Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140
- 159)
Witnesses: Mr Richard
Tarboton, Head of Business Unit, Transport
and Mr Alex Veitch, Transport Strategy Manager, Energy
Saving Trust, gave evidence.
Q140 Mr Hurd: The Society of Motor
Manufacturers sent us some evidence that a move in that direction
could make a significant difference in terms of pushing people
towards the lower end within each category. I understand that
you proposed to the Department of Transport a Cleaner Vehicle
League Table. Is that correct?
Mr Tarboton: Yes, that is correct.
Q141 Mr Hurd: What reaction did you
get?
Mr Tarboton: There has generally
been quite a lot of discussion about it but the decision that
was taken was not to proceed with it.
Q142 Mr Hurd: Do you have any idea
why?
Mr Tarboton: Having proposed it
we are continuing to work with the DfT to see if there is still
an opportunity to do that but that is currently the decision that
has been taken.
Q143 Mr Hurd: Was a reason given?
Mr Tarboton: No.
Q144 Mr Hurd: Can I ask you about
the impact of the congestion charge? We have heard some evidence
that that actually did come through to consumers in terms of a
tangible benefit to them for pursuing a low carbon option. Have
you quantified that impact?
Mr Veitch: You have heard already
the figures on car sales in London. It has had a useful benefit.
There seems to be a lot of focus on the congestion charge discount
as the tool for cleaner cars but actually it is always going to
be a very limited incentive because the goal of the congestion
charge is congestion. We know Transport for London are always
concerned about opening the loop hole too wide but yes, we think
it is good, it is a small measure, it might get some further technologies
on the market but it is quite a red herring and is not the only
answer; we need to keep looking at fiscal incentives and consumer
advice.
Q145 David Howarth: In the previous
session I think it was mentioned that one possibility would be
some sort of differential right to park, depending on the rating
of a vehicle. I wondered if anyone had tried that or has any modelling
been done about and what its advantages and disadvantages might
be.
Mr Veitch: Differential parking
is one of the holy grails of transport lobbyists. You may hear
from car clubs who promote shared ownership and usage of cars,
they are banging on at councils to give their shared cars free
parking spaces. In Westminster there have been some great steps
taken to give free spaces to electric cars. Yes, it is a good
policy but there are an awful lot of competing agendas for that
and again it needs to be controlled by councils and when you get
into the detail there are issues of signage on the car parking
and it gets very complicated in terms of what they are allowed
to put on the sign showing it is free parking. You are not allowed
any company branding on the signage. Yes, it is good, but again
it is a sideways issue; I think we need to keep focussed on things
that can actually be done and be effective reasonably quickly
I think. Differential parking is a tricky one, to be honest.
Q146 David Howarth: Is it expensive
to enforce because of the difficulties of recognising particular
cars or is that not a problem?
Mr Veitch: It is probably one
of the issues. The things I have heard expressed are things like
signage, setting the things up, painting them and yes, I guess,
enforcement would come into to it as well.
Mr Tarboton: One of the things
of enforcement and costs of bringing these measures into place
is that there should be a national framework or set of guidelines
which all the local councils can then adopt in how they bring
it into the market place. We do not want consumers to face different
measures in different cities and a whole plethora of different
approaches and complexities. If we are going to bring in a list
of different types of incentives they need to be simple and clear
across the whole of the UK.
Q147 Ms Barlow: The Department for
Transport recently launched their Safe and Fuel Efficient Drivers
scheme and earlier this year SMMT launched their Drive Green,
Drive Safely guide. Could you just summarise the things that drivers
could best do to cut their carbon dioxide emissions?
Mr Tarboton: There are a number
of projects that we are currently working on funded by the European
Commission to look at what is called eco driving. We have some
detailed information we could send to the Committee. Alex can
share with you some of the detail but overall we see a big opportunity
here, if you look at some of the lessons learned in Europe in
terms of the savings which can be made through changing driver
behaviour. We see there being a simple set of three actions that
any consumer can take when it comes to CO2. Look at
the car and the fuel they use, that is the first action. Look
at how they drive the car; and look at whether they need to use
the car at all. When it comes to how they drive the car, we have
a 10 point check list of things which need to be looked at to
change driver behaviour. In terms of exact percentages perhaps
Alex can go through the particular detail.
Mr Veitch: To give one or two
examples, we estimate slowing down from 90 to 70 saves you 25
to 30% of fuel. Just switching off your air conditioning compared
to it going full blast can save you up to a quarter of your fuel.
There are smaller savings: simply keeping your tyres inflated
is a 1 to 2% saving. There are number of quite well accepted figures
on savings by eco driving.
Mr Veitch: Roof racks are another
one.
Q148 Chairman: Some cars now have
an instrument on the panel which shows you how much fuel you are
using at any one time. If those were made mandatory that would
be a way of warning people. Switching off the air conditioning
or turning it down a bit is not something I always do, but if
I was really conscious of the effect it was having it might be
helpful.
Mr Tarboton: Definitely. If they
were converted into units of financial terms that would also help.
Gear shift indicators is another useful tool to have on the dashboard
so that when you are changing gears you do not go over 2000 revs;
keeping it under the 2000 rev mark can help save 10% fuel.
Q149 Ms Barlow: What about the Government?
You spoke about European examples, is there any tangible evidence
rather than just predictions that this kind of change of behaviour
can be brought about? What can the Government do to bring this
about?
Mr Tarboton: We have projections
from other countries.
Q150 Ms Barlow: I wondered if there
was any sort of evidence of where this has worked in Europe rather
than just projections.
Mr Veitch: There is a study from
2002 in the Netherlands where 6000 drivers were divided into eco
drivers and non-eco drivers and there was found to be a 7% fuel
saving per kilometre by the eco drivers. In Spain the Spanish
version of the AA found that there was an average saving of over
13% in their study. In European Union funded work there are quite
significant campaigns in some other European countries on this.
To put it in context, I think we would like to start talking to
the public about eco-driving in the way that the Energy Saving
Trust talks to them about energy saving in your home—switch
your thermostat down a bit, insulate your house—using the
same idea but shift it to your car. The financial savings you
can get are pretty high. I think we need to start engaging with
the public a lot more about these issues and try to make it interesting
and appeal to them in the way we do on energy saving in the home.
Q151 Ms Barlow: Apart from publicising
these things—which obviously the Government can do—and
the suggestion the Chairman made in terms of making fuel use indicators
mandatory et cetera, is there anything else specific that you
would like the Government to do?
Mr Tarboton: There are eco driving
training courses which you can attend. They cost about £50
a course so if those were incentivised and vouchers were handed
out to people who purchase new cars or at car show rooms that
would incentivise people to go on those training courses. We have
a number of advice centres across the UK. People go to shopping
centres and set up stands about energy efficiency in the home;
they could set up stands about energy efficiency in terms of the
car. We have proposed to the Department of Transport to fund eco-driving
work through our advice centres. We have about 45 advice centres
across the UK which could also provide advice to consumers about
transport. That has also been turned down at this stage. There
are a number of ways in which we can engage with the public and
provide some real incentives to train people to change their behaviour.
I think in addition we need to see it brought in as a requirement
of the driving test. This has been done in other countries and
has been successful.
Q152 Mr Hurd: You have been in this
game and you are trying to preach the same message in terms of
energy efficiency in the home which has been a long, hard slog.
What lessons have you drawn from that in terms of how and where
to focus the energy in terms of this effort to promote eco driving?
Is there a country out there that is proving to be successful
in getting this message across?
Mr Tarboton: Some lessons that
have been learned in terms of our approach to consumers on energy
efficiency are that cost plays an important role. Any efficient
measure has a double benefit of both the cost saving to the consumer
and the environmental saving so it is important that the consumer
understands cost. That, I would think, is the first message to
put across; in any marketing campaign or any advice that is given,
cost has to be very clearly tangiblised. The second is that there
needs to be both national and local interaction. At the national
level you need to create awareness of the issue and understanding
that action needs to be taken; at the local level you need to
provide a hand-holding and guidance on what action can be taken.
All we have seen with transport—and even in this area it
is weak—is some level of awareness of the issue being raised.
There are no practical steps for consumers to be able to go to
an organisation like ourselves or another and find out the three
practical things which they can do. We only provide advice on
renewable energy and energy efficiency to consumers; we do not
provide advice to consumers on transport and we are not funded
to. There is no practical hand-holding out there for the transport
area and we thing that is a serious omission the whole policy
and strategy of government. If you consider that all the rest
of the areas that we deal with in energy efficiency are reducing
in CO2 by about 10%, transport has gone up.
Q153 Mr Hurd: Can I ask you about
Smarter Choices: Changing the way we travel, the DfT report
in 2004 which identified a range of options for reducing car use?
How realistic do you think those findings were and where would
you focus energy in terms of pursuing that?
Mr Tarboton: I think it is realistic
but there are issues of feedback to consider. We have a number
of cases where we have worked with companies on workplace travel
plans to look at car sharing, to look at cycling, to look at optimising
routes to work, and in individual cases we have seen some tremendous
results: 18% with Orange and with other companies we have had
similar achievements made in terms of reduction in mileage and
CO2. The problem comes in needing to ensure that once
you take that 18% of drivers off the road that that road space
is not just filled up with other drivers now seeing that there
is an empty stretch of road and choosing to drive their car as
a result. That is one of the main reasons why our programme of
activity, we think, is not being funded next year by DfT for Smart
Choice for Travel Plans. We have been running a programme
to provide free support and writing up a travel plan for a company.
That will come to an end in the next two days and will no longer
be providing that support. It will now be provided more through
a local type support system through local authorities. We think
it is important; there can be achievements made and if you look
at what is happening in London that just increases the support
in terms of providing travel plans for workplace travel. Up to
£30 million of funding is going to go into this area. The
way they are doing it in London is an area based travel plan approach
so that you not only look at the businesses in that area, you
look at the schools, you look at the infrastructure, you look
at the buses, the cycling routes and you ensure that you tackle
the whole area in its entirety and by doing that you can then
tackle the issue of feedback loop because if you tackle the whole
area you do not have people then jumping in their cars to use
up the empty space. In addition in London you have the added benefit
of a congestion charge to provide a disincentive for people to
have that feedback opportunity to go back onto the roads. We think
what is happening in London is the correct approach and if that
could be rolled out nationally we think some real benefits could
be achieved as per the Smarter Choices report.
Q154 Mr Stuart: Is there anything
you want to add about the practicalities of how that would work,
how big an impact you think it could actually have and, finally,
have you approached the Department of Transport and what is their
response?
Mr Tarboton: Certificate trading
is something which I think could certainly work. There are limitations
in a number of technical issues to be looked at; the devil is
the detail with some of this. One of the limitations to be aware
of is that if you were to bring in a system which made small,
cheap cars even cheaper you could end up with a runaway growth
of small cars and that could not exactly help the situation in
terms of CO2 emissions, so we have to be aware of that.
Apart from those kinds of issues which can be managed, in terms
of its impact it is dependent upon how much of a differential
you create on the cost of carbon for high carbon cars versus low
carbon cars. If you made it, for example, £10 per gram of
carbon so that a vehicle which was 70 grams higher in carbon emissions
would generate a certificate of, say £700 against a green
car which was 50 grams lower in CO2 across the mid-point
they would have a £500 certificate difference. Those could
then be traded. You could change the £10 to £20 or £5
depending on what impact you see happening in the light of this.
The fundamental basis of this would be that you can adjust it
as time goes on. You need to provide long term stability to manufacturers
that such a system would be in place and provide some clarity
on that. Trading systems do provide that level of clarity, certainly
better than stopping and starting grant programmes. There is a
big opportunity there; it is something which has been discussed.
There is some agreement that it is something which should be explored
and certainly the recent letter from the three UK secretaries
of state (for DfT, Defra and DTI), sent to the European Commission
about three weeks ago indicated to the Commission that surface
transport should be assessed in the review of the EUTS. We think
that is a very positive step forward.
Q155 Chairman: Of course it could
be done domestically without any reference to the EU.
Mr Tarboton: Yes.
Q156 Chairman: It could be done by
the industry without the Government being involved.
Mr Tarboton: Possibly, on a voluntary
basis.
Q157 Mr Caton: When we were talking
about buses at the beginning of this session you mentioned the
loss of grant. Why have several DfT's TransportEnergy programmes
been suspended and why is it taking so long to get them up and
running again?
Mr Tarboton: The key issue is
State Aid requirements. We have gone through a process of consulting
the industry, putting in place proposals for new grant programmes
which would be technology neutral and in line with the conclusions
which came out of the consultation, those mechanisms would suit
industry provided they are put in place over a long term and there
is a long term strategy for those grant programmes. We have been
now over a year in waiting for that set of programmes to be approved
through the European Commission. During that time of the six programmes
two programmes have been approved. The R&D programme has been
approved to provide grants for the development of new vehicles.
Indeed, it is in that area where we have been developing projects
in the past which continue to run through from the old programmes
where we are going to be seeing some new vehicles coming through
to be launched in the next few months as demonstration vehicles
which will achieve under 100 grams of carbon per kilometre for
a normal, passenger, family sized vehicle. That programme is having
a tremendous impact. The other programme is the infrastructure
programme to provide grants for new bio fuel, E85 and hydrogen
and electric recharging points to be installed. Both of those
have been approved but the other four programmes are still in
the process of discussion between the Department of Transport
and the European Commission in working out the technical details
and issues to ensure there is no unfair competition distortion
created by the programmes.
Q158 Mr Caton: Do you have any idea
of the timescale we are talking about before they do hopefully
get a programme?
Mr Tarboton: I wish I did. Unfortunately
it is not something which has a fixed timescale attached to it;
it is very much a rolling system of questions being asked, clarification
being sought, answers being provided and then new questions coming
out of the Commission, and it goes on round.
Q159 Mr Caton: Is the Government
pressing hard enough to achieve the objective and have you been
able to assess the impact of the suspension?
Mr Tarboton: We have been asked
to provide support to the Government on the detailed technical
aspects of a number of the questions. In answer to the question,
are they pushing hard? Yes they are, for these programmes to be
approved and they are working out timescales to get back answers
to the Commission as soon as possible and we have been under a
lot of pressure at different times during the year to produce
some technical detail and cost analysis to provide back to the
Commission so that the process can run as quickly as possible.
| 
