The city of Stuttgart is located in a valley which opens onto the Neckar river on the east border of the city. These geographical conditions combined with reoccurring inversion layers over the city, create an urgent need for action to combat air pollution (and congestion). Stuttgart faces severe air pollution problems in some parts of the city centre. EU limits for fine dust (particulate matter PM10 are) above 50 microgram/m3: max. exceedance 35 days/ a year. Measuring station Neckartor : violation of limits on exceedance 72 days in 2015! Annual average value for NOx exceeds twice the EU-limits. Germany faces EU treaty violation proceedings. 50

51 Financial incentives The city of Stuttgart doesn t have financial incentives for an accelerated uptake of electric vehicles. Non-financial incentives The city of Stuttgart has several non-financial incentives to promote more sustainable mobility, and therefore doesn t have a focus on EV s in particular. Because of this air quality issue the first step adopted is to raise awareness in the population by installing the so-called fine dust alarm. To raise public awareness, City of Stuttgart introduced the Particulate matter Fine dust alarm in January This alarm doesn t restrict people from entering the city but it invites them to use public transport, or to walk, cycle or share a car. Compliance is currently voluntary, the measure aiming to raise consciousness and change behaviour during particulate matter alarms and is voluntary for two years. Effects will be evaluated and a ban on driving might follow. As well as this particulate matter alarm the City of Stuttgart has developed an Action plan for sustainable mobility in Stuttgart. The goal of this plan is a higher quality of life through less air pollution, less noise, less congestion and less stress. This results in concrete measures in nine fields of action. Although ICVUE is focused on electric vehicles, these nine fields are broader than only changing drive train technology: 51

52 Intermodality and networking Public transport Work travel Mobility within the city administration Mobility in the region Private motorised transport Non/motorised transport Commercial transport Public relations Within the action plan there is no specific approach on how to increase the share of EVs on the road, but it is clear that it plays a part in the overall plan. There is a specific focus on mobility in the city administration. An analysis is in progress to determine whether more work-related journeys (including postal services) could be carried out using bicycles, electric cargo bikes, on foot or by public transport. Offers from external car sharing providers (Flinkstel Stadtmobil, Car2Go) or e-call-a-bike (bike rental system) will also be taken into consideration. The city of Stuttgart also wants to increase the use of electric vehicles and low-emission vehicles in the City s fleet. 52

53 Figure 22: Mayor Kuhn in his official car Compared to a smaller city like Amsterdam, where there are over charging points, Stuttgart is not yet very developed in this area. Also with regards to interoperability there is room for improvement. Because of the high demand for parking spots, the charge only parking spots are often occupied by ICE vehicles. The city is currently investigating the options to make sure the charging spots are not occupied by vehicles which are not charging. Companies like Bosch have also reached an innovative agreement with Stuttgart, in that employees can use their company ID cards to travel to and from work during fine dust alarm days, as well as on company business. There are no statistics currently available to assess the effectiveness of this measure. In terms of the impact of national regulations on municipalities, Stuttgart has the same conditions as Dortmund. Both cities have to decide which elements they want to adopt from the recently passed laws for electro-mobility. The laws do not require implementation, but allow them to adopt these policies. The municipalities are then responsible to ensure that the overall impact will be positive, e. g. the use EVs in bus lanes would not inhibit the bus service. On the other hand the regions do, partly, have the same conditions and concerns. Measures and initiatives specific for the city/region are described specifically in those city chapters. 53

54 6.3.1 Stuttgart Specific Requirements Electromobility is one measure to combat air pollution. Stuttgart has developed an action plan for sustainable mobility (Figure 23). Figure 23: Stuttgart Plan Concrete measures are taken in the following fields of action (Electro-mobility is one of the key elements in the action plan) i) Charging Infrastructure, Car- and Bike-sharing Approximately 500 public charging points for cars Over 500 electric Smart cars in car2go-fleet (plus non-electric Carsharing by Flinkster and Stadtmobil) 88 charging points for pedelecs 550 Call-a-bike (~90 pedelecs) ii) Free Parking (Incentives) for clean cars Special parking permit for full electric cars and plug-in-hybrids (>30 km range) For private persons and businesses Cost-free parking at all public parking spaces in the city iii) Regulatory problem: how to keep charging infrastructure accessible? Public (parking) space remains scarce Charging stations need reserved parking lots Problem: stations very often blocked by non-electric cars New law (EmoG) allows better signposting Still unclear when it is allowed to tow away non-eligible vehicles iv) Raising public awareness: promoting e-mobility E-Mobility information events in Stuttgart for citizens and selected target groups (migrants, elderly people etc.); Mobility and Information Service Centre in Stuttgart Mobility plans for local companies and housing communities v) Incentives for clean transport in city logistics 54

55 In 2016, Stuttgart will start a project for cleaner city logistics Last-mile-logistics will be tested with light electric vehicles or cargo bikes This will help answer the question about what kind of regulation is needed to make these projects competitive? vi) Changing mobility within the city administration Increased use of electric vehicles in the city fleet o 2016: centrally managed funds to finance the additional costs of electric vehicles Increased use of hybrid-electric buses in public transport (18 hybrid buses today) 25 pedelecs, 3 cargo-bikes in city fleet vii) Electric Taxi Action Plan : Project GuEST uses electric Taxis in on-road-trial 2016: Electric Taxi Action Plan (ETAP) will be developed Benefits for purchasing electric taxis City-financed, taxi-exclusive, quick-charging infrastructure Problem: 500 owners for the city s 780 taxis: many (reluctant) actors viii) Outlook: taking electro mobility further Concept for the inclusion of e-mobility in the urban planning processes New city quarters will be equipped with charging infrastructure, electric carsharing, pedelecs, etc. Study on opportunities, drivers and barriers was made in the framework of 2MOVE2 project Combining parking and charging in car parks Establish network of quick-chargers in the Stuttgart region It should be kept in mind that all of the concepts mentioned above need reliable financing, time and commitment! Stuttgart has set a goal to transition all the Taxis (nearly 800) to electrified power-trains within 10 years (policy set in 2014). They prefer not to support PHEVs, but the Federal State had an incentive program for electrification that also included PHEVs. Taxi dispatch centre was supporting PHEVs but not EVs. 6.4 Discussion Stuttgart was one of the regions to receive extensive funding for multiple demonstration projects (Lead motto; Living Lab ) and can report on a positive result. This may be the reason why survey participants rated this aspect clearly much higher than the average of the responses from the participants surveyed in other locations. 55

56 Stuttgart is also home to many innovative corporations and companies with strong advanced research departments so it makes sense that many experts perceive government grants for R&D investments as a strong pillar to support market uptake. Mostly likely, it is hoped that these efforts will help reduce the cost of the vehicles (thus closing the logic loop to the word cloud). There is agreement (between Germany and the average partner response shown above in Figure 20) that charging infrastructure is positive EV uptake. The exact elasticity of the numbers (when does EV growth level-off due to insufficient infrastructure) still remains uncertain. Germany has seen strong linear growth in EVs over that last four years, although the number of public charging points is essentially nearly constant over this period (Figure 24). Figure 24: Growth of EV fleet compared to the number of charging points 56

57 7 Vienna (AT) 7.1 Prevailing Conditions Please refer to D3.1 report (ICVUE, 2015) 7.2 Behaviours To understand stakeholder behaviour a survey of both service providers and service users was undertaken. The survey was in two parts. The first part consisted of a quantitative section based on collecting responses to how incentives in the region were working according to the Likert scale. Respondents quantitatively scored the impact of a spectrum of incentives and policy-driven initiatives on EV uptake. The structure was based on a review of the external factors impacting the EV undertaken using a PESTEL analysis. The second part was a qualitative section within the questionnaire that allowed respondents the opportunity to discuss their answers and communicate their experience, knowledge and opinions on the impact of policy on their investments. The quantitative responses from the survey are arranged in graphical form in Figure 25. The key observations are: Overall, incentives have a high acceptance rate amongst stakeholders. The exception to the above statement would be the industrial policy. This is perhaps understandable to an extent as there is typically a disconnect between the role of the industrial sector and the provision of clean transport this is more distinct where there is a lack of an OEM (even if there are large TIER1 and TIER2 suppliers) The interesting observation is the polarisation (even though the positive responses dominate) in one of two areas. These are the consumer incentives with a high positive, but also a distinct negative and tax incentives. This could be related to the fact that not all stakeholders benefit to the same extent from these incentives. Incentives that support industrial policy could be considered to be the most neutral in terms of acceptance by stakeholders. This could be linked to the perception that industrial policy is remote from the purchase and use of the EV. 57

58 Figure 25: Survey results for Austria 58

59 Figure 26 compares the responses for Austria with the responses for all the survey responses. The positive responses are those that correlate to a strong or positive influence between the incentive or initiative, whilst the negative represent the negative responses in isolation. In interpreting Figure 26, the following observations were made: The weaknesses according to the stakeholder community are in the area of fuel taxation, incentives for the purchase of EVs and regional consumer incentives. The view is that public policy in the area of energy generation has a positive impact on the success of EVs in Austria Stakeholders in Austria commented on the opportunities for energy suppliers and consumers from the integration of EVs. In Austria the percentage of respondents stating that environmental policies were having a strong influence on EV uptake was the highest. The programmes for the purchase of clean vehicles, the policies that link EV with clean energy production and the establishment of zones within urban areas for clean vehicles were all activities that respondents noted as having a strong influence. In Austria, although there was broad support for both purchase subsidies and tax-breaks, it was noted that taxes are high in Austria, [and] incentives in [the EV] sector will probably be perceived very well and whilst Austria has been very active in supporting the purchase of clean vehicles the role of purchase subsidies in promoting the uptake of EV has so far been limited to certain sectors of the market because there are no purchase incentives for private users. Focusing on the national economic policy and the share that sustainable transport has from the overall tax and spending, it is seen that Austria has the highest share of positive respondents The stakeholders in Austria are in general positive about the national economic policy and the role this has in supporting the R&D necessary to achieve long-term goals by transforming the mobility habits of the people and foster new forms of mobility such as e-carsharing. Pilots and trails of EV technologies and mobility solutions have overwhelming support in Austria Many of the vehicles and EV services available in Austria were financed by publicly funded pilots, [these] trials focused on specific regions or companies (e.g. postal services) [and] provide significant visibility which helps of course. 59

60 The general consensus expressed in the commentary was that There is a considerable number of persistent clichés about e-vehicles which seem to be widespread among people. Targeted information about price, range, positive environmental impacts and fields of application might help transform the image of e-vehicles. 60

61 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% All - Posi ve AT - Posi ve All - Nega ve AT - Nega ve 10% 0% Tax incen ves Purchase subsidies Na onal economic policies Policy in the area of fuel taxa on Consumer informa on schemes Public transport policy Pilots trials or demonstra ons Governments grants for R&D investments Regional consumer incen ves Industrial policy Charging infrastructure Public policy in the area of energy genera on Public policy in the area of climate change Public policy in the area of air quality Figure 26: Comparison of the positive and negative responses for the Austrian respondents with all survey responses. (those regions included as part of the overall study) 61

62 The thematic analysis is interesting. It is clear that the purchase of the EV is the dominant theme. This could be related to the availability and/or the high cost. It can be observed from earlier analysis that consumer purchase incentives received a high positive acceptance, but also a distinct small cluster of negative responses. Further to this the term company is also distinct as are market and influence with CO2 also at the centre. These terms and their connection show that there is recognition of the relevance of EVs and the role the market has to play. Figure 27: Thematic analysis of the written responses to the Austrian stakeholder survey

63 7.3 City Requirements A meeting was held with Dieter Häusler in September The meeting discussed the e-mobility strategy of Vienna, the experiences of the city to date and the direction the strategy may develop in the future. In February 2017, another meeting was held with Harald Bekehrti who serves as coordinator for e-mobility in Vienna since early Key points from the discussion are summarised below: Motorised traffic causes roughly 40 per cent of CO2 emissions in Vienna. With increased mobility demand due to a greater urban population this is a problem that needs to be tackled. Vienna is a city with a long- standing e-mobility tradition due to the fact that electricity powers a large portion of public transport (suburban rail, underground, trams and city buses). In motorised individual transport, there have been recent moves towards electric cars and motorcycles as well as e-bikes. This trend needs to be supported and appropriate guidance put in place. As an environmentally friendly, socially and economically equitable urban transport system is made available, individual mobility needs have to be taken into consideration and new types of mobility must be combined with existing modes. E-mobility is an opportunity to re-think mobility i.e. multimodality. The fundamental transport policy-related objectives of the City of Vienna, such as the city of short distances, a lower percentage of trips by motor vehicle, priority to eco-mobility and the reduction of noise and exhaust emissions, are top of the list. It is not enough to merely electrify passenger-car traffic; transport must on the whole primarily be shifted to more city-compatible modes. In Vienna, city-friendly electric vehicles (tram, underground and suburban train) already account for roughly 30% of passenger transport; more than 30% of people do not require external energy sources as they walk or ride bicycles. The benefits of electric cars lie in reduced airborne pollutants and noise emissions as well as energy efficiency. However, they do not offer any benefits in terms of space electric cars need the same amount of space for parking as conventional cars. The increased use of electric cars does not do away with problems such as traffic jams, obstructions, street parking, obstacles or danger to pedestrians and cyclists.

64 E-mobility in individual transport should thus not be seen as a substitute for public transport but a target-oriented way of complementing it. However, there are no plans to grant private electric vehicles exemptions from parking space management rules or give them permission to use public transport lanes (such as bus lanes), which is the case in many other European cities. Commercial transport is considered differently to private transport. In the future, it is very likely that incentives will be introduced for commercial vehicles. Part of the charging infrastructure expansion falls within the remit of the City of Vienna. Preferably, charging stations should be installed in (semi-) public spaces such as on parking lots, at filling stations or in indoor carparks so that they do not use public space, which is limited in the city. However, starting in 2017, the provision of a sufficient number of charging stations with 11 kw charging power in public space will take place. Following this, the city intends to increase the number of charging stations according to the market development of e-vehicles for Vienna. Potential users are often reluctant to commit to vehicles because they lack knowledge and information about e-mobility. Information campaigns are in place to raise awareness in this context. Further to the city strategy, the fit with the national approach and those of other regions is key. Pilot regions for e-mobility The Austrian Climate and Energy Fund promotes the introduction of e-mobility by funding R&D projects demonstrating technological solutions and so called pilot regions for e-mobility. These regions have generated practical experience and knowledge in Austria since Seven pilot regions have been established in total. The regions focus on electric vehicles powered by renewable energy sources and each have a different scope. Typically, vehicle use schemes are integrated with public transport. Users within a pilot region pay a monthly mobility rate which includes not only the use of an electric vehicle but also the use of public transport. Further incentives Some Austrian cities offer free parking for e-vehicles (however this does not apply to the City of Vienna).

65 7.4 Discussion Austria has a rather favourable starting position for electromobility that is well documented in established research and support programmes, initiatives, and large demonstration and model projects as well as an efficient energy system featuring 70 per cent renewable energy in the power supply mix. With its ambitious development plans outlined in the Ökostromgesetz (Green Electricity Act), Austria will continue to increase that share of renewable energy sources for the generation of electricity. By doing so, the supply of cost-efficient renewable energy for electromobility will be provided. In Austria, battery electric vehicles are generally exempted from the standard fuel-based vehicle consumption tax (NoVA) and the annual engine powerrelated vehicle insurance tax, resulting in about 4,000 EUR savings over five years. For companies, no value added tax applies and there are considerable tax advantages for employees when using a company-owned e-vehicle for private purposes. At the beginning of 2017, a large-scale subsidy programme for promoting electromobility was launched by the Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management in cooperation with the car and motorbike importers. The total budget dedicated is around 72 Mio euros. Some of the nine Austrian federal states have offered or are offering additional financial incentives for the purchase of e-vehicles, both for private users and companies. The schemes differ a lot but currently offer direct subsidies of up to 1,500 EUR per e-vehicle. These activities in Austria are noticeable when assessing the responses collected as part of the ICVUE activity. Austria is moving in the direction of increasing the EV fleet, but there is some friction in places between the policy portfolio of the city and that of the wider Austrian policy of promotion of EV. These are similar challenges to those faced in London to make EV attractive, but not to the extent that it may inadvertently cannibalise public transport. As the overall TCO is determined primarily by national policy the role of local policy is to make the move to EV attractive where it is not in direct competition with public transport which is preferable. The scenario is therefore very similar to the proposal for London. Higher Priority Provision of infrastructure based on spatial considerations that take account of public transport activity levels (PTAL) and aligns to policy objectives Increase profile of EV. This would be via increased use of EVs for transport provision in urban areas (taxis, shared vehicles, etc.) and demonstrations (pilots). Lower Priority

66 Greater financial incentives for EV use and purchase. Provision of a dense charging network covering all usage patterns Fuel taxation differential that would increase the competitiveness of EV cf. ICE without the other actions required to diminish private vehicle use in the city. Changes to the above will be explored using the CO2 model developed as part of the ICVUE action and reported in section 9.

67 8 CO 2 Reduction Potential 8.1 Approach In order to estimate the impact of incentive measures on the reduction of CO 2 emissions DLR adapted the vehicle technology scenario model VECTOR21. VECTOR21 was designed to model the competition of conventional and alternative powertrains on the German new vehicle market (Mock, P. 2010) and was recently enhanced to cover further European new vehicle markets (Schimeczek, et al., 2015). This agent-based tool is capable of modelling customer decisions and vehicle manufacturer strategies, based on comprehensive data for current and future vehicle technologies. During the I- CVUE project, the model was enhanced to cover important aspects of the electric vehicle markets for urban areas in Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Spain. Changes include a more granular differentiation between customer groups, a more comprehensive modelling of Total Cost of Ownership, as well as a utility assessment for the impact of nonmonetary aspects of vehicle ownership on EV uptake. The enhanced EVuptake module of VECTOR21 (VECTOR21e) is publicly available at It features about 16,200 customer agents instead of 900 in the original VECTOR21 model (see Figure 17). Extending VECTOR21, the module includes six vehicle size segments (A to E segments and N1), 12 annual mileage classes from 5,000 km/a to 60,000 km/a as well as 5 different types of vehicle ownership, i.e. car rental, taxi & logistics, public service, company car and private ownership. Additionally, 45 electric vehicle affinity levels cover a wide range from very high EV affinity to substantial rejection of this technology. The distribution of EV affinity among the customers is modelled with a normal distribution, see also [Rogers]. For each customer agent, country-specific market shares are defined based on national transport statistics, e.g. Mobility in Germany (DLR & Infas, 2010).

68 Figure 28: Schematic overview of customer agents in the enhanced EVuptake module of VECTOR21 (VECTOR21e) For each of the customer agents mentioned above, Total Costs of Ownership (TCO) are calculated for vehicles with conventional powertrains, i.e. petrol and diesel, as well as for battery-electric vehicles (BEV). These TCO calculations include costs, taxes and incentives at purchase, resale values, registration cost, insurance cost, fuel and energy cost, motor taxes, costs for maintenance and repair, costs of money, opportunity cost for limited BEV range, and, for corporate vehicle ownership only, profit tax reductions due to vehicle expenses. Please refer to (Schimeczek, et al., 2016) for a comprehensive explanation of the cost items considered and the employed reference data set. In addition to a monetary assessment, VECTOR21e also considers non-monetary aspects of vehicle ownership using a utility-based approach based on Redelbach, M. (2016). For that analysis, aspects were selected that represent differences between conventional and alternative powertrains, e.g. CO 2 and air pollutant emissions. Furthermore, vehicle acceleration is considered to account for the higher motorisation of electric vehicles compared to conventional ones. The customers perception of possible incentive measures for electric vehicles is also considered, including permissions for EVs to use bus or taxi lanes, reserved parking spaces for EVs only, as well as entry restriction zones for conventional vehicles. To reflect on different national perspectives on these non-monetary items and differing regional preconditions for possible incentive measures, e.g. the availability of bus lanes, a survey was conducted (ICVUE, 2016) for a detailed description. The survey was designed to cover all I-CVUE cities and nonmonetary aspects of interest, as well as corporate and private vehicle ownership types. The willingness-to-pay values drawn from this survey are included in the utility calculations and allow for a detailed comparison of petrol, diesel and electric vehicles for a large variety of different customers. Based on the country- and customer-specific vehicle assessment mentioned above, VECTOR21e allows the calculation of market shares for petrol, diesel and battery-electric vehicles from 2017 to 2020 with and without policy

69 measures in favour of electric vehicles. Real-world vehicle sales in 2015 and 2016 were taken from EEA (2016), EAFO (2017) and national platforms and were used to calibrate the EV affinity normal distribution for each country and powertrain. The combination of country-specific averages of Well-to-Tank (WTT) CO 2 emissions for electricity generation and new vehicle sales, finally, leads to estimates for the total CO 2 emission reduction for each policy measure considered. Finally, the national results are scaled to the considered urban region, using the share of registered vehicles in that region plus the number of daily commuters to that region.

70 8.2 Results The following subsections will show VECTOR21e scenario results for the uptake of electric mobility and the corresponding CO 2 emission reduction due to policy measures in the European urban regions of London, Barcelona, Dortmund, Stuttgart and Vienna. For each of these regions, different combinations/bundles of policy measures are investigated based on the outcomes of the work described. Furthermore, three scenarios for the uptake of EV sales are considered. These scenarios vary with respect to their normal distribution for EV affinity and feature either a more progressive or conservative attitude towards EV than the basic scenario. Note that all monetary values are given in for convenience and comparability.

71 8.3 Amsterdam Among all the countries of the EU investigated, the conditions for EV uptake are best in the Netherlands. High tax exemptions for annual motor taxes and a significant price gap between conventional fuels and electricity represent a solid basis for the uptake of electric vehicles. The city of Amsterdam is a large urban area and, together with car commuters, is expected to influence about five percent of the national vehicle stock. Figure 29 illustrates the total CO 2 emissions saved from additional BEV sales in the years 2017 to 2020 for two different policy measures. The first one, i.e. to allow BEVs to use bus lanes, is expected to have, if any, only a minor impact on the uptake of electric vehicles and thus the reduction of CO 2 emissions. However, the second policy measure investigated would be more effective: Entry restrictions for conventional vehicles, allowing them to enter the area of Amsterdam only for payment of about 8 per day, can have a significant impact on the saving of CO 2 emissions. Although the individual measures show a significant dependency with respect to the scenario assumptions, the combination of both measures seems to be highly effective in all of the investigated scenarios. Figure 29: Total CO 2 emissions reduction in Amsterdam from additional BEV sales between 2017 and 2020 depending on implemented policy measures

72 8.4 London The United Kingdom offers high direct incentives for EVs (Plug-in Grant) in addition to a large gap between electricity prices and prices for petrol or diesel fuels. Thus, the TCO for BEV in the UK are better than in many other European countries, but still above those for conventional vehicles for most vehicle sizes. VECTOR21e scenarios indicate that the compound annual growth of EV in the UK is strongly limited without further incentives in the forthcoming years and is estimated to be about 8,000-10,000 BEV/year. Figure 30 shows the modelled CO 2 emissions reduction in the period from 2017 to 2020 in London due to different policy measures. The policy measures investigated include an additional purchase incentive of 1,000 for BEV in the London area and a ten percent price increase for conventional fuels due to taxation, in addition to the expected rising oil prices in the future. It can be seen that the slight increase in fuel price has only a small impact on the BEV CO 2 savings in London. Granting additional incentives for BEV purchase could have a higher impact on these figures. A combination of both measures leads to even higher CO 2 savings of up to about 14,000 tons in the investigated time period. The other suggested policy measures, namely the increase of EV profile and a further infrastructure development, can also lead to an accelerated uptake of electric mobility. These measures are expected to reduce the rejection of electric vehicles among the customers and to improve their visibility. The different scenarios in Figure 20 somewhat reflect these changes of awareness and the image of electric mobility and thus indicate the CO 2 reduction potential of these measures.

73 Figure 30: Total CO 2 emissions reduction in London from additional BEV sales between 2017 and 2020 depending on implemented policy measures

74 8.5 Barcelona The TCO is not, generally, favourable for electric vehicles in Spain. Although stakeholders in the survey identified fuel taxation as an issue, relative to other countries the low cost of conventional fuels, low annual motor taxes and taxes on private usage of corporate vehicles reduce the savings potential of BEV. In addition, the availability of purchase incentives is not guaranteed over the whole year. Barcelona and commuters of its surrounding area represent a large portion of about six percent of the national vehicle stock. Figure 31 shows the total saving potential for CO 2 emissions of policy measures in the Barcelona area. In order to shift the TCO in favour of BEV, additional incentives could provide a first step to increase EV uptake in Barcelona. According to the investigated scenarios, an additional 1,000 of purchase incentives could lead to moderate savings of CO 2 emissions. A fee for conventional vehicles upon entry to the Barcelona area (zone entry restrictions) in the range of about 8 per day could have a significant impact on the uptake of BEV sales and CO 2 savings, and lead to even higher savings if this fee leads to a modal shift of commuter traffic towards public transport. The combination of these measures, however, would lead to significantly higher CO 2 savings than what would be expected from adding together the savings from each of the individual measures. This is due to the exponential growth of the first part of the EV affinity distribution: While the harsh zone entry restrictions overcome the initial market barrier, the additional purchase incentives lead to further large market gains.

75 Figure 31: Total CO 2 emissions saved in Barcelona from additional BEV sales between 2017 and 2020 depending on the policy measures implemented