COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF ZEVS AND PARTIAL ZERO EMISSION VEHICLES
We begin this section by combining the cost estimates in Section 4 with the emission reductions in Section 5 to predict the cost-effectiveness of technologies that manufacturers may use to meet ZEV program requirements. Cost-effectiveness is measured as the cost per ton of non-methane organic gases (NMOG) plus oxides of nitrogen (NOx) emissions reduced. We then compare these estimates with the cost-effectiveness of other measures that have recently been adopted or are scheduled to be adopted to reduce emissions of ozone precursors in the South Coast. Finally, since cost-effectiveness calculations rarely cover all considerations that should be taken into account when developing policies and programs, we examine potential costs and benefits of California's ZEV program that are not reflected in our cost-effectiveness estimates.
We first calculate the cost-effectiveness of the various advanced vehicle technologies in the near term. For battery-powered electric vehicles (BPEVs), advanced technology partial zero emission electric vehicles (ATPZEVs), and partial zero emission vehicles (PZEVs), this period is 2003 through 2007. For direct hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (DHFCVs), it is 2006 through 2010, because we think it unlikely that fuel-cell vehicles will be ready for the market in more than pilot quantities before then (see Subsection 3.1). We then project cost-effectiveness when the vehicles are in volume production.
The low costs in volume production can be thought of as the payoff society can expect after incurring high costs when a new technology is introduced. But in evaluating whether an investment makes sense, society must consider not only the payoff, but also the costs of achieving it. Thus, we also calculate cost-effectiveness for each technology that includes the higher costs of vehicles produced prior to volume production.
We calculate the cost-effectiveness of moving to progressively tighter emission control standards. We first calculate the cost-effectiveness of a PZEV relative to a vehicle that meets the super ultra low emission vehicle (SULEV) exhaust and the near-zero evaporative standards. Then we calculate the cost-effectiveness of ATPZEVs, which in this case are gasoline hybrid electric vehicles (GHEVs), and ZEVs relative to PZEVs. This allows us to evaluate whether the PZEV standard is sensible on cost-effectiveness grounds and, in turn, whether it makes sense to further reduce vehicle emissions.
Our estimates of cost-effectiveness implicitly assume that consumers are willing to pay the same amount, on a lifecycle basis, for the vehicles being compared. It assumes, for example, that
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Book title: Driving Emissions to Zero: Are the Benefits of California's Zero Emission Vehicle Program Worth the Costs?. Contributors: Lloyd Dixon - Author, Isaac Porche - Author, Jonathan Kulick - Author. Publisher: Rand. Place of publication: Santa Monica, CA. Publication year: 2002. Page number: 81.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.