Researchers at Transport for London are instructing Londoners to shut off their engines when idling for more than one minute. City officials note that “no engine idling” applies not only to passenger vehicles but city buses, taxis and every other vehicle on London roads. This campaign is based on research at the Millbrook Proving Ground that should eliminate concerns about wearing out vehicle starters and batteries. Transport for London found that cars, buses and trucks that repeatedly stop and start do not experience technical problems over thousands of key turns. The “no engine idling” campaign focuses particularly on London’s black cabs, which contribute 25% of the city’s emissions with about 15% produced while idling.

The push for the “no engine idling campaign” goes beyond London’s desire to put on a good show this summer. The Confederation of Passenger Transport has worked with the Freight Transport Association and Asthma UK to study the health impacts of greenhouse emissions. Asthma UK estimates that vehicle pollution contributes to nearly 4,300 deaths in London each year especially among sensitive populations like children and the elderly. The City of London and Transport for London are highlighting the compounding effect of air pollution on cyclists, pedestrians and others exposed to contaminated air during this campaign.

Mayor Boris Johnson and Transport for London have demonstrated an effective corollary to green vehicle development. Big cities like London are moving toward greener transportation but full immersion of EVs, alt-fuel vehicles and hybrids will take at least a generation. The gradual introduction of green vehicles in London combined with efforts like the “no engine idling” campaign should cut emissions significantly within the decade. The intersection of technology with public policy dealing with reduced emissions seems far in the distance but Mayor Johnson has taken steps in the right direction.

Toyota, Citroen and Peugeot sit at the head of the class within the EEA report. Toyota Motor Europe has achieved the 2012 emissions goal based on 2010 vehicle sales. These vehicles also fall within one g/km on average of reaching the 2015 standard. Citroen and Peugeot have already hit 2012 standards with their latest models. Both automakers need only cut 5 g/km on average to reach the EU’s 2015 goal. A trio of smaller automakers has produced all-electric vehicles that slightly reduce the industry’s aggregate emissions. The European Commission established incentives for automakers that achieve these goals on time including emissions credits and tax incentives. The EEA lauds these automakers while noting that they are rare breeds in the European auto industry.

The EEA report concludes that a small number of automakers must cut their average emissions by at least 50% to meet 2015 standards. This estimate amounts to an average emissions reduction of 14 g/km for each model. These automakers include European branches of Asian automakers like Mazda, Nissan and Honda. Daimler and General Motors are joined by Romanian automaker Dacia in their failure to reduce emissions in a timely manner. The European Commission coupled incentives for successful automakers with penalties for manufacturers that cannot decrease their emissions. The EEA estimates that failure to comply with 2015 standards could lead to fines and penalties up to 10 billion Euros.

Industry observers can parse the report’s details to find optimistic notes regarding 2015 EU emissions standards. Automakers like Maruti Suzuki India have achieved average vehicle emissions of 104 g/km through lightweight frames and highly efficient engines. Fiat Group has achieved average vehicle emissions of 125 g/km, showing the potential for major automakers to drastically cut emissions. Economic circumstances have challenged the structure of the European Union but progress toward carbon cuts shows one of the virtues of regional cooperation.

Professors Paul Hanley and Jon Kuhl of the University of Iowa published a report that sheds light on the potential for mileage-based road taxes. “National Evaluation of Mileage-Based Charges for Drivers” published in Transportation Research Record details results of a two-year simulation of a road tax in major American markets. This federally fund study was designed to determine the feasibility of recording passenger mileage and billing miles traveled through the appropriate municipalities. On the whole, Hanley and Kuhl found positive responses from participants to the recording and simulated billing processes.

“National Evaluation” studies the initial results from a trial authorized by the 2005 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act. This federal law creates a multi-tiered approach to funding infrastructure beyond gas taxes and tolls. Legislators developed programs under the law that allowed states to test additional tolls on interstate highways as well as the Value Pricing Pilot Program. The program originally funded at $59 million allows up to 15 “variable pricing” programs in the United States that offset traditional methods of highway funding.

Hanley and Kuhl reviewed data from 2,650 test drivers in 12 states distributed throughout the country. This trial lasted from July 2008 to July 2010 and covered more than 21 million miles. Volunteers agreed to install GPS systems in their vehicles that tracked mileage and delivered information to the appropriate municipality. Researchers compared the ability to track miles across municipalities with GPS against the reliability of data collection without onboard computers. The typical driver traveled 9,000 miles during the study with 92.5% of mileage collected accurately by the GPS. The accuracy of the mileage collection depended on whether the miles could be attributed to the correct government agencies. The study found that only 6.9% of non-GPS miles could be reliably recorded and billed through the correct agency.

The report asked volunteers about their views on mileage-based road charges in general and the study in particular. Hanley and Kuhl determined that 71% of respondents had a positive view of the trial including the monthly audits based on GPS information. “National Evaluation” found 17% of respondents who were unhappy with the trial especially concerns over privacy and information security in GPS networks. Local, state and federal governments will certainly continue studying this alternative to tolls and gas taxes especially with the introduction of green vehicles that contribute less revenue to state governments.

President Barack Obama and representatives from 13 automakers recently announced a major revision of fuel economy standards intended for Model Year 2017. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state agencies plan enforcement of an average fuel economy of 54.5 miles per gallon by Model Year 2025. The White House invited officials from GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda and other major automakers to announce the new standards last week. This standard improves on the existing fuel economy average of 27 miles per gallon and could reduce the impact of fuel prices on American families.

Automakers worked with the EPA, United Auto Workers and the U.S. Department of Transportation to develop this standard. Fuel economy standards will increase by 5% per year between 2017 and 2015 for passenger cars. This standard is lower (3.5% per year) for pickup trucks in the first five years before increasing to 5% by 2022. The EPA and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) plan parallel Notices of Proposed Rulemaking by September 2011 before accepting public comments.  The EPA, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and state agencies will coordinate on implementation in the near future.

Incentives from state and federal governments will be implemented to double fuel efficiency over the next 15 years. These incentives could focus heavily on consumers including increased tax credits on purchases of new hybrids and electric vehicles. Corporate fleets could receive credits for green vehicle conversions and purchases. The acceleration of fuel economy standards could occur through credits to automakers that cut emissions during production. The federal government may venture into tax credits for improvements to air conditioning and other auxiliary systems that reduce emissions.

The benefits of revised fuel economy ratings could be significant to the average consumer and the environment. Officials with the Obama administration have calculated $1.7 trillion in savings due to fuel costs by 2025. This calculation amounts to $8,000 in savings per vehicle, which would significantly reduce lifetime costs of vehicle ownership. Significant increases in average fuel economy could cut demand for oil by 12 billion barrels by 2025 with daily reductions of 2.2 million barrels in that year. The lingering question from this recent announcement is why the government does not commit to more aggressive fuel economy increases. We have seen endless hybrid, alt-fuel and electric vehicles paraded before the public in the last five years. The auto industry could achieve fuel economy in excess of 50 miles per gallon by Model Year 2020 if the current pace of research would continue.

Political reporters have cast their gaze largely on budget debates and 2012 Republican candidates this summer. These high-profile stories have overshadowed the small but significant debates underlying these larger issues. An example where concerns about federal debt could derail forward-thinking programs is the onslaught of alternative fuel bills currently slogging through Congress. Efforts to support electric vehicles, natural gas and alternative fuel development could suffer from brinksmanship regarding government spending.

Senators Lamar Alexander (R-TN) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) first proposed S.948 last year to support “electric vehicle deployment communities.” This measure would authorize $2 billion in grants to villages, towns and cities that develop comprehensive charging infrastructure for plug-in vehicles. Alexander, Merkley and other supporters want $300 million for conversion grants to businesses. The maximum grant would be $20 million with the applying company covering 80% of the project cost. S.948 also includes provisions for advanced battery research and DOE EV adoption totaling $375 million. These initiatives could be funded by reductions in tax deductions to oil companies and decreased tax credits for wind power.

Republicans and Democrats in the House of Representatives are seeking support for the NAT GAS Act. This bill proposed by Rep. John Sullivan (R-OK) would support conversion of trucks to operate using natural gas. These conversions would be subsidized with tax credits up to $64,000 to fleet operators. Sullivan also wants tax credits to businesses that invest in CNG refueling depots up to $100,000 per station. The NAT GAS Act dovetails with the public campaign for natural gas adoption by financier T. Boone Pickens. This bill also has support from more than 180 House members looking for job creation as well as independence from foreign oil.

These bills are stuck in limbo as both parties struggle with the federal budget. Heated debates over drilling permits, accountability for the oil industry and the legitimacy of climate change research undercut efforts to pass green vehicle proposals. Republicans who have not supported these measures are concerned about the efficacy of these technologies in the short term. Democrats are divided between moderates trying to keep Republicans on board and liberals interested in more aggressive emissions control. This divide is evidenced by the lack of Republican support for a Senate bill sponsored by Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) attempting to evenly divide funding for low-emissions technology. The lack of federal leadership over alternative fuel adoption could mean piecemeal programs by states and businesses that fail to connect across America’s vast landscape.

The United Kingdom branch of the World Wildlife Federation (WWF-UK) issued a report indicating progress needed toward EV adoption in the UK. This report entitled Electric Avenues: Driving Home the Case for Electric Vehicles in the UK uses three scenarios to determine the impacts of EV adoption in the region. WWF-UK and Element Energy created Electric Avenues to pressure legislators, businesses and consumers to at least meet the emissions goals of the Climate Change Act of 2008. This national legislation requires the UK to cut 80% of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 with a 34% reduction by 2020.

Electric Avenues assumes that plug-in hybrids and full EVs will split the market evenly in the next 30 years. The report also assumes the drastic reduction of carbon emissions in electrical production throughout the UK by 2030. WWF-UK offered a forecast based on the Climate Change Act of 2008 called the extended scenario. This situation would yield at least 1.7 million plug-ins and BEVs by 2020 and 6.4 million units by 2030. Electric vehicles would represent 6% of all cars in the UK by 2020 and 18% in 2030 in the extended scenario.

WWF-UK also ran through stretch and business-as-usual scenarios that bracketed the 34% reduction in the Climate Change Act of 2008. The stretch scenario assumes the UK achieves 42% carbon reductions by 2020 and a 75% reduction in car emissions by 2030. This simulation reveals 4.2 million EVs in the UK by 2020 and 26.3 million by 2030, representing 44% and 80% of all vehicles in the UK respectively. Electric Avenues concludes that the stretch scenario would yield $8 billion per year in reduced fuel imports by 2030. The business-as-usual simulation assumes that the UK would allow green vehicle grants to lapse in 2012 and fail to provide incentives for future purchases. WWF-UK concludes that only 160,000 EVs would exist in the UK by 2020 and 1.6 million by 2030 under these conditions.

The primary goal for WWF-UK is 100% renewable energy in the United Kingdom by 2050. Electric Avenues targets auto emissions that represent 14% of carbon emissions in the United Kingdom. The financial problems facing the United Kingdom could push EV adoption closer to business as usual than the extended or stretch scenarios. Another strike against the ambitious goals of Electric Avenues is the sluggish rate of EV adoption at present. The Department for Transport notes that only 61,000 hybrid-electric vehicles and 1,400 all-electric vehicles operated in the UK in 2010. These figures layered with a decline in EV sales since 2007 could prove problematic for widespread adoption in the UK.

Charter members in the National Clean Fleets Partnership represent half of the ten biggest corporate fleets in the United States. These members operated more than 275,000 vehicles in 2010. Corporate fleets operated more than three million vehicles in 2009 with fuel consumption in excess of four billion gallons per year. The Department of Energy and private partners have cited a short-term goal of replacing 20,000 vehicles with green vehicles as well as a replacement of seven million gallons of gasoline per year with alternative fuels. This series of goals could be met by combining advanced vehicle technology with myriad fuel sources currently subsidized by the federal government including biofuels and natural gas.

This public-private partnership should be able to find efficiencies within corporate fleets to reduce fuel consumption. The National Clean Fleets Partnership will utilize the 2010 Fleet Electrification Roadmap by the Electrification Coalition to create criteria for improvement. This document notes that corporate fleets represent the best entry point for hybrids and EVs in the marketplace. Federal officials and private partners will review delivery routes, driving techniques and vehicle performance at present to uncover inefficiencies. The 2010 Fleet Electrification Roadmap suggests solutions like more centralized fleet depots and parking facilities along with alt-fuel infrastructure as necessary for green vehicle adoption.

The Obama administration hopes that the inclusion of major corporations in the National Clean Fleets Partnership will encourage smaller businesses to follow suit. This hope comes from sources like the Electrification Coalition, which states that corporate fleets could buy up to 20% of available EVs and plug-ins over the next five years. Corporate fleets converting to more efficient and eco-friendly vehicles would provide reliable consumers for automakers concerned about high research and development costs. Skeptical observers might cry greenwashing on the part of major corporations but corporate fleets could help bring down green vehicle costs in the long term and increase visibility for the next generation of vehicles.

Local and state governments throughout the United States rely on gasoline taxes to pay for highway maintenance costs. These revenues have grown from $9 billion in 1977 to about $37 billion in 2007 according to the Tax Policy Center. Increasing fuel prices along with shifts toward green vehicles have caused fewer vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in many states. This issue has been broached by legislators in Texas and Oregon trying to replace revenues lost from decreased VMT.  VMT taxes on plug-in vehicles might replace some revenue lost by gas taxes but civil libertarians and other skeptics are fighting these efforts.

Rep. Linda Harper-Brown proposed HB 1669 in the Texas House of Representatives earlier this year. This bill would require the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles to track VMT by electric vehicles through October 1st, 2012. The Texas DMW would allow drivers to submit to manual inspections of their odometers or install reading devices with wireless transmitters. Brown’s proposal sets out a $0.0005 per mile charge to EV drivers with an estimated annual charge of $73.20 for the average driver. HB 1669 was discussed in a recent public hearing, providing input on the bill as it heads to the full House of Representatives.

The state of Oregon has been studying VMT taxes since a Department of Transportation study was commissioned in 2003. The Oregon House of Representatives was presented with HB 2328 in January with a public hearing in mid-March. If passed, HB 2328 would take effect on January 1, 2014 with a $0.006 per mile VMT charge for electric vehicles driving on state highways. State legislators included a provision in HB2328 that would require at least one manual recording option to sidestep privacy and funding concerns. This legislation also includes a $720 fine for any driver who tampers with the odometer to reduce a VMT tax.

These perspectives on state VMT taxes have been countered by critics who see these taxes as excessive or unnecessary. Civil libertarians are concerned that requiring tracking devices and GPS units would infringe on the privacy rights of drivers. Advocates of increased EV adoption see the VMT tax as an innovation killer that would be counterproductive. The most convincing criticism of the VMT tax might be that decreased revenues should be countered with new methods of funding transportation infrastructure. This debate should grow more contentious as states try to find new revenue sources while balancing operating budgets.

The growing green vehicle market in the United States has created a new problem for drivers, pedestrians and communities. Vehicles like the Toyota Prius are not only miserly with gasoline but significantly reduce noise pollution. Hybrids and electric vehicles that produce little or no noise create safety issues for pedestrians and cyclists who rely on sound to navigate traffic. The addition of Chevy Volts, Nissan LEAF EVs and other green vehicles to American roads would exacerbate this problem. Congress and the White House are taking action with passage of the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act.

This legislation was supported in the House by Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY) and the Senate by Sen. John Kerry (D-MA). Rep. Towns was driven by his experiences as a teacher of the blind and deaf to remedy this emerging issue. Sen. Kerry spearheaded passage of the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act as a means of eliminating an obstacle to further adoption of green vehicles. The Senate passed the act unanimously while the House passed the act 379-30. At the time of writing, the White House was expected to sign the bill before the end of the year.

The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act requires automakers to install pedestrian alert systems in hybrid and electric vehicles by 2013. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will study the minimum sound needed to warn pedestrians of a green vehicle’s presence. This study is necessary to balance pedestrian safety with community concerns about excessive noise. The Department of Transportation will also conduct research into additional standards that could enhance safety for drivers and pedestrians. New models like the Nissan LEAF and the Chevy Volt already feature alert systems but would need to eliminate cutoff features to comply with the law.

Automakers and non-profit organizations alike put their weight behind the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act. The National Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers provided support in order to ease concerns about green vehicles. This advocacy was necessary as automakers develop demand for hybrids and electric vehicles with premium prices. The National Federation of the Blind and the American Council of the Blind lobbied Congress to accelerate passage to anticipate upcoming deliveries of the Volt and LEAF. This rare bit of bipartisanship and responsiveness from Congress will eliminate a major safety concern while easing the path for green vehicle purchases.

Consumers throughout the United States look to the EPA fuel mileage sticker when shopping for new cars and trucks. This sticker is only second to the price tag in the minds of savvy shoppers. The evolution of the automotive market toward greener vehicles has turned the EPA label into a relic. The EPA is responding by redesigning the label in anticipation of a more dynamic generation of vehicles. Readers will have 60 days to submit their comments and criticisms to the EPA through this website.

The traditional EPA label did not vary based on vehicle classes and drive systems. The EPA has proposed two versions of the mileage sticker for five vehicle classes. The gas-powered vehicle label will be joined by labels for EVs, plug-in hybrids, flex fuel vehicles and compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles.

The first version of the proposed EPA label looks similar to a door hanger. The top of the label features a letter grade between A+ and D based on metrics like fuel mileage and tailpipe emissions. The EPA would also include a five-year estimate of fuel savings based on comparisons to other vehicles in the class. The bottom section of this label lists MPG ratings for city and highway driving along with carbon dioxide emissions. Users would also be able to see where a vehicle fits into the larger market based on combined MPG, carbon emissions and other emissions.

The EPA also proposed a second label pictured above that shares a similar layout to the original label. The top panel details the EPA’s MPG estimates as well as the annual fuel cost for a vehicle. This panel is adapted for each type of vehicle to recognize MPG differences for electric and gas-powered vehicles. The bottom left panel shows how a selected vehicle compares to other vehicles in the class based on combined MPG. The bottom right panel focuses on environmental impact with vehicle comparisons for greenhouse gas emissions and other emissions. Both labels feature smartphone bar codes that allow consumers to find vehicle reports and EPA information about new vehicles.

This duo of fuel mileage labels shows the EPA’s efforts to educate the public about the growing green vehicle market. The first label may run into trouble due to the subjectivity of using letter grades for new vehicles. The latter label could be criticized for failing to have the five-year cost estimate that might help consumers make smarter decisions. The American public should be active in refining these proposed labels during the next two months. The selected label will impact everything from vehicle advertising to consumer guides.