Dieselization and Road Transport CO₂ Emissions: Evidence from Europe

António Cardoso Marques, José Alberto Fuinhas, Bruno Miguel Gonçalves

NECE and University of Beira Interior, Management and Economics Department, Estrada do Sineiro, Covilh?, Portugal.
University of Beira Interior.

DOI: 10.4236/lce.2012.33008                

Abstract

Road transport carbon dioxide emissions were analyzed, by focusing on a panel of 14 European countries for the time span 1995-2007. We deal with the existence of contemporaneous correlation by using the Panel Corrected Standard Errors estimator. We extend the empirical literature by controlling the effect of new diesel passenger car registrations and the average power of those vehicles. The price of gasoline and income reduce road transport carbon dioxide emissions, while population density and average power of new diesel passenger cars raises those emissions. We deepen the debate about dieselization, concluding that saving emissions by using diesel tend to be surpassed by the increased kilometers driven.

Keywords

Road Transport; CO₂ Emissions; Fuel Prices; Dieselization

1. Introduction

European countries have been expressing deep environmental concerns for some time and now play a leading role worldwide in the fight against pollution. To achieve this purpose, the European Union (EU) has been implementing environmental policies to counteract the degradation of the ozone layer and to bring the green house effect to an end. The EU has established directives for its member states in order to restrain and diminish the emission of greenhouse gases (GHG), namely carbon dioxide (CO₂), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, nitric acid and ozone. Since CO₂ is the major GHG released into the atmosphere (98% in 2007 for the EU15), it is essential to reduce its emissions in order to work against global warming and climate change. Substantial CO₂ emissions originate in the transport sector (25% in 2007 for the EU15, excluding the international traffic departing from the EU) and almost all of this comes from road transporttation (93% in 2007 for the EU15). This large contribution makes this sector one of the largest polluters with respect to oil fuel combustion.

The road transport sector includes both motorcycles and automobiles. The latter consist of: 1) passenger cars (PC) (84.4% of the number of automobiles sold in 2007 for the EU15); 2) commercial vehicles (15.2%); and 3) buses and coaches (0.4%). Since PCs constitute the majority of automobiles on European roads, they play a crucial role in road transport CO₂ emissions. As a consequence, the EU decided to make voluntary agreements with the automobile manufacturers’ associations, the ACEA [1] JAMA [2] and KAMA [3], in order to promote the decrease of the average CO₂ emissions per km, by each new PC.

The literature regarding CO₂ emissions from PCs brings to the fore a vast normative perspective, but it suffers from scarce empirical support. This paper contributes to the empirical evidence, focusing on the drivers of road transport CO₂ emissions. Overall, the nature of drivers can be socio-economic, demographic, energetic, manufacturer or market. In particular, we work on the questions: 1) is dieselization actually reducing CO₂ emissions released by PCs? And 2) how does GDP per capita influence CO₂ emissions? The responses may define important policy measures to facilitate a reduction in road transport CO₂ emissions. For this purpose, we use a panel dataset for thirteen years (1995-2007) from the EU15 (except Greece). These countries belong to Europe, which has been in the front line of the reduction of road transport CO₂ emissions, and they are selected to fulfill the criteria of the longest time span with available data for drivers we control. In accordance with the common policies guidance from the EU, the econometric methods take into account the contemporaneous correlation.

We extend the literature on road transport CO₂ emissions by: 1) showing the relevant role of the drivers of new diesel PC registrations per 1000 inhabitants, and the average power of new diesel PCs registered; 2) shedding light on the debate of the pros and cons of dieselization; 3) discussing the importance of car sharing and the use of public transport in the reduction of CO₂ emissions; and 4) applying panel econometric techniques that cope well in the presence of common political guidance.

The paper is organized as follows: the second section consists of a literature review, the third presents the data and methodology used in this work. Section 4 provides the results obtained, the fifth section discusses those outcomes and section 6 concludes.

2. Literature Review

In a modern society, CO₂ emissions are generated by numerous sectors. Energy industries, manufacturing, construction, transport and other sectors, like comercial/institutional, residences, agriculture/forestry/fishery, all contribute to environmental damage. According to the source of CO₂ emissions, different literature is applied and several methodologies can be found. The literature on road transport CO₂ emissions, particularly from PCs, evolves according to two main perspectives: 1) the normative; and 2) the empirical. The normative focuses on the analysis of CO₂ emissions, considering both characteristics and fleet composition of PCs [4]. The empirical perspective includes several techniques, namely the decomposition analysis of CO₂ emissions [5], and the panel data approach [6]. The influence of the various vehicle characteristics on the changes in CO₂ emissions from PCs was analysed by [5], in Greece and Denmark between 1990 and 2005. In their turn, Ryan et al. [6] focused on the relationship among variables like fuel price, vehicle taxes, income and population density.

As noted by Stead [7], PCs using different fuel types release different amounts of CO₂. Indeed, the average diesel PC releases smaller quantities of CO₂ per km in comparison to the average gasoline car [8]. A diesel engine consumes 20% to 30% less fuel per km than a gasoline engine equivalent [9]. Nevertheless, while consuming 20% less, it only releases 9% fewer grams (g) of CO₂ per km than gasoline engines [10]. Apart from the fuel economy of diesel PCs, as Pock [11] pointed out, diesel cars have also been upgraded, namely in comfort and driveability, and their retail price is lower in relation to gasoline cars in most European countries. This has all contributed to the trend known in Europe as dieselizetion, which consisted of a sustained diesel market growth. On the one hand, authors such as Fontaras and Samaras [12] and Cuenot [13], connect dieselization to a reduction in CO₂ emissions, as a consequence of the increased fuel efficiency of diesel engines. On the other hand, recent literature minimizes the impact of this trend in reducing CO₂ emissions, because of the higher distance travelled by diesel PCs [14]. This phenomenon of longer trips taken by diesel PCs deserves further analysis.

Diesel PCs release inferior average CO₂ emissions per km than gasoline cars, when travelling the same distance. Nevertheless, as Schipper [14] points out, these type of vehicles in Europe travel 40 to 100% more than their gasoline counterparts, namely since most taxi drivers, salesmen and businessmen use them. For example, in 2005, in France diesel PCs were driven 64% further than gasoline ones and, in Germany, 80% more [15]. Also in Denmark, in 2007, Papagiannaki and Diakoulaki [5] mentioned that diesel cars travelled twice as far as gasoline PCs.

As stated earlier, the increasing demand for diesel is due to its lower retail price compared to gasoline in most European countries. This asymmetry is a consequence of the lower taxation applied to diesel, which results partly from the professional transport sector lobby, as noted by Pock [11]. Moreover, this author points out that, in the short run, higher fuel prices decrease vehicle use, while in the long run, they cause a reorganization of the PC fleet to more efficient gasoline cars and diesel ones. In the former case, this is true since diesel price and diesel PC ownership expenses are reasonably low. Therefore, in the long run, given the correlation between fuel consumption and road transport CO₂ emissions [6], as the former decreases, so CO₂ emissions diminish. Such fuel consumption reduction is directly caused, on the one hand, by fewer kilometers driven in the long run [16,17] and, on the other hand, by lower speeds on roads. In fact, fuel consumption diminishes as more drivers circulate at optimum speeds [18]. All these consequences of high fuel prices arise from its impact on families and individuals’ income.

When there are higher incomes, two opposite behaviors can arise. According to Storchmann [19], in the short run, individuals tend to drive more, increasing road transport CO₂ emissions. In contrast, over time buyers have greater opportunity to acquire powerful vehicles, but also better equipped with regard to fuel efficiency and technology [18]. Hamilton and Turton [20], when studying GHG emissions in OECD countries from 1982 to 1997, and Hatzigeorgiou et al. [21], when analysing CO₂ emissions in Greece between 1990 and 2002, pointed out GDP as the greatest contributor to CO₂ emissions. Nonetheless, Tapio et al. [22] noted that in the EU15 countries, from 1960 to 2000, GDP growth decoupled from energy use and, therefore, from CO₂ emissions. Another socio-economic factor affecting CO₂ emissions is population. Although it makes a positive contribution to road transport CO₂ emissions, its effect is not very noteworthy due to the small variations in population figures over time [5]. Nonetheless, it is worthwhile mentioning that increasing population density reduces the number of gasoline PC [6], favouring the use of diesel cars.

Another contributor to road transport CO₂ emissions is PC power, which is highly correlated with PC weight. Zervas [4] reported a rise in the average maximum power of both gasoline and diesel cars, from 1995 to 2003, as a result of the improved combustion efficiency. The increase in PC weight and power were in part a result of dieselization [10]. Diesel PCs have experienced a greater growth in power than gasoline ones. Since diesel PCs had to find more torque to increase their power/weight ratio in comparison to gasoline cars, they became more powerful. As a consequence, fuel consumption and CO₂ emissions also increased, counteracting the advance of technological standards in fuel efficiency. Regardless of the technical aspects, the last word about the average power of PCs, as Bonilla [18] points out, belongs to consumers, whose preferences when buying a new PC depend on their income.

The greater demand for diesel in Europe produces, however, a negative outcome in the whole CO₂ emissions, because it generates inefficiency in the entire fuel supply chain. Indeed, the adjustment of European refineries to the production of diesel causes an increase in CO₂ emissions due to higher energy loss. Exportation of gasoline and importation of diesel associated with the lower and higher demand, respectively, of the European PC fleet increases CO₂ emissions due to international transportation [23].

In the EU, most decisions aimed at reducing CO₂ emissions have a common guidance. To the best of our knowledge, the scarce empirical literature on road transport CO₂ emissions has not yet taken into account the possible existence of contemporaneous correlation between the EU countries as a result of the similar policies measures taken in all member states. To that extent, apart from the variables mostly suggested by literature (GDP per capita, population density, and gasoline price), we control for the effect of new diesel PC registrations and average power of new diesel PCs registered on road transport CO₂ emissions. The next section describes the data, method and estimation process.

3. Data and Methods

In order to select the appropriate methodology that will give us a full understanding of the object on which we are focused, we must have a thorough understanding of the available data. In this section we present the data, their sources and main characteristics, as well as pursuing a discussion about the methodological choices.

3.1. Data

Data from the year 1995 to 2007 were used, for a panel of 14 EU member states: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Greece was excluded for lack of data. Due to the inexistence of data prior to 1995 and subsequent to 2007 for some of the variables, the maximum time span was ascertained (1995-2007). Furthermore, because the remaining countries of EU27 only offer data from 2000 for some variables, we had to limit the study to EU15, except Greece. Otherwise, the actual period of thirteen years (1995-2007) would be only eight years (2000- 2007). Although the number of observations is not exactly the same for all countries, missing values are few, isolated, and purely random. Therefore, we can apply the estimators in our unbalanced panel without causing inconsistency in these estimators.

The main goal of this paper is to make an empirical evaluation, for a panel of 14 European countries, of the explanatory power of several variables over the following dependent variable: road transport CO₂ emissions (CO₂ROAD). The explanatory variables for understanding the course of CO₂ROAD are in accordance with the literature. GDP per capita and population density are important socio-economic drivers of CO₂ROAD due to their influence on the PC fleet composition and on the number, frequency, length and speed of journeys. The price of gasoline is highly correlated with the price of diesel, allowing us to control for the impact of energy pricing on CO₂ROAD. New diesel PC registrations per 1000 inhabitants enable us to understand the conesquences of dieselization on CO₂ROAD. New diesel PC average power, as one of the three major vehicle characteristics (power, weight, engine capacity), allows us to control for the influence of manufacturer drivers on CO₂ROAD.

GDP per capita (GDPPC). Income produces two opposite outcomes in families and individuals’ behaviours. On the one hand, a positive signal is observed when higher incomes lead both to increasing the propensity to drive more [19] and to buying powerful vehicles, contributing towards raising CO₂ROAD. On the other hand, a negative signal is identified when higher incomes allow individuals to acquire PCs with more advanced fuel efficiency technologies [18]. The final signal depends on the dominance of these two opposite effects. 

Population density (POPDENS). The literature suggests that population influences positively CO₂ROAD. The influence is generally low, because over time population does not suffer significant changes [5]. POPDENS has an effect on the PC fleet, since the number of gasoline cars diminishes when POPDENS increases [6]. This effect produces an outcome on CO₂ROAD. In accordance, we control for this variable, expecting that large POPDENS will contribute to greater CO₂ROAD.

Gasoline price (PRICEG). Energy prices infer on consumer behaviours and preferences, because:

Their available incomes become affected. As a result of high fuel prices, drivers may decrease their fuel consumption travelling at optimum speeds [18]. Moreover, in the long run, the distances travelled may be reduced [16,17] and car owners tend to replace gasoline cars with more fuel efficient ones or with diesel ones [11]. Most PCs worldwide are propelled through gasoline or diesel combustion. PRICEG and diesel price are highly correlated, which prevents their simultaneous use in the estimation, in line with the collinearity concerns. We control for PRICEG, given that it is commonly used in the empirical literature [11,16,17]. A negative relationship is expected between this variable and the CO₂ROAD.  

New Diesel PC registrations per 1000 inhabitants (DIESCAR). DIESCAR is used to measure the level of dieselization. As discussed before, the literature suggests two opposite effects regarding dieselization. On the one hand, one could expect a negative signal to CO₂ROAD, given that, comparatively, diesel PCs emit lower average CO₂ emissions per km [12,13]. On the other hand, a positive signal could be expected due to the larger distances travelled by diesel PCs [14] and thus, dieselization may induce the increase of CO₂ROAD. This divergence in the contribution of DIESCAR to CO₂ROAD, makes it relevant to identify whether the predominant effect is negative or positive.

New Diesel PC Average Power (AVPOWERD). AVPOWERD corresponds to the average power of new diesel PCs registered in one country for a year. A strong increase in AVPOWERD was observed from 1995 to 2007 [3,24]. Following the literature, we control for AVPOWERD. Since more power requires more fuel consumption ceteris paribus, a positive signal for AVPOWERD is expected in explaining CO₂ROAD.

Table 1 shows the variables, their sources and descriptive statistics.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	EC, “Recommendation (1999/125/EC) of 5th February 1999 on the Reduction of CO2 from Passenger Cars,” European Comission, Brussels, 1999.
[2]	EC, “Recommendation (2000/304/EC) of 13th April 2000 on the Reduction of CO2 from Passenger Cars (JAMA),” European Comission, Brussels, 2000.
[3]	EC, “Recommendation (2000/303/EC) of 13th April 2000 on the Reduction of CO2 from Passenger Cars (KAMA),” European Comission, Brussels, 2000.
[4]	E. Zervas, “Analysis of the CO2 Emissions and of the Other Characteristics of the European Market of New Passenger Cars. 1. Analysis of General Data and Analysis per Country,” Energy Policy, Vol. 38, No. 10, 2010, pp. 5413-5425. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.02.008
[5]	K. Papagiannaki and D. Diakoulaki, “Decomposition Analysis of CO2 Emissions from Passenger Cars: The Cases of Greece and Denmark,” Energy Policy, Vol. 37, No. 8, 2009, pp. 3259-3267. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.04.026
[6]	L. Ryan, S. Ferreira and F. Convery, “The Impact of Fiscal and Other Measures on New Passenger Car Sales and CO2: Evidence from Europe,” Energy Economics, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2009, pp. 365-374. Hdoi:10.1016/j.eneco.2008.11.011
[7]	D. Stead, “Relationships between Transport Emissions and Travel Patterns in Britain,” Transport Policy, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1999, pp. 247-258. Hdoi:10.1016/S0967-070X(99)00025-6
[8]	B. Los and B. Verspagen, “Localized Innovation, Localized Diffusion and the Environment: An Analysis of Reductions of CO2 Emissions by Passenger Cars,” Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2009, pp. 507-526. Hdoi:10.1007/s00191-009-0146-8
[9]	I. Al-Hinti, A. Al-Ghandoor, B. Akash and E. Abu-Nada, “Energy Saving and CO2 Mitigation through Restructuring Jordan’s Transportation Sector: The Diesel Passenger Cars Scenario,” Energy Policy, Vol. 35, No. 10, 2007, pp. 5003-5011. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2007.04.024
[10]	T. Zachariadis, “On the Baseline Evolution of Automobile Fuel Economy in Europe,” Energy Policy, Vol. 34, No. 14, 2006, pp. 1773-1785. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2005.01.002
[11]	M. Pock, “Gasoline Demand in Europe: New Insights,” Energy Economics, Vol. 32, No. 1, 2010, pp. 54-62. Hdoi:10.1016/j.eneco.2009.04.002
[12]	G. Fontaras and Z. Samaras, “A Quantitative Analysis of the European Automakers’ Voluntary Commitment to Reduce CO2 Emissions from New Passenger Cars Based on Independent Experimental Data,” Energy Policy, Vol. 35, No. 4, 2007, pp. 2239-2248. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.07.012
[13]	F. Cuenot, “CO2 Emissions from New Cars and Vehicle Weight in Europe; How the EU Regulation Could Have Been Avoided and How to Reach It?” Energy Policy, Vol. 37, No. 10, 2009, pp. 3832-3842. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.036
[14]	L. Schipper, “Automobile Fuel; Economy and CO2 Emissions in Industrialized Countries: Encouraging Trends through 2008?” Transport Policy, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2011, pp. 358-372. Hdoi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.10.011
[15]	K. Bodek and J. Heywood, “Europe’s Evolving Passenger Vehicle Fleet: Fuel Use and GHG Emissions Scenarios through 2035,” Publication No. FFEE 2008-03 RP. Laboratory for Energy and Environment, MIT, 2008.
[16]	B. Liddle, “Long-Run Relationship among Transport Demand, Income and Gasoline Price for the US,” Transportation Research Part D, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2009, pp. 73-82.Hdoi:10.1016/j.trd.2008.10.006
[17]	D. Greene, “Rebound 2007: Analysis of U.S. Light-Duty Vehicle Travel Statistics,” Energy Policy, Vol. 41, 2012, pp. 14-28. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.083
[18]	D. Bonilla, “Fuel Demand on UK Roads and Dieselisation of Fuel Economy,” Energy Policy, Vol. 37, No. 10, 2009, pp. 3769-3778. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.07.016
[19]	K. Storchmann, “Long-Run Gasoline Demand for Passenger Cars: The Role of Income Distribution,” Energy Economics, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2005, pp. 25-58. Hdoi:10.1016/j.eneco.2004.03.002
[20]	C. Hamilton and H. Turton, “Determinants of Emissions Growth in OECD Countries,” Energy Policy, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2002, pp. 63-71. Hdoi:10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00060-X
[21]	E. Hatzigeorgiou, H. Polatidis and D. Haralambopoulos, “CO2 Emissions in Greece for 1990-2002: A Decomposition Analysis and Comparison of Results Using the Arithmetic Mean Divisia Index and Logarithmic Mean Divisia Index techniques,” Energy, Vol. 33, No. 3, 2008, pp. 492-499. Hdoi:10.1016/j.energy.2007.09.014
[22]	P. Tapio, D. Banister, J. Luukkanen, J. Vehmas and R. Willamo, “Energy and Transport in Comparison: Immaterialisation and Decarbonisation in the EU15 between 1970 and 2000,” Energy Policy, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2007, pp. 433-451. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2005.11.031
[23]	B. Kavalov and S. Peteves, “Impacts of the Increasing Automotive Diesel Consumption in the EU,” European Commission Joint Research Centre, Ispra, 2004.
[24]	European Comission, “Regulation (EC) No. 443/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009,” European Comission, Brussels, 2009.
[25]	F. De Filippis and G. Scarano, “The Kyoto Protocol and European Energy Policy,” European View, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2010, pp. 39-46. Hdoi:10.1007/s12290-010-0121-7
[26]	C. Baum, “Residual Diagnostics for Cross-Section Time Series Regression Models,” The Stata Journal, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2001, pp. 101-104.
[27]	M. H. Pesaran, “General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels,” Working Paper 1229, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics, Faculty of Economics, Cambridge, 2004.
[28]	E. Frees, “Assessing Cross-Sectional Correlation in Panel Data,” Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 69, No. 2, 1995, pp. 393-414. Hdoi:10.1016/0304-4076(94)01658-M
[29]	E. Frees, “Longitudinal and Panel Data: Analysis and Applications in the Social Sciences,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004. Hdoi:10.1017/CBO9780511790928
[30]	W. R. Reed and H. Ye, “Which Panel Data Estimator should I Use?” Applied Economics, Vol. 43, No. 8, 2011, pp. 985-1000. Hdoi:10.1080/00036840802600087
[31]	A. Cameron and P. Triverdi, “Microeconometrics Using Stata,” Stata Press, College Station, Texas, 2009.
[32]	R. E. De Hoyos and V. Sarafidis, “Testing for Cross-Sectional Dependence in Panel-Data Models,” The Stata Journal, Vol. 6, No. 4, 2006, pp. 482-496.
[33]	N. Beck and J. Katz, “What to Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 89, No. 3, 1995, pp. 634-647. Hdoi:10.2307/2082979
[34]	E. Zervas, “SCO2 Benefit from the Increasing Percentage of Diesel Passenger Cars. Case of Ireland,” Energy Policy, Vol. 34, No. 17, 2006, pp. 2848-2857. Hdoi:10.1016/j.enpol.2005.05.010H