Implementing the electric car in the greater Copenhagen area Policy implications of a techno-institutional and economic analysis

Implementing the electric car in the greater Copenhagen area Policy implications of a techno-institutional and economic analysis Or: Why are these parking spaces empty? Nørrevoldgade, Copenhagen, May 2008 Aalborg University 2008 Kirsten Sophie Hasberg Maiken Mets

2

Sustainable Energy Planning and Management Department of Development and Planning Fibigerstræde 13 9220 Aalborg Øst http://www.energyplanning.aau.dk/ Title: Implementing the electric car in the greater Copenhagen area. Policy implications of a techno-institutional and economic analysis Theme: Sustainable Energy Planning and Management in an Institutional and Societal Perspective Project period: 04.02.2008 02.06.2008 Project group: 08em0807 Group members: Maiken Mets Kirsten Hasberg Supervisor: Dr. Frede Hvelplund External examiner: Anders Møller Reports printed: 4 Number of pages: 83 Number of appendices: 13 Abstract: This project analyzes the techno-institutional and economic setting of the electric car and develops a policy mix for the implementation of the electric car in the greater Copenhagen area. Based on the theories on institutional change, the project develops a theoretical frame consisting of a techno-structure and the institutional setting. Methodologically, the institutional analysis first identifies the barriers towards electric cars, by analyzing the historical and current situation of the electric car. Secondly, the private economic barriers are identified. Thirdly, the project creates incentives and identifies actors to overcome these barriers. This is done using different methods: literature research, economic data analysis, qualitative interviews, and the use of illustrative cases, reflecting the project s interdisciplinary and systemic approach, building on both institutional, economic and policy theory. The project concludes that the institutional lock-in of the existing transportation system based on the internal combustion engine requires active policies and facilitated partnerships to bring about institutional change of technology towards electric cars. The creation of five types of incentives are recommended: a congestion charging zone with free access for electric cars, creation of a efficiency-differentiated road pricing, provision of the opportunity for long distance traveling by car sharing and public transportation, availability of a plug with parking space and access to after-sale services. These incentives can be provided by cooperation among the actors identified in the framework of a facilitator. The policies recommended create an economic incentive for and reduce the non-monetary costs of electric cars in the two illustrative cases and are hence likely to bring about the institutional change of technology towards the electric car in the greater Copenhagen area.

Preface This project is written on the 8th semester of the Master Programme in Sustainable Energy Planning and Management at Aalborg University, Department of Development and Planning. The semester focus is the analysis of energy systems in an institutional and societal perspective. The reference system of this project follows the Chicago Style. Interviews and other personal communications are in accordance with the Chicago style not included in the reference list and are not given formal references but run into the text. In the appendix, a full list of interviews is found with dates. For readability, we limit the use of abbreviations and rather use the short terms (e.g. electric car for battery electric car). However, a list of abbreviations is found in the appendix. Footnotes are placed on each page and not as end-notes or appendixes to allow easy access to additional information. Thanks to our interview persons Per Møller Jørgensen, chair of the Danish Electric Car committee, Anne Vang, political spokesperson of The Danish Social Democrats in the Municipality of Copenhagen, Anders Foosnæs, consultant at the Danish Energy Association, Bjarke Fonnesbech, chairman of the Danish Car sharing fund and Bendt Iversen and Sune Grøntved, consultants at Drivegreen, the Danish Think importer. Also, we d like to thank Åsgeir Helland, Environmental Officer, Think Global, Norway, Benjamin Caun, Marketing Manager at Inventek Corporation, California, Karl Sperling, and Brian Vad Mathiesen, both Phd students at the Department for Development and Planning at Aalborg University, Clement Johan Ulrichsen, Economist at the Danish Competition Authority Maria Bugge Severinsen, Dong Energy and Birte Busch Thomsen, Environmental Protection Agency of the City of Copenhagen and Gustav Langdal, Municipality of Stockholm, for their comments and insights. Special thanks to our supervisor Dr. Frede Hvelplund for taking time and effort for long and fruitful discussions with us. It is our hope that the active involvement of actors and our focus on the concrete implementation and present technology makes the project and its policy recommendations relevant in the ongoing discussion about the future of the Danish energy system in general and the transportation system of the municipality of Copenhagen in particular. Maiken Mets Kirsten Sophie Hasberg

The table of content The table of content 1 1 Introducing the transportation sector and the role of the electric car 3 1.1 Current problems of the transportation sector 3 1.2 The electric car potential 3 1.3 Using a hypothesis to define the research question 5 1.4 Defining our institutional setting as researchers 6 2 Defining the theoretical approach and methodology 8 2.1 Theoretical approach and definition of central concepts 9 2.1.1 Defining the central concepts of institutional theory 9 2.1.1.1 Institutions 9 2.1.2 Applying institutional theory to the context of electric cars 13 2.2 Methodology 16 2.2.1 Project outline 16 2.2.2 Tools and methods used 17 2.3 Assumptions and delimitations 18 3 Identifying technological and institutional barriers 19 3.1 Technical Background 19 3.1.1 What is an electric car? 19 3.1.2 Why electric vehicles? 21 3.1.3 About The Think City 23 3.2 Techno-Institutional Analysis 26 3.2.1 Competition between ICE and EV creation of lock-in 26 3.2.2 Six factors needed to overcome lock-in 28 3.2.3 Electric car first attempt to unlock the market - history 28 3.2.4 Implementation of electric cars behind the scenes 30 3.2.5 What are the Main Barriers on a Way of Escaping from lock-in today? 32 3.3 Conclusion of chapter three 35 4 Private transportation alternatives from a socio- and private economic point of view in the greater Copenhagen area 36 4.1 Introduction: Transportation patterns 36 4.2 Total costs of private transportation 39 4.2.1 External costs of private transportation 40 4.3 Private costs of private transportation 43 4.3.1 The Jyllinge case family 43 4.3.2 Copenhagen 44 4.3.3 The private budgets of transportation of the two cases 45 4.3.4 Conclusion of chapter 4 49 5 Chapter 5 Establishing private person incentives for overcoming barriers in an actor framework 51 1

5.1 Solutions for overcoming barriers 52 5.1.1 Access to parking spaces with plugs 53 5.1.2 Free public parking 53 5.1.3 No registration tax and ownership charge on electric cars 53 5.1.4 Congestion Charging Zone with no charge for electric cars 54 5.1.5 Efficiency-differentiated road pricing 56 5.1.6 Access to after sale services 57 5.1.7 Free membership of car sharing association - access to multiple different vehicles 57 5.1.8 Discount on public transportation and access to shared cars in whole Denmark 58 5.1.9 Electric cars in the car sharing fleet 58 5.2 The role of facilitator 59 5.3 Changes in the private budgets of transportation 59 5.3.1 Jyllinge case: Costs of transportation alternatives after 60 5.3.2 Copenhagen case: Costs of transportation alternatives after 61 5.4 New transportation concepts induced by private person incentives 62 5.4.1 The Jyllinge case after, the policies and relevant partnerships are established 62 5.4.2 The Copenhagen case after, the policies and relevant partnerships are established 63 5.5 Partial conclusion 64 6 Chapter 6 Discussion of strengths and weaknesses 65 6.1 Strengths and weaknesses of theoretical approach 65 6.1.1 Discussing excluded disciplines 65 6.1.2 Discussing the interdisciplinary approach 66 6.2 Strengths and weaknesses of central sources 67 6.2.1 Research papers and evaluation reports 67 6.2.2 Statistical data sources 67 6.2.3 The six conditions for escaping institutional lock-in 68 6.2.4 Articles, parliamentary debates, company information, internet resources and interviews 68 6.2.5 Actor interviews 68 6.3 Strengths and weaknesses of methodology 69 6.4 Strengths and weaknesses of limitations and assumptions 70 6.4.1 The transportation sector and the problem of general sustainability 70 6.4.2 The technology chosen 70 6.4.3 The temporal and geographical limitation 71 6.4.4 The value of non-monetary costs and benefits 72 6.4.5 Assumptions on change in behaviour 72 6.4.6 Financial implications 72 6.5 Strengths and weaknesses of suggested private person incentives 73 6.5.1 Strengths 73 6.5.2 Weaknesses 73 6.6 Conclusion for chapter six 74 7 Conclusion 75 7.1 Future perspectives 77 The role of an electric car in the future energy system 77 References 78 2

1 Introducing the transportation sector and the role of the electric car 1.1 Current problems of the transportation sector The transportation sector is often termed the most problematic concerning climate change and sustainability in general. Today, the transport sector of Denmark is almost 100 % oil dependent. Although Denmark is the only EU member state that is self-sufficient with energy today, the Danish oil- and gas production is decreasing, and the Danish import dependence on oil is showing an increasing trend. Also, oil and hence gasoline prices are increasing, indicating the increasing scarcity of fossil resources. Energy efficiency in the transportation sector is generally low. When looking at the well-to-wheel performance, the average conversion efficiency of internal combustion engine is only 15-18 % (Jørgensen, 2008). At the same time, the energy use of the transportation sector has increased by 27,3 % compared to 1990 (Energistyrelsen 2007). Furthermore, local air and noise pollution, as well as congestion, are a significant problem caused by urban transportation. Today, Copenhagen has difficulties living up to the requirements set for air, concerning particles and nitrous dioxide (NO2), and noise, 40.000 households are affected by exceeding noise levels (Københavns Kommune 2007). 800 annual cases of too early deaths in Copenhagen are caused by air pollution (Thomsen 2008). Furthermore, 56.000 households are severely affected by noise levels (Thomsen 2008). 1.2 The electric car potential A long variety of reports and plans already today emphasize the potentials of the electric car in Denmark: - The report on alternative fuels for the transport sector, commissioned by the Danish government, describes electric cars as the greatest long-term potential, because they display the best energy efficiency and at the same time have great local environmental benefits in terms of less noise and no harmful local air emissions. Furthermore, the potential for interplay between electric cars and renewable energy, especially fluctuating wind power, is recognized. (Energistyrelsen 2008) 3

- The Danish Technology Council also recommends electric cars and plug-in hybrids as a mean for reducing energy consumption from the transport sector by 25 % in 2025. (Teknologirådet 2007) - Also, the Danish Parliament priorities for electric cars are set in the agreement on energy, where 35 million DKK are set aside over the years 2008-2012 for demonstration projects, and the registration tax exemption for electric cars is prolonged until 2012 (Folketinget 2008). - In the 2007 report on cleaner fuel technology for transportation, the municipality of Copenhagen presents a vision for 2035: The municipality of Copenhagen must be know as the environmental capital of Europe, where 100 % of the municipal vehicles are sustainable due to the use of biofuels, battery powered cars and hybrid electric vehicles, powered by batteries and hydrogen. (Københavns Kommune 2007b) - The Energy Plan of the The Danish Society of Engineers, sees that 20 % of all cars in 2030 are electric, and emphasizes the interaction with fluctuating wind power, since more than 2/3 of the electricity production in the plan is based on renewable energy sources. (Ingeniørforeningen i Danmark 2006). Other plans underline the need for action, concerning the present problems of the transportation sector: - The municipality of Copenhagen has set goals in its vision for 2015: a reduction of CO2-emissions by 20 % compared to 2007-levels, a reduction in noise levels, and air of a quality that does not damage the health of Copenhageners (Københavns Kommune 2007a). - Also the Danish Infrastructure Commission has a vision for the Danish transportation system of the future: (In 2030), the increase in transport is detached from the rise in CO2-emissions. Air pollution is reduced significantly, and noise levels are reduced. (Infrastrukturkommissionen 2008). Furthermore, the European Union has set requirements, with its 202020 -goals, to reduce CO2-emissions by 20 pct., increase the share of renewables by 20 pct. and increase energy efficiency by 20 pct. by 2020 compared to 1990-levels and simultaneously10 pct. of the energy used in the transportation sector has to be renewable energy (assuming that the biofuels target is interpreted as a general renewable energy target). (European Commission 2008) Considering these reports, plans and policies, as well as the severity of the range of problems outlined in 1.1., the scene is set for the implementation of electric cars: The electric car can contribute with high efficiency (targeting both the CO2 and the efficiency goal) and the possibility to run on renewable energy (targeting both the renewable energy goal and the transportation sector goal). It has low noise levels and no local emissions. 4

However, none of these reports answer to the question of how electric cars are to be implemented into the existing transportation system. Both, on the research side as well as on the policy side, there is a gap in describing concrete solutions and actions. Hence, the purpose of this project is to fill this gap by answering the question of how. The range limitations of the electric car, however, also play a significant part in the literature and discourse on electric cars: Although Horstmann (2005) concludes that the users of the electric car in have been satisfied, both Jørgensen (2008), KFB (2000) and Københavns Kommune (2007b) put emphasis on hydrogen as the fuel of the future because of the inherent range limitations of the electric car, although the reports are aware of the lower well-to-wheel efficiency of hydrogen. In the Danish media, the company Project Better Place has gained attention because it seeks to overcome the range limitations of electric cars (the Israeli- Californian company has a business concept of providing a battery exchange infrastructure for electric cars, planning cooperation with Dong Energy), (Dong Energy 2008). Recognizing these range limitations of the electric vehicle, we develop a system of multi-modal transportation, combining the electric car with car sharing and public transport. Our motivation as researchers for choosing electric cars as the area of our research is furthered by the future perspectives that the electric car possesses: By using vehicle-to-grid technology it can provide the possibility for electricity grid stabilization in a system with increased shares of fluctuating renewable energy. Also, it can solve the problem of the lack of CO2-regulation of the transport sector on the EU-level, because the use of electricity in the transport sector simultaneously includes it in to the European Emissions Trading system. 1.3 Using a hypothesis to define the research question Our background hypothesis for choosing our research question is: A transportation system based on the electric car has lower external costs than the current system based on the internal combustion engine car. However, institutional barriers exist, and private person incentives are not great enough to overcome these barriers, since private costs and non-monetary costs of the electric car exceed those of the internal combustion engine car. If the institutional barriers are identified by looking at historical experience and analyzing the present situation, it is possible to overcome the barriers by providing a range of solutions. These solutions consist of the internalization of the external costs of transportation using the polluter pays principle, and the 5

cooperation of actors to reduce non-monetary costs. In this way, private person incentives are created and the institutional barriers towards electric cars can be reduced. Hence, the electric car is implemented into the transportation system. Therefore, our research question is: How can the creation of private person incentives reduce institutional barriers towards electric cars and lead to the implementation of electric cars in the greater Copenhagen area, in order to reduce the global and local environmental impact of transportation? This is answered using the following sub-questions: - What are the barriers to the institutional change of technology towards electric car usage historically and today? - What are the social costs (externalities) and private costs of private transportation in the greater Copenhagen area of the current internal combustion engine vehicle and of the electric car? - How can relevant actors provide incentives for the private person to choose an electric car? 1.4 Defining our institutional setting as researchers Institutional theory is not only about the object studied, but also about the way the object is studied and the pattern of thought of the researcher. As Hodgson (2006) puts it, institutions are simultaneously both objective structures out there and subjective springs of human agency in the human head. In the same way, institutional analysis is both out there, studying institutional structures of the researched field, and in the researchers head, requiring us to think in a broad manner. Hence, the perspective of the project is holistic and systemic. Our educational background frames the way we conceive the world. We are students from two separate directions of study, electric power engineering and economics respectively; our awareness as researchers towards institutional factors has been created by our current educational setting in an interdisciplinary master programme. Jamison (2008) distinguishes three types of processes studied: ongoing processes, finished processes and future processes. This project studies a process of the first type. The implementation of the electric car is an ongoing process, and hence, our understanding is research as intervention, or interactive assessment 6

(Jamison 2008). Jamison (2008) uses three metaphors to describe the researchers role: fly on the wall spider in the web or queen bee in the honey comb. This project is a combination of the two latter: We as researchers are facilitators and consultants, playing both a participatory and advisory role. Because of the interactive role of our research, this project can be grouped into what Jamison calls changeoriented research, and is a way of cultivating the hybrid imagination : From theory of science perspective, we base our research on positivism (when doing economic analysis), social constructivism (when analyzing the social construction of technological change) and critical theory (by including policy suggestions). Studying a technical subject using tools from economics in an institutional frame implies that this project is by definition interdisciplinary. The theoretical and methodological basis is presented in chapter 2, underlining the interdisciplinary character of the project. The central concepts of institutional theory, the logic behind the chosen structure and the delimitations of the project are introduced. 7

2 Defining the theoretical approach and methodology Beginning with a discussion on the use of theory in general, this chapter consists of three subchapters, describing and discussing the theoretical approach and the central concepts of institutional theory, the methodology and the line of argument, and the delimitations and assumptions of the project. Theory is an intrinsic part of our understanding, but the theoretical background evolves throughout problembased project work, and is not systematic and detailed in advance. We understand research as a recursive process: Theory and concrete analysis feed each other to create the theoretical framework developed for this exact problem formulation. This perception of the usefulness of theory is also reflected by the following quote: There is nothing as practical as a good theory (Lewin 1951). It says that the good theory is practical and we see the value on theory if it can be applied to solve real-life problems. We see ourselves as practical theorists, as we are looking for a solution for a practical problem by applying operationalized theories for creating the knowledge. We have chosen a problem formulation with practical and concrete relevance. Hence, we have to apply theories and adjust existing theories to our concrete context. Institutional theory poses a possible explanatory framework to answer our research question. This might seem contradictory to the theoretical nature of the institutional focus, but as we show in section 2.1, theories can be operationalized and applied to the concrete context, creating our own theory. 8

2.1 Theoretical approach and definition of central concepts In this subchapter, the general theoretical background of institutional theory is defined; The theory is applied to our research question. Our own theoretical framework is created by introducing, using and critically reviewing the existing institutional research. 2.1.1 Defining the central concepts of institutional theory 2.1.1.1 Institutions According to North (1990), institutions are the rules of the game in society, or as described by Campbell (2004), the foundations of social life. According to Scott, institutions consist of three pillars: the regulative, normative and cultural/cognitive pillar. However, these definitions are very broad. To be able to apply the theory of institutions, we need an adequate conception of what an institution is. As a definition, we will use the following, borrowing from Hodgson (2006): Institutions structure, constrain and enable individual behaviour. Furthermore, Hodgson (2006) argues that actor and institutional structure, although distinct, are thus connected in a circle of mutual interaction and interdependence. That is, our focus on the private person is no contradiction to institutional analysis on the contrary. Both quotes emphasize that institutions have to be seen in interaction with the individual actor. The term institutions, institutional setting and institutional barriers are used interchangeably in this project. When using the terms, we have the structuring, constraining and enabling features of the regulative, normative and cultural-cognitive societal setting in mind. 2.1.1.2 Technology and technological change According to Arthur, technology can be defined as method or knowledge imbedded in artefacts (Arthur, 1991, cited in Unruh (2006)). However, this narrow view of technology ignores the important systemic interrelations among individual technologies. (Unruh 2006) Therefore, our understanding of technology builds on the theory on social construction of technology within the field of science and technology studies, 9

and on the writings by Hughes on Large Technological Systems (Hughes 1983). Hughes provides a long, but useful definition of technology (Hughes 1987): Technological systems contain messy, complex, problem-solving components. They are both socially constructed and society shaping. Among the components in technological systems are physical artefacts ( ), organizations ( ), scientific ( ) (and) legislative artefacts (and) natural resources. If a component is removed from a system or if its characteristics change, the other artefacts in the system will alter characteristics accordingly. This verbal definition makes the complexity of the concept of technology clear and emphasized the interdependent nature of the components. However, it is difficult to operationalize the concept of technological systems and its underlying components in applied research. Therefore, a graphical definition is used for a more condensed and operationalized framework for understanding technology, using a modified version of the technology definition of Hvelplund (2005) shown in figure 2-1. Figure 2-1 Definition of technology, inspired by Hvelplund (2005) and Hughes (1987). From this figure, we derive our definition of technology: Technology consists components of technique, organization, profit, product, knowledge and natural resource, which are interrelated and interdependent, and embedded in an institutional setting. Furthermore, the graphical representation, figure 2-1, allows for an applied understanding of technological 10

change. Borrowing from Hvelplund (2005), it is defined in the following way: Institutional change of technology (technological change) takes place when more than one of the components is changed. Hvelplund s definition did not include the sixth component: the natural resources, which is seen as part of technology by Hughes (1987). As the natural resource(s) is central component for technology development and the institutional change will take place, if this component is changed, we have included it to definition of technology. In this project, the terms technology and technological system are used interchangeably; in each case, we refer to the described understanding of technology as consisting of the interrelated components of technique, organization, profit, product, knowledge and natural resource(s), embedded in an institutional setting. The terms, technological change and institutional change of technology are used interchangeably as well. 2.1.1.3 Path dependency and lock-in: The importance of history is central in institutional analysis. As Hodgson (2006) argues: Because institutions simultaneously depend upon the activities of individuals and constrain and mould them, through this positive feedback they have strong self-reinforcing and self-perpetuating characteristics. These characteristics have been termed path dependence in the academic literature on technological change. The central question is: Why are some technologies dominant and others not? The early founders of the theory of path dependency are David and Arthur see historical events as the central cause (Arthur (1989), David (1985). That is, the choices of the past are institutionalized and restrict the possibility of choices of the present, creating a lock-in of technologies already present. For our purposes, we have chosen the definition of path dependency and lock-in characterized by Meyer and Schubert (2007): 1. Actors are thought to behave rationally in the sense that they always choose the technology which is best suited for them. However, technological paths are the result of an emergent evolution behind the backs of the actors. 2. Increasing returns and lock-in are emergent processes, which are not and cannot be the result of deliberate planning and mindful action. 3. Once a path is locked-in, only external shocks can break it. The terms, path dependency, institutional barriers and lock-in are used interchangeably in this project. 11

2.1.1.4 Path creation: The theory on path dependency has resulted in a broad academic literature on how this path dependency can be overcome, and how lock-in can be broken. Garud and Karnøe (2001) have developed a theory of path creation. For our purposes, the stepwise definition, characterized by Meyer and Schubert (2007) is used: 1. Powerful actors can strategically influence the development of a path. They can shape the path, while over time they are themselves shaped by the path. 2. Increasing returns and lock-in are subject to deliberate actions and tied in with broader social dynamics. 3. The creation, but also the ending of a path may be caused by deliberate actions which do not necessarily have to be external. The terms, path creation, overcoming or escaping lock-in, overcoming or escaping path dependency and overcoming institutional barriers are used interchangeably. We use the term techno-institutional system as a synthesis of the outlined terms and concepts. Building on Unruh (2000), we define the techno-institutional system as a self-referential system, where technological systems and institutions are feeding each other. These techno-institutional infrastructures create persistent incentive structures that strongly influence system evolution and stability. 12

2.1.2 Applying institutional theory to the context of electric cars The theories outlined in 2.1.1 are now combined into our own theoretical framework, shown in the following figure: Figure 2-2 The theoretical context of the project In the figure, the techno-institutional system as defined in section 2.1.1. is separated into its parts: The institutional setting are the institutions, the technological system is imbedded in. The techno-structure is the technological components of the technological system. The techno-structure can be understood as the hardware, whereas the institutional setting is the software. The figure represents the theory that we have constructed as a synthesis of existing theories. In the following, we define what we mean by each component, proceeding from left to right: 2.1.2.1 Techno-structure The techno-structure describes the technological structure that we create as a basis for our theory it does not reflect the technological situation today. The focus is on the transport need, which is split into long distance and short distance travelling. The electric car is implemented by using it for shorter commuting distances. In addition we introduce the shared car and the combination of public transport and car sharing as the solution to long distance travelling. The idea of combining the electric car with car sharing is also 13

proposed in Jørgensen (2007): A framework with a greater role to shared or rented cars at the expense of privately owned automobiles could probably provide better opportunities for electric vehicles and a framework with less use of the automobile We develop this inter-modal system to make it possible to reap the benefits of the electric car while avoiding its limitations with respect to range by using public transportation and car sharing: The disadvantage of the limited range of the electric car is turned into the advantage of a more flexible use of transportation means. The user can choose the means of transportation according to their need. The electric car can contribute to solving these different types of problems outlined in chapter 1. Depending on the residential location of a household, the electric car can be implemented in two ways: - Combined with car sharing in urban areas, the electric car can become part of the car sharing fleet, while public transportation takes care of the majority of commuting on a daily basis - Ownership of an electric car in extra-urban areas can be combined with car sharing of conventional cars, acting as a range extender to the electric car. For both, the electric car can also be used for long distance travelling if combined with rail transport. As part of a car sharing system, the electric car is available at train stations and provides the possibility for reaching the final destination away from the main rail lines. Our focus is on the need for transportation as a transportation service, not the need for a privately owned car for all possible trips. 2.1.2.2 Institutional setting Barriers: As described above, we use the term barrier interchangeably with other terms describing path dependency. In our context, we need a precise definition of barriers to be able to analyze them. Cowan and Hulten (1996) operationalize the analysis of technological change in the electric car industry by using six conditions for escaping lock-in: 1.) Crisis in the existing technology, 2.) Regulation, 3.) Technological break through, 4.) Changes in taste, 5.) Niche markets and 6.) Scientific results. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) These conditions are used for the techno-institutional analysis of the electric vehicles, and are described in more detail in chapter 3. The six conditions are used to explain and apply the concepts of path dependency and path creation: When the six conditions are not in place, institutional barriers are preventing technological change. When the six conditions are fulfilled, path dependence is overcome and opens the way for path creation. 14

Incentives: We define incentives as factors (monetary or non-monetary) that give the private person a motive for a particular action in our case, switching from driving conventional combustion engine car to electric and shared car. With this definition, we emphasize both the direct incentives affecting the private budget, as well as the non-monetary incentives, that can be understood as the embeddedness of the market in the existing institutional setting of the internal combustion engine. The terms private person incentives, policy suggestions, suggested solutions and first-mover advantage package are used interchangeably. With all these terms, we refer to the incentive-column in our theoretical framework. When developing incentives, we build our work on theories of externalities and policies. A short description of those theories is presented below. Externalities are the classic case of market failure. Following Hanley (2007), when market failure occurs, a wedge exists between what a private person does, given market prices, and what would be the socially optimal course of action. The table below shows how costs can be split into internal and external, variable and fixed and market and non-market. Costs Variable fixed Internal Fuel, parking, Vehicle operation and maintenance, accident risk, user travel time and stress Vehicle ownership, taxes, insurance, fixed parking, feeling of freedom and independence (unused range capacity of ICE), feeling of doing something good for the environment External Accident, congestion, air pollution, noise, barrier effect, effects on flora and fauna, waste (for BEV) Free parking, traffic planning and regulation, road infrastructure, fuel infrastructure, landuse (opportunity costs), land-use impacts (resulting from low-density, automobileoriented land use), social costs (inequality) Table 2-1. Fixed and variable internal costs and fixed and variable external costs. Source: Miljøstyrelsen (2001) and Litman (1997). Note: Italics indicates non-market. The true costs of the private person actions are not reflected in market prices, since market prices do not reflect the external cost of the private decision e.g. the costs of air pollution when driving a car. Because the individual does not have to pay for the externalities created, he or she lacks sufficient economic incentives to act in accordance with the true costs of their action. That is, there is a divergence between social and private costs of private action. To avoid this situation, externalities must be internalized. The polluter pays principle is a popular formulation of the theory on internalizing externalities: The private person must pay the full costs of their actions. 15

Policy regulation can be justified by market failure as described above, or by institutional lock-in in general. It is powerful tool for creating incentives for private person in order to have influence on its behaviour. We understand policy regulation in a broad sense, building on Gunningham and Grabosky (1998). Gunningham and Grabosky (1998) emphasize involvement of relevant actors, partnerships among actors, as well as mixing different policies. This approach is called smart regulation. Actors: In the upper part of our technological framework illustration, we are placing relevant actors that can create the suggested private person incentives. The field is empty at this stage of analysis, since relevant actors are identified through the techno-institutional analysis. The green field underneath the actor row shows that the institutional setting is also still undefined at this stage of our analysis. 2.2 Methodology In this subchapter, we outline the project structure and explain its line of argument. Then, the methods and tools, applied for gathering, handling and analyzing the knowledge, are introduced. 2.2.1 Project outline The general line of argument of the project is to start with the broad historical basis, narrowing it down to the specific problem analyzed. We introduce our project by arguing for the necessity of our research, referring to existing research and reports calling for electric cars, but not developing any policy suggestions for their implementation. Then, we present the theoretical and methodological background and define the central concepts to ensure a common understanding of the foundations of the project. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of the project, this is done in relatively great detail, since different fields of study Figure 2-3 Project structure (institutional theory, economics, and political theory) are recombined. Here, our theoretical frame is presented, and the techno-structure used throughout the analysis is presented. To be able to identify the institutional barriers towards electric cars, we make a techno-institutional analysis using the six steps of institutional analysis of Cowan and Hulten (1996) as a framework. We 16

analyze the historical setting of the electric car in general and in Denmark in particular, splitting the analysis into a historical and a current part. This analysis is hence used to identify the barriers towards electric cars. To understand the barriers and to sustain the validity of our analysis, the private economic background is analyzed by using the interactive online transport budget of Vejdirektoratet (2006) and data on the external costs of transportation of the Danish Ministry of Transportation (DMT 2004). To apply our theoretical analysis to the real-world question of our problem formulation, we create solutions in the form of private person incentives to overcome the identified institutional barriers in the municipality of Copenhagen. To qualify our analysis, we discuss its findings and balance our conclusion according to the discussed elements. The future perspectives of the implementation of electric car are outlined. 2.2.2 Tools and methods used For data and knowledge gathering the following tools are used and methods applied: 1) Research papers from scientific databases from various fields, including historical research papers, theoretical papers, economic papers, technical engineering papers and papers applying institutional theory 2) Official documents and reports 3) Studying books 4) Sustainable Energy Planning and Management course s lectures slides 5) Media articles and publications 6) Internet research 7) Actor interviews 8) Case studies 9) Economic data analysis Economic data analysis are done in order to estimate the private spending on transportation and find out, how the external costs of transportation affect it. Case studies are used for historical background study as well as to create illustrative cases for our theoretical approach its results for private person. 17

2.3 Assumptions and delimitations Here are listed the assumptions and delimitations, which define the point of departure of our project. - We focus on private transportation only. - Focus is on the implementation of the electric car. General transportation policies are discussed in chapter six under policy discussion, but not analyzed in the central parts of our project. - We focus only on the electric Think car. The technical reasons for this choice are given in chapter three. - The actors, not relevant for the private person incentives creation, are left out. - The actor interviews are not used for discourse analysis, but for background information and for evaluation of our suggested model. We do not use our actor interviews to analyze power structures either. - We do not analyze profit structures or socio-economic impact, only the private budget for transportation. - Geographically, we limit our analysis by focusing on greater Copenhagen area. - We do not focus on policies for electricity production. - The focus is on present technology, which is available and on market already today. - The technical effects on the electricity grid of increased electric car use are neither analyzed nor modelled. - In the fifth chapter, we are considering only the incentives defined in the research question: congestion charging zone with free access for electric cars, creation of a efficiency-differentiated road pricing, provision of the opportunity for long distance travelling by car sharing and public transportation, availability of a plug with parking space and access to after-sale services. Other solutions might be able to create the same private person incentives, but only these five incentives are considered. Other assumptions of more concrete character (e.g. economic assumptions in chapter 4) are mentioned in the chapters where used. Having presented our theoretical background, methodology as well as our assumptions and limitations, we now proceed to the two analytical chapter: The techno-institutional analysis in chapter 3 and the economic analysis in chapter 4. In chapter 6, the choices made in this chapter are evaluated, critically reviewed and discussed. 18

3 Identifying technological and institutional barriers The aim of this chapter is to answer for one the research sub-questions: What are the barriers to the institutional change of technology towards electric car usage historically and today? To answer to this sub-question, the chapter is divided into two subchapters: The technological background and the technoinstitutional analysis. 3.1 Technical Background 3.1.1 What is an electric car? An electric car is a car, which is propelled solely or partly by an electric drivetrain rather than internal combustion engine (ICE) only. Electricity may be used directly as a fuel in battery electric vehicles (BEV) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV), or be converted into hydrogen and supplied for fuel fuel cell vehicles (FCV) or in ICE based vehicles. (Jørgensen 2008) The BEV has a battery for energy storage and an electric transmission system from engine output shaft to wheels. The PHEV has a battery and electric drivetrain combined with ICE and fuel tank. The ICE is used generate electricity on board in order to charge the battery. The battery can also be recharged from the grid. (Jørgensen 2008) It lies at hand to perceive the plug-in hybrid as the natural successor to the internal combustion engine cars, paving the way towards electric cars, since they combine the range of the gasoline car with the use of electricity from the grid of the electric car. However, we choose to focus on the pure electric car. There are several reasons for focusing on the electric car rather than on the plug-in hybrid: The range of modern electric cars (i.e. using non lead-acid batteries) can cover distances that by far overshoot the daily transportation need of most car owners in Denmark (see chapter 4) 19

Today, there are no commercially available plug-in hybrid cars 1 (WWF 2008), although a number of plug-in hybrids are planned (e.g.toyota Prius plug-in, Volvo Recharge, GM Volt and Opel Flextreme) and hybrid cars without the possibility of plugging in exist (e.g. (e.g. Lexus GS 450h, Toyota Prius, Honda Civic IMA). Having to have both the combustion and electric engines gives the hybrid car an inherent disadvantage compared to both pure combustion engine cars and pure electric vehicles, and makes it inherently more expensive to produce than the pure electric car 2. Of course it is possible that plug-in hybrids will be sold at similar or lower prices than the electric car because of the economies of scale that big car producers benefit from, and which are not yet to the same extend seen the electric car market. The difficulty of assessing the emissions of a plug-in hybrid is another reason to focus on the pure electric car. In theory, there is no guarantee that the owner will plug in the car, and could be using the combustion engine only or more realistically: it depends on the driver, whether the electric mode or the combustion mode is the dominant propulsion system of the car. The Danish Ministry of Taxation is rejecting plug-in cars from any taxation benefit for this reason (Ingeniøren, 2007). The pure electric car is already exempted from registration tax in Denmark today. The electric car outperforms the plug-in hybrid electric car in terms of well-to-wheel performance, since the efficiency of the plug-in hybrid electric car lies between that of the pure internal combustion engine car and the electric car. Life cycle analyses, which do not only include well-to-wheel analysis, but the entire production and waste treatment of cars, show that the pure battery electric cars outperform other cars. This means that although batteries might be made of environmentally damaging materials, the overall environmental performance of the electric car remains positive. (Lane 2006) The FCV is powered by electricity generated in a fuel cell. This means that electricity is generated onboard out of hydrogen gas, liquid hydrogen, ethanol, reformed methanol, natural gas or petrol. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) 1 according to interview with Per Møller Jørgensen, Dansk Elbil Komité 2 ibid. 20

Compared to battery electric vehicle, the range of FCV is considerably higher but the drawbacks are the lower efficiency and the infrastructure requirements, as well as the high cost of this technology. Hydrogen, produced by electrolysis based on electricity from current Danish energy system, has higher CO2 emissions and energy consumption than the present fuels for cars. (Jørgensen 2008) This is also one of the reasons, why the BEV is in the main focus in this project. In this project the term electric car is used about a pure electric vehicle powered by chemical energy stored in rechargeable battery packs, which are carried on-board of the vehicle. Instead of internal combustion engine the energy is utilized in electric motor and in motor controllers, which makes the silent ICE vehicles, when accelerating. As no fuels are burned, it produces no exhaust fumes and has zero local emissions, when driving. If charged from most forms of renewable energy, the overall pollution will be minimal or close to zero. 3.1.2 Why electric vehicles? The main differences between electrical and internal combustion engines are the difference in efficiency and local emissions. If to compare the electrical engine to a traditional combustion engine, the difference in energy use is up to four times. An electrical engine s efficiency is from 80% to 85% for present motors and in future may reach up to 92% or even higher for advanced electric vehicles, whilst the internal combustion engine utilises only 15 to 18% of energy, if the transmission and idling losses are included - most of the energy provided from fossil fuels disappears as heat. In case of electric cars, the efficiency depends also on the type of battery and its recharging efficiency, which are respectively 70-85% and 95%. As it is possible to have about 70-75% of braking losses recovered in case of BEV, the regeneration of braking losses increases the total average vehicle energy efficiency by 15-20%. (Jørgensen 2008) Electric vehicles consume significantly less primary energy per driven kilometre and it is proved that even if the electricity is based on fossil-rich energy mix, the overall reduction of greenhouse gas emissions can be delivered by electric vehicles. (WWF 2008) The graph below shows the calculated CO2 emissions per kilometre for an average Danish passenger electric car (the first two columns surrounded by the red circle on the graph), assuming that the electricity is covered by the Danish supply system as of 2004. For comparison the gasoline and diesel drive vehicles the estimated well-to-wheel emissions are presented (the last two columns surrounded by red circle on a graph). 21

Figure 3-1 Average CO2 emission for electric and conventional ICE automobiles. Source: (Jørgensen 2008) As it can be seen from the table the BEV will have lower CO2 emissions, even with the present energy sources mix in Danish electricity generation system. This is still a modest assessment, as there is planned to have considerable improvements in the Danish electricity supply system in the nearest future. (Jørgensen 2008) Also, the fact that the EVs can be utilized as decentralized power generation units in the future is not considered. Having all the advantages of battery electric vehicle in a mind, the Th!nk City car has been chosen to fill the place of technology in this project. Having a certain car in focus is needed in order to be able to make concrete calculations in chapter 4 and to present the private budget consequences of the suggested policies in chapter 5. The reasons, why Th!nk City is chosen are listed below: The Think City is in production today. The first cars rolled out from the factory in Aurskog, Norway, in April this year. 3 The Think company has marketing plans for Denmark in the near future (2008/2009) 4. This is important, since the focus of our project is on concrete possibilities today. The Think City is not the cheapest electric car on the world market today, primarily because of its battery leasing pack. Therefore, using a relatively expensive model as an example makes the calculations presented valid and the policy suggestions effective on other, cheaper car types as well. 3 interview, Drivegreen 4 ibid. 22

Later in this chapter, the range and speed of the electric car are identified as crucial factors causing the failure of the electric car in the 1990 ies and early 2000 s. Therefore, central criteria for a case vehicle are range and speed, which are both primarily dependent on the battery type. This required us to focus on a car using modern battery technology. This is the case for the Think City, currently sold with a battery package using a Zebra battery (see section 3.1.2) The Think City is registered as a car and hence has gone through crash tests. (Other electric cars are registered as quadricycles which need not be crash tested) This does not mean that no better choice of electric car exists just that the Think City fulfils our requirements for a case study vehicle. It is outside the scope of this project to make a full survey of currently available electric cars and their characteristics. 3.1.3 About The Think City Th!nk is a car company, which offers environmentally friendly vehicles, produced in low carbon factory in Norway. (Think 2008a) It has been producing and developing urban mobility solutions since the early 1990s. Investors like to call it as The Car Company of the 21 st Century. Think (2008b) It can travel up to 200 kilometres with single charge and go as fast as 100 km/h. (Think 2008a) The first prototype of the Th!nk City was developed in 1991 and in 1999 it was put in serial production. In 2007 the 5 th generation Th!nk city went into serial production. The Think is 95% recyclable and also made of recycled materials. Think (2008c) TH!NK city has been designed to cope with a variety of battery systems and technologies, at the moment three types of batteries are used: the Zebra (sodium based hot battery) and two types of lithium based batteries. The modular design also accommodates for alternative technologies such as hydrogen power. The battery can be fully charged from the 10 or 16 A socket during the night for example, when there is excess energy production. Also, the fast charging is possible and can be implemented with the growing number of electric vehicles, when it is becoming feasible and system is standardized. Think (2008d) The Zebra battery is sodium based battery, which has high energy density. It is so called hot battery, as it is operating between temperatures from 270 to 350 degrees. Due to the high temperatures the hot materials are contained sealed and vacuum insulated container, which makes it possible for a battery to provide long range performance independently from ambient temperature. This is efficient in areas with very cold or hot 23

climate. As the battery needs to retain the temperature in order to be ready for the next trip, it has to be plugged in, when not in use. Think (2008d) Both lithium-based systems, A123 and Enerdel, operate at ambient temperatures, which eliminate the need to be plugged in, when not in use. At the moment Th!nk co-operates with two suppliers for those battery systems. Think (2008d) In order to take full responsibility of the battery operation throughout the car life span the battery will be leased by Th!nk company, with the fee of 1495 DKK per month. This fee for the battery package is included in economic calculations in chapter 4. The fee includes a full maintenance service agreement and insurance. Think (2008d) Figure 3-2 Think City Source: Think (2008e) Figure 3-3 Think City Source: Think (2008e) 24

Figure 3-4 Think City Car Source: Think (2008e) As described in chapter 2, the technology of electric cars is a system, which is socially constructed and shaped by institutions. The figure below helps us to understand the institutional settings around Th!nk car technology. It can clearly be seen that it is very different from the conventional car technology. This means that with change in car technology, the change in institutional setting around it is also needed. What is present and what is still needed to carry through this change are discussed later in this chapter. Figure 3-5 The Th!nk car technology in the institutional context. 25

The figure above helps to understand the electric vehicle technology in its institutional setting. The components presented on a figure are relevant for integrating technology and have to be present. These components fulfil the technology, described as interrelated parts in definition in chapter 2. The components, presented on a figure above, can be mapped under those interlinked parts as follows: 1) Product. It is seen as the car itself. Here it is the Th!nk City car. 2) Technique. Here the charging infrastructure, the after sale services and the battery technologies. 3) Knowledge. It is about the information, learning and experiencing. 4) Organization. All the relevant actors and actors, who are affected by the presented product and technique, are meant. In current figure, all components can be placed under that part. 5) Profit. It is the market. 6) Resources. The components needed to make the car, as well as the energy resources needed for driving. This way of perceiving the present electric vehicle technology in institutional context helps us later in this chapter identify and understand the barriers towards electric cars. 3.2 Techno-Institutional Analysis The aim of doing the techno-institutional analysis is to identify the barriers towards creating a path for the electric car technology. To conduct the analysis the history of electric cars technology is studied in order to have understanding of the path dependence, created by internal combustion engine and what it takes to overcome it. 3.2.1 Competition between ICE and EV creation of lock-in Today, the ICE vehicle technology has achieved dominance in the market and has created a lock-in. It is not simple for the new technology to compete on the market, even if they outperform existing technology. Both consumers and producers are locked in: Users have invested money and time in the dominant technology, and producers benefit from economies of scale. The electric drive technology is almost a century old and has been in use since. In 1900, its sales even outstripped their gasoline-powered competitors. (WWF 2008) The electric cars were presented as pleasure cars on those times. Later with the internal combustion engine technology development, the differences 26

between technologies became more pronounced, as the electric cars were perceived as city cars and the ICE car as touring cars. Due to the fact that during those times the oil was cheap and abundant resource as well as the external costs of using it were unknown, the internal combustion engine became a dominant technology. The advantages of the ICE were the lower cost, longer range and no need for planning the recharging time. Now, after a century of infrastructural development based on ICE vehicles, a lock-in is created (defined in chapter 2), which has kept the disruptive technologies out of competition. (WWF 2008) This creation of lock-in is illustrated on a figure 3-6 through five phases during the time period of 1885 till today. The latest time period is presented as escape, which is still ongoing process today. Figure 3-6. Competition between electric drive and gasoline car. Inspired by (Cowan and Hulten 1996) As it is seen from the figure 3-6, the escape from ICE based technological lock-in started already ten years ago on for today it has take a global form. The stage of this escape in Copenhagen will be evaluated through analyzing the impact of six factors, which existence is needed to unlock the automobile market. These six factors are identified by Cowan and Hulten, in their research in 1996. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) 27

3.2.2 Six factors needed to overcome lock-in It is needed to estimate the possible impact of each factor and its contribution to escape from lock-in. To unlock the market, all those factors have to be met. These factors are used to structure the two tables below in this chapter. The first table is looking into history and through the cases that took place during 70s the first attempt of escaping lock-in is analyzed on a global level. The second table analyzes the degree of lock-in today. These six factors and the idea behind them is explained in more detail below. 1. Crisis in the existing technology. Here the change in technology is needed do to the global crises related to the scarce resource use and its inefficient use. The more efficient vehicle technologies and alternative fuels are needed. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) 2. Regulation. These are global, national and local policies related to transport sector. Here the private person and automakers incentives created by different policies are discussed. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) 3. Technological breakthrough. Here the breakthrough is expected to create a cost breakthrough. It is the way from research and development to the market and mass production and can be supported by the other factors mentioned here. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) 4. Changes in taste. The growing awareness of the environmental and health impacts from the existing technology the mass market for environmentally adapted products can be created. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) 5. Niche markets. The emerging new technologies can be facilitated in case there are consumers who are willing to invest into it before the low cost production and well developed after-sale services. The early adopters provide the learning of the new technology. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) 6. Scientific results. Science provides tools to measure the external effects of transportation and enables the inventors and entrepreneurs to transform the science into innovations and new inventions. Due to recognised external impacts of technologies the scientific results can put the development pressure on old technologies as well as provide new competitive technological solutions. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) 3.2.3 Electric car first attempt to unlock the market - history The electric car did not succeed with escaping lock-in after the oil crises in 1972-1973. Using the six steps, the barriers will be identified when analyzing and studying the history of the events. 28

Some of the steps are studied through Swedish experience. In 1993, the Swedish Transportation and Communications Research Board (KFB) began a program, where during eight years 120 million SEK were invested into electric drive research, development and demonstration projects with the goal to assess the potential for electric and hybrid cars in short and long term perspective, to assess the effects on markets, communities and in the environment as well as to support the introduction and demonstration of those technologies. The study of this Electric and Hybrid vehicle program is made by Lund Institute of technology in which they have evaluated the vehicles infrastructure and gathered the user experience. (KFB 2000) 1) Crisis in the existing technology In 1970s the three events - the discourse on the limits to growth, the oil crisis in 1972-73 and the nuclear debate - served the need to bring alternative, renewable energy resources and technologies into focus. (Høyer 2008) 2) Regulation To overcome health problems in Los Angeles, California Air Resource Board decided in 1990 that in 1998 2% of all new sold cars must be zero emission and 10% by the year 2003.The same regulation was applied by 10 additional U.S states. In contrast to U.S. technology-forcing regulation in France the policies encouraged the development of EV and in Sweden to purchase one. (KFB 2000), (Calef and Goble 2007) The air quality regulations have been a catalyst effect on EV technology development. As the introduction of electric drive technology was supported by government, there was competition to limited funding. Successful introduction of EVs would mean potential reduction in state/local revenue (taxes, gasoline and diesel taxes). (KFB 2000) 3) Technological breakthrough There was no technological breakthrough - the battery technology did no develop fast enough. The range and the vehicle performance have remained a problem. Also the time period needed for recharging between trips is too long as well as the access to local charging capability has been problematic. (Romm 2006) True, the ZEV mandate in California accelerated development of advanced batteries for EVs, also fuel cells and electric drive trains. (Calef and Goble 2007) The policies in California focused on technology and not on human behaviour. The mandate s outcome is the introduction of HEVs, the vehicles the consumers accepted. (Calef and Goble 2007) The lack of clear standard for charging infrastructure has been a problem the recharging system as well as the recharging protocols can differ from producer to producer. (KFB 2000) From the safety point of view, the battery EV accidents may cause unusual problems fires and fumes from rapid battery discharge. There is no available information regarding whether they are more or less dangerous than ICE vehicles, which carry flammable fuels. (KFB 2000) 4) Changes in taste During the 1970s, active demonstrations and green movements created environmental awareness. The early electric car adopters loved their cars and formed the supporting group. Compared to majority, the voice of EV supporters remained silent. The applications for the EV were seen as a city car or urban service vehicle. (KFB 2000) The EVs are selected for inner city commuting. It is noted that the owners usually have several vehicles in a fleet, which allows them to choose the EV for shorter and conventional vehicle for longer distances. (Cowan and Hulten 1996) Studies indicate that vehicle users are not willing compromise with the performance of conventional vehicle, even when realizing that the actual driving need can met in large extent by EV. 29

Mainly positive feedback in using electric vehicles has been reported from company drivers. There was no broad interest among private passengers towards electric cars, even if the technology was subsidised. The early buyers were mostly EV technology enthusiasts, when the next generation buyers were more likely to compare the technology to ICE based one. (KFB 2000) The Swedish experience includes that the only chance for the EV to become a viable transportation alternative is if they will provide something more valuable, beside the environmentally friendliness and silent engine, for the customer than the conventional counterparts. (KFB 2000) 5) Niche markets The market for EVs is still in its infancy. (KFB 2000) The new transportation technologies, like electric, hydrogen and electric car, entering to the market must compete with existing technologies that provide similar services. From this point the history is important. New technologies often have to adapt in path-dependent ways to previous investments and policy decisions, which have been often made decades in the past. The service and maintenance support have not been sufficient enough. It is because, the local retailers interest have not been motivated enough, the strong local buyer-supplier relationships did not develop. (KFB 2000) The problem with EV is that nobody knows the resale value of this car, due to batteries that may obsolete. (KFB 2000) There was recognised a lack of balanced factual information for all actors. (KFB 2000) Due to lack of consumer demand the BEV was said to be infeasible to produce. (Calef and Goble 2007) Even though there has not been enough demand and the EVs have been produced in small numbers, the price has been fallen remarkably. Mass production of the lead-acid and nickel-cadmium batteries have made this possible. (KFB 2000) Common procurements, practiced in Stockholm, helped to achieve lower prices for the vehicles. (KFB 2000) The creation of standards for charging has become a priority for automakers as well for transport planners. (KFB 2000) The fast charging or the battery exchanges, seen as solutions for the battery range problem, have not yet proved to be successful. (KFB 2000) The studies in Sweden noted that technology for slow and fast charging is reliable and fairly inexpensive and some of the energy companies are willing to provide financial support for infrastructure provision and sites maintenance. (KFB 2000) 6) Scientific results Were not always made clear and presented through reliable sources. There was a need for information as well as for education. (KFB 2000) Table 3-1 The six factors needed to present to escape from lock-in, from the first attempt to escape. 3.2.4 Implementation of electric cars behind the scenes To describe how the institutional lock-in as the automakers and oil groups lobbyism failed in the attempt to introduce electric drive, the documental story Who killed the electric car?, presented by EV1 support groups, is brought as an illustrative example: 30

In 1996 in California an electric plug-in carev1 was released by General Motors (GM). In the beginning the battery had a range only of 64 kilometres without a recharge, but later the range, with different battery technology, reached up to 258 kilometres. (P. Reed 2006) To support a growing number of electric cars that were brought, the recharging stations were built in California. Picture 3-1 EV1 recharging station Source: (SPC 2008b) 3.2.4.1 Why did the EV1 not survive? In 1990 the California Air Resources Board (CARB) passed Zero Emissions Mandate (ZEV). The ZEV was radically stating that two percent of new vehicles sold in California should be emission-free by 1998 and ten percent by 2003. This mandate seemed to give birth to the EV1, but it did not last long. (P. Reed 2006). The oil companies perceived the appearance of EV as a serious threat to their monopoly on fuels and were directly hostile to the mandate, while automobile industries were reluctant to it, due to the needed configurations in their industries. (Calef and Goble 2007). By contributing money to candidates to political office the oil companies indirectly influenced public policy formulation. During the 1994 to 1995 more than 1.3 million dollars were donated to legislative candidates by six biggest oil companies and auto industry. Also, an estimated 3.5 million dollars were spent by Mobil Oil Corporation on advocacy advertising in public magazines and journals in order to secure the approval of the general public. (Calef and Goble 2007) Under the pressure of auto industry the law was repealed and the due to that the electric cars like EV1, Toyota RAV4 and Ford Ranger were sent to shredder. Most of the electric cars as well as the EV1 was pulled out of circulation and destroyed systematically by GM. (P. Reed 2006) 31

Reed (2996) raises the question: What is the automakers and politicians real interest? Is it searching solutions for oil dependence or bankroll the oil companies? (P. Reed 2006) If the mandate would not have been repealed, could the EV1 have survived? The official reason for taking the EV1s back was that they did not sell. Despite that, the EV1 drivers loved it and fought to keep it. They said that this car was silent, futuristic and cool. (P. Reed 2006). As there were errors with technology and strong opposition against too forcing regulations the niche market for battery electric vehicles did not develop strong enough. Due to that all the six factors were not present or fulfilled and the technological escape did not happen. 3.2.5 What are the Main Barriers on a Way of Escaping from lock-in today? As the concern about the climate change has become a global issue, actions have been taken in different level. To evaluate the possibility for the EV to break through the automobile market in Denmark, the six steps are gone through again. During this process the barriers towards fulfilling all the needed factors are identified. 1) Crisis in the existing technology All the modern industrialized societies face the problem of air pollution produced by ICE vehicles. In spite of improvements in ICE technology, in most urban areas the air pollution still exceeds the levels, which are determined to be harmful to human health. (Calef and Goble 2007) To protect the human health some cities have applied traffic restrictions already. (Mierlo et al. 2006) 2) Regulation Already today in some forward looking cities there are incentives to promote low and zero emission vehicles, like making them cheaper and creating conditions for more convenient driving. For example, in London, electrical cars are exempted from the congestion charge, which applies, when entering in city centre. Also, in Italy entering to certain city centres with combustion engine car is prohibited but allowed with zero emission cars. In Norway electric car drivers can benefit from the permission to use public transport lanes, driving through from all toll booths with no charge and free public parking. (Think 2008c) 3) Technological breakthrough Regenerative braking, which enables to recover the energy during breaking it forms a significant proportion of the energy expended during acceleration. (Jørgensen 2008, EVDL 2007) This type of breaking also reduces the wear and tear on friction brakes less maintenance. The battery electric car technology is less complex than the hybrid or fuel-cell car. Tesla Roadster prototype, uses Lithium-Ion batteries and can travel 394 km per charge with an equivalent fuel efficiency 1,74L/100km. It can reach 97km/h in 4 seconds, with 185kW motor rate. (Eisenstein 2007) In December 2007, the Fortune reported on eleven companies plan to offer high-way electric cars within few years. There has been a rapid development in battery technologies since the late 1990s due to the demand for laptop computers and mobile phones. The electric vehicle has reaped the benefits of this development. In 2005, Altairnano s NanoSafe batteries are rechargeable in around 10 minutes. (ABG 2007) There are new lithium-ion batteries available, which can provide 400-500km per charge. Lithium is also 32

cheaper than nickel, which is used in earlier batteries. (Reuters 2007) The battery technology has been a challenge and still is. The development of battery technologies during the last decades shows the possibility of making a technical and economic breakthrough in a short term in hand with market development. (Mierlo et al. 2006) 4) Changes in taste The main factors that have had influence on the peoples attitude are the oil prices, rise in environmental awareness as well as technological breakthroughs. 5) Niche markets The concern and action against the climate change have created incentives for further future technology developments and environmental solutions. As the electric car is recognized as the future pathway, its development is in rapid process, all the biggest automobile producers are working on electric drive vehicles at the moment. For example the development of electric vehicles is announced by Mitsubishi, Renault/Nissan wants to have pure electric vehicles on the road by 2012 and Daimler prepares for a production launch of electric cars in 2010. (J. Reed 2007) 6) Scientific results Studies in on environmental balance of battery electric vehicles compared to ICE cars have shown substantial benefits from reduced emissions and primary energy consumption and thus from reduced CO2 emissions. (Mierlo and Maggetto 2006) Today it is also possible to use EV as an energy storage that can help to meet short-term and random fluctuations in electricity demand and in that way to avoid the frequency regulation by conventional power plant. (Dell et al. 2001) V2G battery electric vehicle as a buffer that can provide power to grid during the peak load periods and absorb the excess generation of wind-power for example. Also can be used as a backup during the blackouts. (V2G 2007) The possibility to achieve substantial energy economy and reduction in CO2 emissions by using intelligent charging periods of the EVs, with existing electricity infrastructure, has to be studied further. (Mierlo et al. 2006) Battery and hybrid electric vehicles are seen as a midterm mobility solutions, preparing a future shared with hydrogen economy. (Mierlo et al. 2006) There is need for continuous research and development for higher efficiency and lower cost electric drive systems like batteries and power electronics. (Mierlo et al. 2006) Table 3-2 The six factors, needed to present to escape from lock-in, fulfilment today. According to the table, not all those six factors are present or fulfilled. Also, it has to be said that these factors are interdependent. For example, if the incentives, created by different regulations and partnerships, are efficient and the rise of environmental and technological awareness has changed the consumer attitude, then the niche markets will be developing. When analyzing the level of fulfilment of those factors in Copenhagen, we found four barriers, which are still there and have to be overcome in order to have EV implemented. 33

These barriers are as follows: 1) No possibility for plugging in the electric car when living in an apartment rather than in a private house; 2) No possibility to take a test drive in an electric car at a car retailer; 3) No possibility to use the electric car for long distance travelling because of the limited reach of the battery; 4) No economic incentive to reflect the environmental benefits of the electric car in urban use. Identifying the barriers is the first step in our research towards answering for the research question. The stepby-step illustrative overview with identified barriers is given on a figure 3-7. The barriers, recognized, have to be solved in order to unlock the automobile market in Copenhagen. Figure 3-7 Private person barriers towards electric cars in Copenhagen. 34

3.3 Conclusion of chapter three In order to understand the technology development, the technological lock-in and the competition between vehicle technologies, the history has been studied through different development cases and regulatory frameworks. When analyzing the lessons from history, the technology development, the human behaviour, societal restrictions and the regulatory framework around them have been looked into. By understanding the history and the institutional settings around the technology, we have been being able to analyze the present conditions from private passenger perspective and have identified the current barriers towards implementing electric vehicle technology in Copenhagen. How the private person incentives will help to overcome these barriers are discussed in the following chapter. 35

4 Private transportation alternatives from a socio- and private economic point of view in the greater Copenhagen area RQ sub-question: What are the social costs (externalities) and private costs of private transportation in the greater Copenhagen area of the current ICE car and of the electric car alternative? Based on the Danish transportation survey (DTU Transport 2007) we first present the transportation patterns in Denmark. Then, the total costs of transportation are assessed by analyzing private and external costs. Based on the insights on transportation patterns, two illustrative family cases are developed and illustrated graphically. Finally, the private transportation budget of these two family cases is calculated. 4.1 Introduction: Transportation patterns The typical Danish transportation patterns fit well with the range of an electric car, as the following figures show. Data in this section is based on the Danish transportation survey (DTU Transport 2007). Data is taken from the year 2006 for all pie charts, unless stated otherwise. In Denmark, there are roughly 1,9 million cars (2004 year average). On average, the cars drive 47 km per day. (Danmarks Statistik 2008) Number of trips pr. person pr. day devided into mean of transport and trip length 1,400 1,200 1,000 0,800 0,600 0,400 Public transport Car Scooter+Motor cycle Biking Walking 0,200 0,000 1-2 km 3-4 km 5-6 km 7-10 km 11-15 km 16-20 km 21-30 km trip length 31-40 km 41-50 km 51-100 km 101-200 km 201-300 km 301 km - Figure 4-1 Average number of trips per person per day. Data source: DTU Transport 2007. 36

32,3 % of the short trips, between 1-6 km, transport 5 is vehicle transportation 6. These are particularly problematic in terms of local pollution because of the "cold start" of the engine. However, the number of trips do not reflect the distances of transportation. As the two pie charts show, the car makes up a significant share of transport work in terms of km per person per day. Transport work in km pr. person pr. day in Copenhagen divided into mean of transportation 8,4 3,6 1,2 3,0 Other Walking Biking Private motorized Public transport 17,6 Figure 4-2 Average number of kilometres of transport work per person per day in Copenhagen county. Data source: DTU Transport 2007. Transport work pr. km pr. person pr. day in Roskilde Amt 0,5 0,5 8,3 1,0 Other Walking Biking Private motorized Public transport 44,6 Figure 4-3 Average number of kilometres of transport work per person per day in Roskilde county. Data source: DTU Transport 2007. The pie chart shows the average transportation distances divided between the means of transportation. The shown the figures are for Roskilde and Copenhagen county, because we have chosen to these location to base our illustrative cases, described in detail in section 4.3.The average vehicle transportation (car as driver or passenger and trucks) distance in Copenhagen is 17 km per day, in Roskilde 45 km. The average total transportation distance in Copenhagen is 33,8 km and 54,8 km in Roskilde county. (DTU Transport 2007). As shown in figure 4-4 and 4-5 below, the family with children has a transportation need around double 5 defined as transportation work (transportarbejde), DTU Transport (2007) 6 including car as driver or as passenger and trucks 37

compared to a single without children. The comparison of different family types is used in the illustrative cases in section 4.3. Also, car ownership heavily depends on location and family structure. Among the other factors, couples with children have one or more cars in 93 % of the cases, whereas only 45 % of singles without children are car owners. In Copenhagen and Frederiksberg, 62 % of households do not own a car, while this is only the case for 18 % of the residents in Roskilde county. (DTU Transport 2007) km pr. person pr. day for a couple with children divided into mean of transportation 1,05 4,8 0,711,43 Walking Bike motorized private public Other 43,46 Figure 4-4 Average number of kilometres of private transportation per person per day in case of couple with children. Source data: DTU Transport 2007. km pr. person pr. day for a single without children divided into mean of transportation 1,78 0,7 1,8 6,39 Walking Bike motorized private public Other 25,31 Figure 4-5 Average number of kilometres of private transportation per person per day in case of single person without children. Source data: DTU Transport 2007. The average trip length by private car as a driver is 17 km per day for both residents in Copenhagen and Frederiksberg municipality. Both figures are far below the range of the electric car Think City, which is 170 km. However, it is often the distance to work that determines the need for daily transportation. 38

Division of the labour force according to distance between home and work 4%1% 1% 1% 21% 15% 38% 1-5 km 6-11 km 12-24 km 25-49 km 50-74 km 75-99 km 100-149 km 150+ km 19% Figure 4-6 Labour force average distance between home and work. Source data: Transport 2007 (2002-2003). The pie chart shows that the vast majority of all transportation needs between home and work can be covered by an electric car. This points to the fact that is not the transportation need alone that determines drivers' attitudes towards electric cars, but rather the sense of freedom: Although not needed on a daily basis, the driver wants to be able to go long distances, and hence perceive the battery range as a restriction. 4.2 Total costs of private transportation Costs pr. vehicle km, DKK Urban marginal vehicle costs pr. Km petrol car central petrol car high EV central EV high Air pollution 0,02 0,11 n.a. n.a. Climate change 0,03 0,26 0,01 0,11 Noise 0,26 0,77 n.a. n.a. Accidents 0,18 0,23 0,18 0,23 Congestion 0,25 0,70 0,25 0,70 Infrastructure 0,01 0,02 0,01 0,02 private fixed costs pr. km 1,98 1,98 2,22 2,22 private variable costs pr. km 1,53 1,53 0,58 0,58 Total 4,26 5,60 3,25 3,86 Table 4-1 Costs in DKK per vehicle driven kilometre in urban area. Source data for calculations: Danish Ministry of Transport 2004 and Vejdirektoratet 2006. Note: The private costs reflect private ownership costs as calculated for the Jyllinge case described in section 4.3.1.1. The figures are not recalculated to the same price level. 39

Table 4-1 illustrates the full costs of transportation, and the content of the table is shown graphically in figure 4-7, 4-8, 4-9,and 4-10. The private fixed costs and private variable costs, shown in the table, are calculated in section 4.3. Each component is described more detailed in next sub-chapter. 4.2.1 External costs of private transportation 4.2.1.1 Air pollution Air pollution data for the electric car should include the emissions from electricity production. We have not calculated these figures. However, these numbers are expected to be almost negligible compared to conventional cars, since no local air pollution takes place. The electric car costs of air pollution are hence excluded from the analysis. 7 4.2.1.2 Noise The noise levels from the electric car are very low compared to the conventional car. An assessment of the exact external costs of noise is not made, but we expect the costs to be almost negligible and exclude them from the analysis. 4.2.1.3 Accident and congestion costs Accident costs are assumed to be identical across car types. Congestion is also assumed to be identical, since no car technology specific figures exist. However, the congestion caused by electric cars is probably lower than for gasoline cars, because the electric car is on average smaller than the gasoline or diesel cars. 4.2.1.4 Climate change The external costs of climate change are assessed using the so-called avoidance cost assumption, which is based on specific emission reduction goals. (DMT 2004) Climate change costs for electric cars are calculated by dividing the petrol figure by 2,3. It can be read from the figure 3-1, that the electric car (using the current Danish electricity mix) emits 2,3 times less CO2 per km than the conventional car. 4.2.1.5 Other costs Fuel infrastructure land use, barrier effects and land use of the cars are not taken into account in table 4-1 above. Disregarding the fuel infrastructure, they apply equally to electric cars as well as to internal combustion engine cars (although electric cars are often smaller and hence have a lower barrier effect and land use effect) hence, we do not consider this emission as central to the results. 7 The dislocation of the emissions from the inner city to the power plant reduces the air pollution problem significantly. Health effects from power plant emissions are very low today due to the use of particle filters on the smoke stacks. 40

Private fixed and variable costs are presented and analyzed in section 4.3 Below, the total costs (private and external) of driving are presented both for the central and for the high estimates shown in table 4-1 above. The costs differ to a great extent. This shows how sensitive results are to underlying assumptions. Having presented both central and high estimates, we choose to use the high estimates as our point of departure in chapter 5, where we are using them to develop policies for the implementation of electric cars. The choice of high estimates instead of central ones and its consequences are discussed more detail in chapter six. Accidents and congestion are posing the main externalities from driving in both cases. This shows how the value of time and directly lost life years is valued compared to indirectly lost life years (caused by e.g. health effects and climate change). As the figures show, economically speaking, climate change and air pollution are the relatively smaller problems of private car traffic. It is outside of this project scope to discuss the methods of valuation, but descriptions can be found from DMT (2004). Cost of driving a gasoline car pr. km (high estimates used). Total cost 5,60 DKK pr. km 27% 2% 5% 14% 4% Air pollution Climate change noise accidents 35% 0% 13% congestion infrastructure private fixed costs pr. km private variable costs pr. km Figure 4-7 The high estimate costs per kilometre, when driving a gasoline car. Source data: Vejdirektoratet 2006 and Danish Ministry of Transport 2004. 41

Cost of driving an electric car pr. km (high estimates used). Total cost 3,86 DKK pr. km Air pollution 15% 3% 6% Climate change 18% 1% noise accidents congestion infrastructure 57% private fixed costs pr. km private variable costs pr. km Figure 4-8 The high estimate costs per kilometre, when driving an electric car. Source data: Vejdirektoratet 2006 and Danish Ministry of Transport 2004. Cost of driving a gasoline car pr. km (central estimates used). Total cost 4,26 DKK pr. km 36% 1% 0,47% 6% 4% 6% 0% Air pollution Climate change noise accidents congestion 47% infrastructure private fixed costs pr. km private variable costs pr. km Figure 4-9 The central estimate costs per kilometre, when driving a gasoline car. Source data: Vejdirektoratet 2006 and Danish Ministry of Transport 2004. Costs of driving an electric car pr. km (central estimates used). Total cost 3,25 DKK pr. km Air pollution 18% 6% 8% 68% Climate change noise accidents congestion infrastructure private fixed costs pr. km private variable costs pr. km Figure 4-10 The central estimate costs per kilometre, when driving an electric car. Source data: Vejdirektoratet 2006 and Danish Ministry of Transport 2004 42

4.3 Private costs of private transportation As described in section 4.1, the transportation need is heavily dependent on family structure and location. Therefore, our case family in Jyllinge represents the "high transportation intensity" setting, living in an extraurban area and having two children and our Copenhagen case represents the "low transportation intensity" setting, living in an urban area without children. In this section, we create two illustrative non-representative cases in order to analyze the concrete private budget of two families. Each case is illustrated with a figure, showing their current transportation pattern. The term before in the title of the illustrations signifies that the illustrations show the transportation use before the implementation of policy suggestions developed in chapter 5 are in place. 4.3.1 The Jyllinge case family The family lives on Merkurvej in Jyllinge and has two children, one in kindergarten and the other one in school. One parent commutes every day to Kraftværksvej on Amagerbro in Copenhagen by car (since the same trip using public transport would take 1:38 hours to 1:51 hours and require 2-3 shifts (Rejseplanen 2008). By car, this trip takes 41 minutes (outside peak hours) and is 43, 1 km long Krak (2008). The other parent works at Risø National Laboratory for Sustainable Energy, which is 7,9 km away, and can be reached within 18 minutes by public transport (Rejseplanen 2008) or by 29 minutes by bike (De gule sider 2008). The older child is going to the local school by bike, the smaller child is being brought to kindergarten by foot, since both the kindergarten and school are within walking distance. The family owns a gasoline Ford Mondeo from 2003. The relatives of the family are scattered in Denmark: some relatives are living in the Roskilde area and are often visited; other relatives live in northern Jutland. They are visited by car, although the family would also like to go by train to rest on these longer trips, but the low marginal cost of the car makes its use very attractive. The daily shopping is done by foot in the nearby shopping centre, but the big shopping is done in weekends by car. 43

Figure 4-11 Jyllinge case family transportation pattern before policy suggestions 4.3.2 Copenhagen The couple lives on Ungarnsgade in Copenhagen. The man commutes every day to Køgevej in Roskilde by public transportation a distance of 38,7 km (Krak 2008). By metro and train, this trip takes 55 minutes and requires one shift (Rejseplanen 2008) (the same trip, using the car would take 30 minutes outside peak hours) (source: krak.dk). The woman works in the city centre, which is 4,3 km away and takes 15 minutes by bike (De gule sider 2008) or 23 minutes by public transportation (Rejseplanen 2008). The couple does not need a car in for daily commuting, but has a transportation need in the weekends, since the relatives and friends live scattered around Denmark. They are visited by train, but the couple has to be picked up at the train station at the end destination, and has no freedom of transportation when visiting family members in remote areas. The daily shopping is done by foot and by bike in the nearby shopping centre, but for the big shopping the couple has to rent a car or borrow it from family friends. In the weekends, the couple enjoys going to the forests around Sealand, but does this quite rarely, because the remote forest areas are difficult to reach with public transportation. The couple is satisfied with its current transportation solution for commuting, but is considering buying a car (Toyota Yaris, diesel, 2003), because the weekend and holiday transportation needs cannot be covered in a satisfactory manner by public transportation. However, when the car is bought, the marginal costs of driving by car to work will be lower than the costs of public transportation, and lead to car use for commuting to Roskilde as well. 44

Figure 4-12 below illustrates the situation of the Copenhagen case. Figure 4-12 Transportation pattern for the Copenhagen couple before policy suggestions. 4.3.3 The private budgets of transportation of the two cases To analyze the private transportation budget, we use the interactive transportation online tool Vejdirektoratet (2007). The input data is derived from the descriptions in 4.3.1 and 4.3.2. By using this description as input data, the monthly transport need for each case is defined by the standard assumptions in the interactive online transport budget (Vejdirektoratet 2006). The general assumptions behind the calculations can be seen in appendix A and B (in Danish). A brief description, including our own additional assumptions that differ from standard settings as well as a description of the transportation alternatives follow below: For all alternatives, the costs associated with biking have left out for simplicity, because they are similar in all cases, since it is assumed that all trips under 5 km are made by bike in all alternatives. The distance to work for the woman from the Jyllinge-case is reduced from 7 to 5 km, as the online tool only accepts biking distances equal to or below 5 km. Here, the transportation alternatives used in the budgets, are described: Gasoline car + bike / diesel car + bike: The conventional car is used for commuting to work by one household member, while the other uses a bike for commuting. Free time transportation is done by car as well. 45

Electric car + shared car: The electric car is used for commuting to work and for most free time distances 8. For the longer trips (defined as ½ of all trips over 25 km), a gasoline shared car is used, to allow for long range driving. Public transport + bike + shared car: Public transportation is used for commuting by one household member, while the other uses a bike to go to work. The shared car is used for free time driving, partially in combination with public transportation. Ownership charge (Grøn ejerafgift): For conventional vehicles, the standard assumptions of Vejdirektoratet (2006) are used. For electric cars, there is an existing exemption of the ownership charge. Parking/ road assistance etc. (Parkering/Vejhjælp mv.): Existing exemption of parking fees in Copenhagen for electric cars. Road assistance is not included for electric cars. Battery lease/service pack: The battery package of Think City is set to DKK 1495 9 (for a description of the battery package, see chapter 3). Loss of value (Værditab) and Interest payments (Rente af lån) are calculated using standard assumption of Vejdirektoratet (2006), based on the car price. For the Ford Mondeo, the standard price of Vejdirektoratet is used. The price of the Think City is set to DKK 200.000. 10 Fuel consumption (Brændstofforbrug): For gasoline and diesel prices, standard values of (Vejdirektoratet (2006) are used: 8.49 DKK per liter diesel and 9,19 DKK per liter gasoline. For electric cars, consumption pr. kilometer is found to be 14 øre. 11 Maintainance (Vedligeholdelse): For conventional vehicles, standard assumptions of Vejdirektoratet (2006) are used. For electric cars, maintenance is assumed to be part of the battery package. Car sharing membership (Delebil, abonnement), Insurance (Forsikring), Tyres (Dæk), Car sharing, rental payment (Delebil, lejeudgift) and Car sharing, km charge (Delebil, km Takst) are all standard assumptions from Vejdirektoratet (2006). 8 assuming that the electric car, owned by family, is 4-seated 9 according to Sune Grøntved, Drivegreen, personal communication 27.05.08 10 according to Sune Grøntved, Drivegreen, personal communication, 27.05.08 11 As described in chapter 3, the overall efficiency of the electric car is 85%, and the capacity of the Think Zebra battery is 28,3 Wh (Jørgensen, 2008 and Think, 2008), with a range of 170 km (Think, 2008). With an electricity price of 71,74 øre/kwh ( Fixed price, eastern Denmark, including VAT, Dong Energy, 2008b), the price pr. km is found in the following way: 28,3 Wh / 0,85 = 33,3 kwh pr. 170 km. 33,3 kwh x 71,74 øre/kwh = 2389 øre = 23,89 kr. pr. 170 km 0,14 kr. pr. km 46

For the Jyllinge case, it is already possible today to switch to the electric car concept described in chapter 2 without policy, since a plug is available, the electric car can be bought and car sharing associations are in place. Therefore, the family s current transportation budget is compared to the electric car concept described in chapter 2. For the Copenhagen case, the budget considered by the couple is presented, since the present situation does not fulfil their transportation need in a satisfactory way as described above. For the Copenhagen case, it is not possible to switch to the electric car concept described in chapter 2 without further policy action, as no parking spaces with plug are available in the area in question. However, to present an alternative to their conventional car ownership considerations, we compare it to entering a car sharing system for free time driving and continuing to use the public transportation for commuting. 4.3.3.1 Jyllinge case: costs of transportation alternatives gasoline Fixed costs pr. month, DKK car + bike Ownership charge (Grøn ejerafgift) 333 Parking/ road assistance etc. (Parkering/Vejhjælp mv.) 248 electric car + shared car Car sharing, membership (Delebil, abonnement) 263 Battery lease/service pack 1495 Insurance (Forsikring) 1000 1000 Loss of value (Værditab) 2764 2312 Interest payments (Rente af lån) 640 535 Sum of fixed costs 4985 5605 Variable costs pr. month, DKK Fuel consumption (Brændstofforbrug) 2140 328 Maintainance (Vedligeholdelse) 1388 0 Tyres (Dæk) 327 327 Car sharing, rental payment (Delebil, lejeudgift) 352 Car sharing, km charge (Delebil, km Takst) 444 Sum of variable costs 3855 1451 Sum of fixed and variable costs 8840 7056 Table 4-2 Jyllinge case family transportation costs for the gasoline car and electric car concept, before the supportive incentives are established. Data source: Vejdirektoratet 2006. The explanations for each budget step are given in appendixes A and B (in Danish) and the way, how the online tool is used is given in appendixes C to K (in Danish). As shown in table 4-2, the price difference between the electric car + shared car package and the conventional car is 1874 DKK in favour of the electric car + shared car package. This is a surprising result, 47

since we assumed the electric car + shared car package to be more expensive today than conventional one. Although the fixed costs of the electric car + shared car package are higher, especially because of the battery package, but the overall costs are lower due to lower variable costs. From the table 4-1 it can be read that the costs per km for the Jyllinge family are 3,51 DKK for the gasoline car alternative and 2,8 DKK for the electric car + shared car concept. That we find the electric car costs to be lower than the gasoline car costs is in line with are in line with Mierlo et al (2006), citing the findings of a Dutch study: the total yearly cost (including fuel, tax, purchase price, etc.), assuming a 15.000 km yearly range, a small passenger petrol car would cost 0,28 EUR/km, a diesel car 0,25 EUR/km and an electric car 0,26 EUR/km. that is, around 2 DKK per km for all technologies. The differing findings might be explained by the generally higher levels of taxation in Denmark. Also, the study is from 2006 whereas the figures used here are from 2008. 4.3.3.2 Copenhagen case: costs of transportation alternatives public transport + Fixed costs pr. month, DKK diesel car + bike bike + shared car Ownership charge (Grøn ejerafgift) 163 Parking/ road assistance etc (Parkering/Vejhjælp mv.) 248 Car sharing, membership (Delebil, abonnement) 263 Insurance (Forsikring) 1600 Loss of value (Værditab) 1530 Interest payments (Rente af lån) 396 Sum of fixed costs 4053 263 Variable costs pr. month, DKK Fuel consumption (Brændstofforbrug) 963 Maintainance (Vedligeholdelse) 953 Tyres (Dæk) 165 Public transport (Kollektiv trafik) 1235 Car sharing, rental payment (Delebil, lejeudgift) 812 Car sharing, km charge (Delebil, km Takst) 634 Sum of variable costs 2281 2679 Sum of fixed and variable costs 6334 2942 Table 4-3 Copenhagen case family transportation costs for the diesel car and shared car concept, before the supportive incentives are established. Data source: Vejdirektoratet 2006. The explanations for each budget step are given in appendixes A and B (in Danish) and the way, how the online tool is used is given in appendixes C to K (in Danish). 48

As shown in table 4-3, the price difference between the diesel car + bike alternative and the public transportation and shared car alternative is significantly in favour of the shared car + public transportation alternative, because no car ownership is needed in the latter alternative. 4.3.4 Conclusion of chapter 4 For both cases, the costs for the alternative system (electric car + shared car and public transportation + shared car respectively) are lower than the costs of the conventional car ownership costs. This means that even without the policies, our developed techno-structure concept the electric car is cheaper. The costs for the gasoline car concept is 8.840 DKK per month compared to the electric car concept of 7.108 DKK per month for our Jyllinge case. For the Copenhagen case, the difference is even bigger, because the electric + shared car concept avoids the costs of private car ownership. The conventional car option costs more than the double of the shared car alternative. Although it must be expected that many are standing in front of a similar decision making situation, the use of car sharing is relatively limited in Copenhagen, and electric cars are not imported yet. That is, there are no indications in the market that this price difference exists. This indicates that institutional barriers exist, and hence our analysis in chapter 3 is supported. Especially non-monetary institutional barriers prevent the techno-structure presented in chapter 2, the implementation of the electric car by combining it with car sharing, to break the institutional lock-in. The private person faces a range of non-monetary costs when considering the electric car, which have not been quantified in this chapter: - limited range and feeling of freedom, - limited speed, - time used for transportation (assumed to be longer for public transport and car sharing, since these means of transport are not as readily available as a privately owned car), - time spent and effort used for understanding and gathering knowledge about new transportation concepts, - convenience, habit and cultural support of the existing fuelling system, - psychological barriers, - first-mover disadvantages (the risk of being the first electric car owners), - relearning. 49

It is a weakness in our analysis that we do not attempt to quantify these non-monetary costs. However, as we show in the next chapter, we are aware of these non-monetary barriers, because the policies suggested in chapter 5 target monetary as well as non-monetary costs. In chapter 5, a first mover advantages package is created for users of the electric car concepts, described in chapter 2. 50

5 Chapter 5 Establishing private person incentives for overcoming barriers in an actor framework This chapter is dealing with the following sub-question of the research question: How can relevant actors provide incentives for the private person to choose an electric car? In order to implement the electric vehicles into Danish transportation system, we develop private person incentives for overcoming the institutional barriers identified in chapter 3. Grouped after the recognized barriers, the central actors in the greater Copenhagen area are listed below. The actors are identified in order to be able to create private person incentives to overcome the institutional barriers. Overcoming barrier 1: The Technical and Environmental Committee (Teknik- og Miljøforvaltningen) of the municipality of Copenhagen and the electricity distribution company in Copenhagen. Overcoming barrier 2: Political spokesperson for the Social Democrats in the municipality of Copenhagen Anne Vang. Overcoming barrier 3: The Think-retailer Drivegreen and the electric car manufacturer Think Global. Overcoming barrier 4: The car sharing association of Copenhagen. As part of our project, these actors have been interviewed (see appendix L), and the input is used throughout the project (see appendix L for a list of interviews, as well as chapter 2 and chapter 6 for a discussion of the actor interviews). 51

Figure 5-1Relevant actors and needed interconnections for creating private person incentives. Figure 5-1 shows how the identified barriers lead on to the identification of private person incentives. As the figure describes, actors can interact to provide the suggested solutions for the barriers identified. The need for multi-stakeholder interaction has lead us to the development of a facilitator, as the dotted line around the actors shows. The role for the facilitator is described in section 5.2. 5.1 Solutions for overcoming barriers In the following, we describe the incentives and policy suggestions developed and describe the actors needed to bring about the institutional change. Policies having direct consequences for the reassessment of the private budget in section 5.3 are marked with italics. 52

5.1.1 Access to parking spaces with plugs Today, only few parking spaces with plugs exist in Copenhagen (see front page picture). These parking possibilities are located in the city centre and are thought for electric car commuters. No parking spaces with plugs are available for residents who live in apartments and thereby do not have direct access to their own home plug. As shown in figure 5-1, the involved actors for supplying parking spaces with plugs are the municipality and the electricity distribution company in Copenhagen. 5.1.2 Free public parking The electric car owner can benefit from free public parking in city centre and in all parking places already today. We suggest a continuation of this exemption. Parking is a very relevant incentive for the first adopters, as the parking prices in Copenhagen city centre are high in order to have less traffic in the city centre. The municipality is a key player in establishing this parking system, as shown in figure 5-1. 5.1.3 No registration tax and ownership charge on electric cars Already today, the electric cars in Denmark are exempted from registration tax, but for ICE vehicles it is as high as 180 % of the car price. This exemption is assumed to be continued and preferably prolonged to ensure investment security for retailers, service stations etc. 12 A stepwise increase in the tax over time could create further incentives for first movers, paying less registration tax than future electric car buyers. Electric cars are exempted from ownership charge (grøn ejerafgift) as well. This charge is paid according to the fuel efficiency of the car. We suggest that this exemption is extended as well and could be gradually increased in future till to a level, which is approximately 3 times lower than level for conventional cars. This reflects the higher efficiency of the electric car (see chapter 3). As shown in figure 5-1, the actor in question for providing this policy is the Danish government. 12 interview with Sune Grøntved and Bendt Iversen, Drivegreen 53

5.1.4 Congestion Charging Zone with no charge for electric cars The congestion charge can be understood as a charge of three private vehicle transportation externalities: congestion, local air pollution and noise. As table 4-1 in chapter 4 shows, the external costs of these three factors are a large part of the external costs of private vehicle transportation. Therefore, we suggest the implementation of a congestion charging zone in Copenhagen. For simplicity, we determine the congestion charging zone to be geographically identical to the current particle filter zone (Miljoezone 2008). The zone is shown on the map below. Figure 5-2 Map for the recommended Congestion Charging Zone. Source: Miljoezone 2008. We define the congestion charge to be a payment for the external costs of congestion, noise and air pollution identified in chapter 4. The general formula for the congestion charge hence becomes: congestion charge = cost of noise + cost of air pollution + cost of congestion. By using the high estimates on external costs per km from the table 4-1 in chapter 4, the congestion charge becomes: Congestion charge pr. km for electric cars = 0,77 + 0,11 + 0,7 = 1,58 DKK pr. km Congestion charge pr. km for gasoline cars = 0 + 0 + 0,7 = 0,7 DKK pr. km Congestion charge pr. km for diesel cars (without particle filter) = 0,77 + 0,41 + 0,7 = 1,88 DKK pr. km Table 5-1 The congestion charge per kilometre for electric, gasoline and diesel car. Assuming that a daily trip in the congestion charging zone of 20 km (which is the approximate trip length per day in the zone for our Jyllinge-case), we can recalculate the congestion charge per day: 54

congestion charge pr. day for electric cars = 14. kr. pr. day congestion charge pr. day for gasoline cars = 32 kr. pr. day congestion charge pr. day for diesel cars (without particle filter) = 38 kr. pr. day 13 Table 5-2 The congestion charge per day for electric, gasoline and diesel car. In order to create further incentives for using the electric car, we suggest that the electric cars are initially exempted, and their charge is the gradually phased in using a staircase system: cars bought in the first years of electric car introduction (e.g. before 2012) are exempted from the congestion charge throughout the lifetime of the car. Year by year, a larger percentage of the congestion charge for electric cars (70 øre per km) has to be paid, reaching the full costs in the future. The progression could for example extend over seven years, increasing the congestion charge by 10 øre per year. If the electric car is exempted from congestion charge until 2013 and progression starts from 2014, the electric car will be paying its full charge by 2020, as shown in table 3. The exact type of progression is irrelevant to our analysis, since we focus on the present, where we suggest that electric cars are entirely exempted from the congestion charge. Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Charge pr. km, øre 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Table 5-3. The example of time period in which the electric car reaches to the full congestion charge payment. The levels of congestion charge suggested here are in line with the charges introduced in other cities: The congestion charge in London is 8 pounds, and in Stockholm it is SEK 10 to 20, depending on time of day. Both cities have positive experience with congestion charging (Langdal 2008). Congestion charging is currently heavily debated in the Danish parliament (Dyhr et al. 2008, Trafikudvalget 2007) and among economists (DØR 2006 and DØR 2008). The Economic council analyzed both road pricing and congestion charging in Copenhagen in their 2006 report, and repeated their call for road payments in their 2008 edition (DØR 2006 and DØR 2008). The municipality has also analyzed the possibilities for congestion charging in Copenhagen, and is cooperating with the surrounding municipalities in developing the concept 14. However, since a congestion charge is in legal terms considered to be a tax, the municipality is under current legislation not allowed to implement it. Taxes can only be levied by the state level. Therefore, there are tensions between the municipal and state level. The majority of parties, at the state level, favour a general road pricing system and do not allow the municipality to implement its own 13 In the changed private budget in section 5.3, it is assumed that the city zone is entered 25 days pr. month for the Jyllinge case, whereas it is entered 30 days a month in the Copenhagen case, since they live in the zone. It can be discussed whether residents have to pay congestion charge of the same height; however, from an externalities point of view, no differentiation should be made. 14 according to interview with Anne Vang, municipality of Copenhagen 55

congestion charge (Dyhr et al. 2008, Trafikudvalget 2007). The municipality on the other hand sees road pricing as a distant future, and wants congestion charging now (Socialdemokraterne i København 2008) However, it is not considering a differentiation of the congestion charge or an exemption of electric cars, because the problem targeted is congestion, which is caused by all cars. 15 Because of the tensions between the two levels of governance, both, the state and the municipal level are needed to implement the suggested congestion charge, as shown in figure 5-2. Having these discussions on congestion charging vs. road pricing in mind, we have designed the congestion charge suggested here to fit both systems: The payment for congestion, air pollution and noise can be charged as a daily fee (shown in table 5-2) paid when entering the city zone (traditional congestion charging), or as part of a general road pricing system (see under 5.1.5.) based on GPS surveillance, which is able to recognize when the car enters the city zone and then charges for driven kilometres (table 5-1). In Stockholm, the problem between the municipal and state level are solved: The state collects the congestion charge, because it is a tax, but transfers it back to the municipality in the form of payments for public transport infrastructure 16. 5.1.5 Efficiency-differentiated road pricing Although road pricing is considered by the Danish Economic Council (DØR 2006, DØR 2008), efficiencydifferentiated road pricing is not considered. A differentiation according to energy efficiency would give electric cars an advantage. Efficiency-differentiated road pricing could be a way of regulating the CO2- emmissions of the transportation sector, because efficiency and CO2-emissions go hand in hand. The emission of an electric car using the current electricity mix is around 90 grams per km, whereas the emission of an average gasoline car is around 210 grams per Km. (Jørgensen 2008) Simultaneously, the overall efficiency of the gasoline engine is 15-18 %, while the efficiency of the electric car is 85 %, as shown in chapter 3. (Jørgensen 2008). Since efficiency is easier to determine than the CO2-emission per km, the energy labelling of cars could be used to determine the level of efficiency-differentiated road pricing. To define the level of efficiency differentiated road pricing 17, we use the high estimate for the climate change shown in table 4-1 in chapter 4. The externality per km driven for a gasoline car is used as a baseline. 15 personal communication with Birte Busch Thomsen, Municipality of Copenhagen, 27th of may 2008 16 personal communication with Gunnar Langdal, the municipality of Stockholm, on May 27th 2008 17 Road pricing could consist of a general part as well (e.g. covering the externalities of accident risk and infrastructure usage which are set to be equal across car types, or reflecting a general change in taxation from buying to using a car). However, this general part is not in focus in our project. 56

Hence, the charge for the electric car is set three times lower, reflecting the difference in conversion efficiency and CO2 emissions. 18 The road pricing charges are shown in table 5-4: Charge pr. km for electric car (Think) city (high efficiency class) = 9 øre pr. km Charge pr. km for ICE car (Ford Mondeo) (low efficiency class) = 26 øre pr. km Table 5-4 The recommended efficiency differentiated charge for electric and gasoline car. As shown in figure 5-1, the relevant actor for establishing this form of general road pricing sytem is the government. 5.1.6 Access to after sale services We do not develop an individual policy targeting this barrier, since the set up of private companies normally follows if the framework conditions are in place. However, to support the technology and niche market development, governmental support can be used. For example by providing education and training, the establishment of after sale services could be supported. Education and training can be located within the facilitator see section 5.2. As shown in figure 5-1, the involved actors are the municipality and the Danish government, who can set up education and training facilities within the framework of the facilitator. 5.1.7 Free membership of car sharing association - access to multiple different vehicles Enabling electric car users to go long distances is central to the implementation of electric cars. By setting up cooperation between the electric car company and the car sharing association, the problem of long distance travelling can be solved. At the same time, the electric car owner can as a car sharing member benefit from the multiple vehicles at their disposal. We suggest that the buyer of an electric car automatically gets a free membership of the car sharing association. Hence, the privately owned car must not cover all transportation needs, but only the daily transportation need: typically a single person travelling to and from work. 18 In chapter 3, the efficiency and emissions of the electric car and the conventional car are compared, based on Jørgensen (2008). There is a factor 5 efficiency difference and a factor 2,3 CO2-emission difference between the two types of cars. We choose to differentiate the road pricing by a factor 3 to reflect the advantages of the electric car both in terms of CO2 and efficiency compared to the conventional car. Using the calculations of Jørgensen (2008) for both efficiency and CO2-emissions ensures the comparability of the two. 57

As shown in figure 5-1, the involved actors are not only the car sharing association and the electric car retailer, but also the government and the municipality. The two official actors can support the set up of the cooperation of the private actor and the association in the framework of a facilitator see section 5.2. 5.1.8 Discount on public transportation and access to shared cars in whole Denmark Today, a membership of a car sharing association does not solve the problem of long distance travelling, since it is relatively expensive to use a shared car for long distances. The solution to this problem is practised in Switzerland already today (Mobility Car Sharing 2008): Railway transport is used for the long distances, and a shared car is at your disposal at the train station in the destination. This system requires that car sharing is extended from the local associations to the national level. 19 In the budget analysis in section 5.2, this discount is reflected as a 25 % reduction in the total public transportation costs. The concrete design of the discount is outside the scope of this project. However, because of the convenience of having only one mean of transportation for the whole trip length, the shared car, not the train, might be the superior choice for our case family for some long distances, e.g. when going on holiday with children. As shown in figure 5-1, the many involved actors to set up this discount: the municipality, the retailer, the car sharing association and the public transportation operator. Such broad cooperation can be eased by the facilitator see section 5.2. 5.1.9 Electric cars in the car sharing fleet Electric cars as shared cars could ensure a quick introduction of electric cars in urban areas. In cities, the individual car need is lower because of the dense public transportation network. Also, there is no current possibility to own an electric car because of the lack of parking spaces with plugs. Including electric cars in the car sharing fleet is considered by the Danish Car Sharing Association, Delebilfonden. 20 As shown in figure 5-1, the involved actors are the car sharing association and the electric car retailer. Such an agreement could also be combined with the free car sharing membership of electric car owners described under 5.1.7. 19 according to interview with Bjarke Fonnesbech, Delebilsfonden, the association is working on national access to shared cars for car sharing association members. 20 interview with Bjarke Fonnesbech, Delebilfonden 58

5.2 The role of facilitator The facilitator is seen as external body, whose purpose is to bring together all the relevant actors and establish a system of private person incentives discussed in section 5.1. The facilitator could be established within existing (or currently planned) organizations. For example Energinet.dk, the Danish Transmission System Operator could have a interest to be the facilitator as the electric cars can be seen as part of a flexible energy system in a longer perspective. Another possibility could be the revival of the Knowledge Centre for Electric Cars, which was closed down in 2002. (Horstmann 2005) According to Horstmann (2005), the aim of the knowledge centre was to be a neutral centre of knowledge and advice with the purpose of promoting the use of electric cars in Denmark as a contribution to a sustainable transportation development. (Translated from Horstmann, 2005) The knowledge centre was supporting users and potential customers, advising municipalities, public institutions and companies and informing the general public. It was located at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU). Re-establishing a knowledge centre with departments in the major cities Copenhagen, Aarhus, Odense and Aalborg could lead to a quicker roll-out of electric cars. Plans already exist to establish the "Nordic Knowledge Centre for Electric Transport (Noveltra) in the fall 2008 within the framework of the Danish Technological Institute. According to the Noveltra background paper (VE-Net 2008), the Nordic Knowledge Centre for Electric Transport shall be targeted towards potential interested parties such as industrial companies, private and public institutions; deliver factual and impartial information which is unbiased towards various technologies and decision- makers both with regard to the individual technologies and in a wider context a purpose very similar to the Knowledge Centre for Electric cars of the past. Therefore, Noveltra could be seen as a possible facilitator. It is outside the scope of our project to develop the concrete organizational setting of the facilitator further. 5.3 Changes in the private budgets of transportation As described under 5.1, the policy suggestions have consequences for the private budget. Therefore, the private transportation budgets of the two case families are recalculated and shown below. For a description of the budget parts, see chapter 4 or appendixes A and B (in Danish). 59

5.3.1 Jyllinge case: Costs of transportation alternatives after gasoline Fixed costs pr. month, DKK car + bike Ownership charge (Grøn ejerafgift) 333 Parking/ road assistance etc. (Parkering/Vejhjælp mv.) 248 electric car + shared car Car sharing, membership (Delebil, abonnement) 0 Battery lease/service pack 1495 Insurance (Forsikring) 1000 1000 Loss of value (Værditab) 2764 2312 Interest payments (Rente af lån) 640 535 Sum of fixed costs 4985 5342 Variable costs pr. month, DKK Fuel consumption (Brændstofforbrug) 2140 392 Road pricing 727 252 Congestion charge 800 Maintainance (Vedligeholdelse) 1388 0 Tyres (Dæk) 327 327 Car sharing, rental payment (Delebil, lejeudgift) 352 Car sharing, km charge (Delebil, km Takst) 444 Sum of variable costs 5382 1766 Sum of fixed and variable costs 10367 7108 Table 5-5 Jyllinge case family transportations costs for the gasoline car and electric car concept, after the supportive incentives are established.. Base data source: Vejdirektoratet 2006. As it can be read from the table 5-5, the policies have increased the profitability of the electric car concept. With our suggested private person incentives, this difference is increased to 3.259 DKK per month, because the conventional car concept costs now 10.367 DKK per month, whereas the electric car concept 7.108 DKK. 60

5.3.2 Copenhagen case: Costs of transportation alternatives after public transport Fixed costs pr. month, DKK diesel car + bike + bike + shared car Ownership charge (Grøn ejerafgift) 163 Parking/ road assistance etc. (Parkering/Vejhjælp mv.) 248 Car sharing, membership (Delebil, abonnement) 263 Insurance (Forsikring) 1600 Loss of value (Værditab) 1530 Interest payments (Rente af lån) 396 Sum of fixed costs 3937 263 Variable costs pr. month, DKK Fuel consumption (Brændstofforbrug) 963 Road pricing 734 Congestion charge 1140 Maintainance (Vedligeholdelse) 953 Tyres (Dæk) 165 Public transport (Kollektiv trafik) 926 Car sharing, rental payment (Delebil, lejeudgift) 812 Car sharing, km charge (Delebil, km Takst) 634 Sum of variable costs 3955 2372 Sum of fixed and variable costs 7892 2635 Table 5-6 Copenhagen case family transportations costs for the diesel car and shared car concept, after the supportive incentives are established. Base data source: Vejdirektoratet 2006. For the Copenhagen case, with policies, the gasoline car concept has the threefold price compared to the electric + shared car alternative. We assume that this larger price difference is sufficient to overcome the non-monetary barriers analyzed in chapter 3. Hence, a new transportation situation arises, which is described and illustrated in the next section. 61

5.4 New transportation concepts induced by private person incentives In the following, the transportation patterns of the two family cases are re-presented after the suggested policies are in place. We have not put any year on these future scenarios, since the speed of policy making and incentive creation determines this. For simplicity (needed for budget calculations with online tool, provided by Vejdirektoratet 2006), the combination of transportation possibilities are introduced through two cases. The Copenhagen case uses public transport in combination with car sharing, whereas the Jyllinge case uses car sharing without public transport. 5.4.1 The Jyllinge case after, the policies and relevant partnerships are established The family in Jyllinge is saving 3.259 DKK in month since they changed to the electric car and became members of the car sharing association. The husband is using the Think City to commute to work and pays a lower congestion charge and efficiency differentiated road pricing than ICE cars are required to. The wife is still biking to work. The family has a feeling of freedom, because it is always possible for them to drive to the nearest car sharing parking space and pick up a gasoline car to go long distances. However, this happens rather rarely, since the electric car range can cover most of the family s transportation need. 21 When the children get older, the parents are also considering to use the possibility of taking the train for long distances and then switch to an electric shared car but for now, they find it more comfortable to use the shared ICE car for long distances because no change of mean of transportation is needed, although the price for doing so is higher than the train + shared car alternative. Although the monthly fixed costs have increased, the variable costs have become significantly lower. The energy consumption of the electric car costs the family 392 DKK per month compared to their previous fuel costs of 2.140 DKK. Furthermore, the family has a green consciousness during windy nights when charging their car, because they know that the car is using electricity from wind energy. They have become more aware of their environmental impact in general, because both the congestion charge and the efficiency differentiated road pricing reflect the real costs of driving. 21 assuming that the free time activities are for the main part only including two family members, since the Think City is a two-seater. However, the Think Ox is a 4-seated electric car and is available in 2009 (Think, 2008) and might be the favoured option of the family. 62

Figure 5-3 Jyllinge case family transportation pattern after the policies and relevant partnerships are in place. 5.4.2 The Copenhagen case after, the policies and relevant partnerships are established The couple in Copenhagen has given up their plans of buying a car since the congestion charge and efficiency differentiated road pricing is in place. The couple is still using public transport and biking for every day commuting. Although, initially upset, because the price for their planned transportation budget increased by around 1500 DKK, they are now benefiting from the effects of the congestion charge, which has decreased the traffic in the City ring. Entering the car sharing association has solved their problem for long distance transportation:. Compared to the situation, where they were dependent on others to pick them up at the destination, when using long distance public transport, the couple is now enjoying the comfort of the availability of an electric shared car at the end station. Being able to run on electricity has increased their environmental awareness and they are proud users of the electric shared car system. 63

Figure 5-4 Copenhagen case family transportation pattern after the policies and relevant partnerships are in place. 5.5 Partial conclusion By making cars owners to pay for their externalities (noise, local air, congestion and CO2) and by creating opportunities for overcoming technological lock-in (possibility for long distance travelling by car sharing and public transport, after-sale service, plugs) private incentives for using the electric car are created. With our suggested private person incentives, the difference between gasoline car ownership and the electric car alternative, has increased up to 3.259 DKK per month for our Jyllinge case. It is because the conventional car concept now costs 10.367 DKK per month, whereas the electric car concept costs 7.108 DKK. For the Copenhagen case, with policies, the gasoline car concept has the threefold price compared to the electric + shared car alternative, as the car ownership costs are avoided in the latter concept. In the next chapter, the private person incentives are discussed, as well as the foundations of our analysis in general is assessed, critically reviewed and qualified. 64

6 Chapter 6 Discussion of strengths and weaknesses In this chapter the strengths and weaknesses of the report are discussed. In order to understand the consequences of the choices made in chapter 2, 3, 4 and.,a critical review of the choice of theoretical approach, sources used, research methodology applied, limitations and assumptions made and private person incentives considered, is presented. 6.1 Strengths and weaknesses of theoretical approach 6.1.1 Discussing excluded disciplines Since this is an interdisciplinary paper, the limitations of the theoretical approach must be discussed more broadly, because our project is not naturally limited by the borders of the discipline. Therefore, we want to discus theories and disciplines excluded from the project. For example, we did not consider: - sociology /psychology focusing on opinions and attitudes on electric cars; - marketing / business economics; - profit structures: who gains, who looses; - power relations and actor analysis; - discourse theory; - socioeconomic assessment; - electricity grid effects; etc. We are aware of the forces of these disciplines, but have consciously limited our theoretical focus. To integrate the mentioned disciplines can be a next step, for further studies. We determine the analysis of the historical and current setting of electric cars and the private budget as the central elements for our institutional analysis. Therefore, we have prioritized these areas, and the perspectives and insights that could have been gained from the listed theoretical approaches are left out, although they could have been helpful in answering the research question and have given us useful insights. 65

We are aware of the fact that the quote by Lewin, presented in chapter 2 can be used as an argument for research that follows a precise theory from the beginning. Such a world view can bring our approach into discredit. However, considering the selected problem formulation, the practical theoretical approach has more strengths than weaknesses. We could also have chosen a more abstract theoretical rather than the concrete theoretical approach used. However, with the existing problem formulation this would not have been applicable. 6.1.2 Discussing the interdisciplinary approach Especially, it is interesting to evaluate what would have happened if we had chosen only one of the disciplines that we have integrated into the institutional analysis: Either economics, engineering or policy theory: - Focusing solely on economics, external costs of transportation could be the central focus, and the theoretical basis on the internalization of external costs could be applied to a more broad data basis. The socioeconomic costs of the externalities could be quantified, but typically, leaving policy suggestions to other studies. Also, the technical insights would typically be lost. - Focusing solely on engineering, analyzing and modelling the impact of the electric car to the electricity grid could be in focus. Recommendations would typically only include action items for the planning the future of the energy grid, but the societal context would be lost. - Focusing solely on policies, the political process of policy making split into the local, national and municipal level could have been studied, but the specific technical context would be lost. The limitations of each of these approaches illustrate the strength of our interdisciplinary, institutional approach. The chosen framework has clear advantage compared to the pure technical, economic or policy approach, as it considers all three aspects and also takes into consideration institutional setting. Of course, combining several disciplines in one study is to some degree done at the expense of degree of detail and depth of the project. Our setting as researchers could also have been different. Typically, the setting of the researcher changes with the academic discipline. As described in chapter 1, it was possible for us to act as the spider in the web and the queen bee in the honey comb because of our interdisciplinary and institutional approach and the concrete research question. We could have chosen a more distant role to our material. As discussed in chapter 1, our project could also have had a more abstract theoretical approach, studying literature in a more systematic manner and making more general recommendations without considering the concrete case of Copenhagen. However, the more abstract approach was not suitable for answering our research question, where the concrete setting is in focus. 66

The combination of several disciplines is also the reason that our project required literature research in a broad field of studies, leading to the next discussion point: the criticism of materials. 6.2 Strengths and weaknesses of central sources We evaluate our material and data considering what they are used for, and examine their credibility. Because of the many different data sources used, and because our analysis does not build on any central source, the material is grouped into four categories for evaluation: 6.2.1 Research papers and evaluation reports Dealing with the history of the electric car, research papers and evaluation reports are used for analyzing the historical, current and future setting of the electric car. Horstmann (2005) and KFB (2000) are our central sources for identifying the barriers towards electric cars. The individual credibility of the sources is varying, since the sources are either research papers (high credibility), official evaluation reports (medium credibility), or NGO-documents (varying credibility). Combining our sources gives an overall high credibility, since the information can to some degree be checked against each other. However, the sources are difficult to compare since they use different methodologies and are written for different purposes. This can weaken the results of our analysis. Jørgensen (2008) is our central source on efficiency and emissions of electric cars. Being a scientific paper, the source is highly credible. Furthermore, it is up-to-date and gives the emission of electric cars for the current Danish electricity mix which are needed in our analysis. Although basing knowledge on a single source is usually a weakness, using Jørgensen (2008) as our main source instead of a multitude of sources is also an advantage, since the figures presented are comparable. Since we focus on comparing the electric cars with the current ICE system comparability is key, and having an updated scientific source strenghtens the point of departure of our analysis. 6.2.2 Statistical data sources The external costs of transportation (Danish Ministry of Transportation 2004), The Danish Transportation Survey (DTU Transport 2006) and the online interactive transport budget (Vejdirektoratet 2006) are used for making the economic analysis. These sources are generally trustworthy. However, they are standing alone and are not cross-checked with comparable sources (e.g. similar data for other countries, other online budget tools). Especially the source Danish Ministry of Transportation (2004) has to be applied with care, because 67

the methods for measuring external costs are highly contested. Although this official document collects state of the art in the field, the insecurity of these figures is underlined by the fact that they change as new knowledge on health effects of pollution etc. is found. Also, the underlying assumptions of Vejdirektoratet, 2006 pose a restriction on the validity of the presented budgets. 6.2.3 The six conditions for escaping institutional lock-in The paper by Cowan and Hulten (1996) is used to structure the barrier analysis in chapter 3. We have not been able to find any other scientific paper that has operationalized the concept of path dependency and escaping lock-in a way that was applicable to our project. Therefore, one can argue that we are very dependent on this source, and that the six points are limiting our analysis (since more conditions for lock-in might very well exist). However, we are using the six conditions as a set of criteria that have to be fulfilled, and the barriers identified are recognized as the main obstacles. Therefore, the six-point structure suits to our project context and strengthens it. 6.2.4 Articles, parliamentary debates, company information, internet resources and interviews These sources are used for analyzing the discourse around the electric car. On an individual basis, these sources are in general not very credible. However, the use of multiple sources increases the credibility, and hence strengthens our analysis. Furthermore, the actor interviews (see 6.2.5) were used to qualify our analysis and policy suggestions, increasing the validity of our project. 6.2.5 Actor interviews Our interviews (listed in appendix L) are used to gain insights and knowledge from primary resources, and to qualify our understanding and analysis based on written material. Individually, the open, unstructured interviews have a rather low credibility. However, the combined credibility of the interviews is rather high, because the knowledge gained in one interview can be compared to and held against the insights from another interview. Also, having the actors view on our preliminary policy suggestions and on our work in general gives the results of our project validity. The response to our ideas and our interdisciplinary and institutional approach were generally positive, and our suggestions for how to create private person incentives seemed to be new for most actors. The interviews constitute a big part of our background knowledge and have helped us to orientate in the field of electric cars. 68

A limitation of our actor interviews is their unstructured character. The recursive nature of our research, however, demands a looser interview structure, since we have been developing the theory and concepts of our work throughout the project period. To conclude, by using many different types of materials from different disciplines, the overall credibility of our analysis is rather high, although individual sources might possess low trustworthiness. 6.3 Strengths and weaknesses of methodology The general methodology of our project is going from the broad historical background to the narrow casebased analysis. The historical study conducted adds strength to the project, as it is possible to draw parallels to the current situation and recognize some of the same barriers. On the other hand, the development of technology has been very rapid during the last decades and the consumers environmental awareness has increased. Therefore, the lessons to be learned from history must be adjusted, since the conditions have changed and the lessons from history alone do not apply. Therefore, we sustain our line of argument with an analysis of the current situation as well. The illustrative cases are a strong supportive argument of our project. However, they are not representative, since the transportation patterns of the families are not a statistical average based on the Danish transportation survey (DTU Transport 2007), but rather a situation created for the purpose of showing the benefits of the electric car. Statistically based, representative cases would increase the validity of our policy suggestions; another possibility could have been to study a real-life case of a family changing from the ICE to the electric car. However, since the cases are only meant to support the institutional analysis of the historical and current setting of the electric car, their non-representative character is an acceptable limitation. The recursive process of our project has given strength to our development of policy suggestions. However, there is a risk that the argumentation of the project becomes a tautology, that is, a self-fulfilling prophecy, because we do not proceed in a linear manner from research question to conclusion. However, to our purpose, the advantages of the developing a theoretical framework while making the analysis outweigh its weaknesses. We choose the high estimates of the external costs of transportation as a basis for developing policies, because we considered that the central and low estimates do not value the costs of externalities high enough for a policy based on central estimates to have effect. For example, the climate change costs of the gasoline car are 26 øre pr. km for the high estimate, which can be turned into an effective charge. If, on the other hand, the central estimate had been used, the costs of climate change are 3 øre pr. km for the gasoline car. Clearly, it could not have been possible to base a policy of efficiency-differentiated road pricing on such low 69

figures. Also, we considered that the high estimates reflect the political awareness on climate change and environmental issues in general to a higher extend than the central estimates. No sensitivity analysis of the central assumptions (e.g. car costs, gasoline prices) is made in ch. 4, although this could have strengthened our analysis. However, an attempt to illustrate the impact of the assumptions on the result is made by showing the four figures, 4-7 to 4-10, reflecting the total costs of transportation, in chapter 4. Other strengths and weaknesses of methodological character are described in section 6.5 under the strengths and weaknesses of the policy suggestions. 6.4 Strengths and weaknesses of limitations and assumptions 6.4.1 The transportation sector and the problem of general sustainability First of all, the transport sector is narrowed down to private person transportation by car. There are strong arguments for focusing on personal car use due to the fact that the major problems like air pollution, climate change and congestion are caused by passenger vehicles. Our focus was not on congestion (as a physical problem causing delays), but on the environmental impacts of congestion and traffic - in general: air pollution and climate change. Therefore, congestion problems might continue with the use of the electric car (although we had congestion in mind when designing our policies, e.g. by using the electric car as part of the car sharing fleet in the city, not as a privately owned car). The limited focus on congestion and on total traffic numbers in general is also the reason for our limited consideration of public transportation. The competitiveness of public transportation compared to conventional and electric cars is an important field to be studied further. 6.4.2 The technology chosen Secondly, the choice of electric cars and the narrow focus on the pure electric car, in the form of the battery electric car, can be criticized. The competitive technologies like hybrid cars or plug-in hybrids are not considered in the project due to the fact that we chose to focus on current commercially available technology. Another main reason for choosing the electric car is its efficiency. In this respect, other 70

technologies such as biofuels, hydrogen fuel cell cars, plug-in hybrids or natural gas cars have significantly lower overall efficiencies. In extension to the technological limitation, we have also limited our analysis to one single car model: The Think City, since it is the only new electric car with marketing plans for Denmark for the year 2008. 22 This is a clear limitation. A survey of electric cars available on the world market and an analysis of the barriers towards entering the Danish market could have improved our analysis. 6.4.3 The temporal and geographical limitation Focusing on Copenhagen limits the applicability of our results to a geographical area. The choice for Copenhagen was made because the external costs of transportation (congestion, air pollution etc.) are the higher in the densely populated areas. However, other big cities could have been chosen with the same line of argument. In the same way, our policy suggestions are valid for other urban areas as well. The restricted focus on the near term can be criticized, especially in a field like the electric car field, where development is rapid. One of the consequences of the limited time scale in focus is that we are not analyzing electricity production, and not coming up with policy suggestions for this sector, although this could be very relevant when studying electric cars. By not focusing on electricity production, it can be argued that we have not assessed the overall environmental impact of the electric car. However, we consider our contribution to a more sustainable energy system, we asked for in the research question, to be the saved energy. Due to the higher efficiency, the electric cars use less energy and simultaneously contribute to the overall sustainability goal, even if electricity production is not considered. Extending this project with a energy system analysis is an option for future studies. Another consequence for the limited temporal focus is that future technologies as fast charging or battery exchange stations, vehicle-to-grid technology including smart communication systems and the integration of more wind energy in a system with battery electric cars are not considered. These aspects are a task for future studies. 22 Note: In the finishing days of the project it has been announced that the French Mega City electric car is going to be imported by Dansk Autoimport in Hillerød (Dansk Elbil Komité 2008). However, this electric vehicle has a range and top speed much lower than the Think, because it runs on lead-acid batteries. Hence, even if this was known at the project outset, the Think would stil have been chosen as our car model in focus. 71

6.4.4 The value of non-monetary costs and benefits Fifth, non-monetary costs are not quantified. As our analysis shows that even without policies, the electric car concept is cheaper. This indicates that non-monetary costs and cost of institutional barriers in general are high. These non-monetary values include: - the loss of convenience because of the need for planning when an electric car is used, - the reduced flexibility, - the first-mover costs: the insecurity concerning lifetime and servicing of the vehicle. On the other hand, non-monetary benefits are not considered either: - no need to visit the filling station, - the advantage of having different car types at disposal in a car sharing association. Therefore, further analysis of non-monetary costs is needed. 6.4.5 Assumptions on change in behaviour We assume that our suggested solutions solve the barriers towards electric cars that the private person faces today. It gives strength to the project to present a solution for overcoming the technological lock-in. However, as it requires a change in human behaviour, it is simultaneously a weakness. We have not analyzed the behavioural responses to our suggestions, and did not analyze to what extent the incentives created will have an effect. However, the historical analysis suggests that incentives targeting the institutional barriers of the electric car do have an impact. 6.4.6 Financial implications When suggesting the creation of private person incentives, we did not consider the financing of these policies. The socioeconomic impact and the impact on the state budget is not included either. This is a considerable weakness, because the costs of our solutions heavily influence the degree of realism that these policies possess. 72

6.5 Strengths and weaknesses of suggested private person incentives 6.5.1 Strengths Besides decreasing the targeted problems (air pollution, climate change, noise), our private person incentive suggestions posses a range of forces, primarily linked to the methodology used when developing them: - - The policies of road pricing and congestion charging are technology neutral, that is, they favour electric cars indirectly because of their attractive characteristics in terms of efficiency and local air pollution. - The policies are based on a scientific background, since the aim is to internalize externalities of private transportation. Again, this favours the electric car indirectly. - Making car users pay for their externalities increases their environmental awareness, because they are confronted with the true costs of driving Overall, this means that we are using a smart regulation -approach, creating a package of incentives and involving relevant actors at the early stages of policy creation. 6.5.2 Weaknesses See 6.3. and 6.4. We identified policies on the background of barriers. If un-identified barriers exist, our policies will not be sufficient. 6.5.2.1 Policies not considered Many policies towards electric cars and towards a more sustainable transportation system were not considered: - public procurement: municipalities and governments can create demand for electric cars by using them in their own car fleets; - Car loans can be differentiated according to efficiency; - insurance payments can be differentiated according to efficiency; - the transport subsidy (befordringsfradrag) can be reduced or changed in order to reduce the car commuting; 73

- policies for reducing the transportation need (urban planning, home offices) can reduce the overall need for transportation; - public transportation can be made more efficient; - the energy efficiency labelling directive can be enforced better; - car taxation can be changed from taxing the car to taxing kilometres driven (that is, general road pricing. The road pricing in our context is differentiated according to the car engine efficiency); - mandatory plug installation for new buildings and working places with parking lot; - stricter EU standards for car efficiency. 6.5.2.2 Negative effects of policies The usual arguments against congestion charging and road pricing also apply: Congestion charging may decrease the economic growth of the city centre because of the cost of the entrance, and a general road pricing system might decrease mobility and lower the labour market flexibility. We have not looked into these negative effects, and can hence not assess their validity. 6.6 Conclusion for chapter six To conclude, the institutional theoretical approach provides a usable framework for our analysis and can be used for future studies, but detailed technical, economic and policy studies are needed as well. However, it is important to consider the institutional setting in any type of study. Considering the methodology and the delimitations, our results are still valid in the context chosen, although other types of analysis and other areas of research could have been included or considered. Leaving out relevant actors and economic analysis for the state budget as well as focusing only on a certain type of technology can be considered as the strongest weaknesses. Our suggested private person incentives must be seen in the wider context of general transport policies turning the transport system into a more sustainable direction, reducing CO2-emissions, urban pollution and congestion while supporting public transportation. A combination of our policy suggestions and omitted policies could enhance policy outcome and contribute to the goals set in the overall research question. There is a need for further study of transportation policies in an institutional context in Denmark and abroad. 74

7 Conclusion Our analysis of the historical and current institutional setting of the electric car shows lock-in of the existing internal combustion engine technology both in Denmark and in the world in general. We identify four private person barriers towards electric cars in the greater Copenhagen area: no parking places with plug, insufficient economic incentives, no retailer and after sale services and no long distance travelling opportunities, as the range of the battery is limited. The electric car has lower external costs per km compared to the gasoline car, because it is up to five times more efficient and does not have any local emissions. To reflect these environmental advantages, there is a need for internalization of externalities by policy creation. A surprising result is that already without any policies, the costs for the electric car concept are lower than the costs of owning an internal combustion engine car. Hence, the non-monetary costs (limited range, convenience of existing system, changing habits, learning process, psychological barriers, first mover disadvantage) and existing institutional barriers must have a significant influence. The findings from the cases in history, as well as the current setting around the electric car, are supporting this. We identify a range of relevant actors, who has to be brought together by a facilitator. Together, they can provide private person incentives for choosing an electric car by supplying a plug with parking space, creating a congestion charging zone with free access for electric cars, by creating an efficiency-differentiated road pricing system and providing the opportunity for long distance travelling by car sharing and public transportation. Through the creation of these private person incentives, the externalities of private vehicle transportation are internalized, and the non-monetary costs of electric car usage are reduced. 75

Figure 7-1. The supported context of Th!nk City car. Based on the assumption that the identified incentives are sufficient to change the private person behaviour, the electric car technology can make significant contributions to achieving a more sustainable transportation system because of the higher efficiency and zero local emissions of the electric car compared to the conventional car. In the light of the discussion chapter, the policies recommended must be seen in a broader policy context and should be further studied. 76

7.1 Future perspectives The future perspectives that the electric car usage opens up are illustrated through the following narrative about the energy system of the future: The role of an electric car in the future energy system Because the transport sector has in large-extent been electrified, installing more fluctuating renewable energy has been made possible. The fluctuating renewable electricity production operates together with the system of distributed electricity storage of electric cars, busses and trucks. Intelligent information systems have made the communication between cars and grid operators possible. By using the price signal and control mechanisms, the electricity grid is kept balanced. Electric cars can be plugged in at all parking spaces and are selling auxiliary services to the system operator by supplying balancing power when it is needed. The electric car owners benefit from selling those auxiliary services. By using wind energy for recharging the batteries of electric car has created awareness and the need for more renewable electricity in the grid. Therefore, it more renewable energy sources are used for energy production and the whole energy system benefits. No new interconnections are needed, although the energy system has gone through a large-scale integration of renewable energy sources and is highly dependent on them. The intelligent use of electric car fleets is able to act as a buffer for grid balancing purposes. 77

References Arthur 1989 Arthur, W. B. 1989. Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-in by Historical Events. Economic Journal, 99: 116-131 ABG 2007 Blanco, S. 2007. AeroVironment successfully quick charges Altair Nanotechnologies battery. AutoblogGreen. http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/05/30/aerovironment-successfullyquick-charges-altair-nanotechnologie/ (accessed 20.05.2008) Bijker et al. 1987 Bijker, W.E., Hughes, T.P. and Pinch, T.J. eds. 1987. The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. MIT Press, Cambridge. Brian 1989 Brian, A. W. 1989. Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-in by Historical Events. Economic Journal 99: 116-131. Calef and Goble 2007 Calef, D. and Goble, R. 2007. The allure of technology: How France and California promoted electric and hybrid vehicles to reduce urban air pollution. Policy Sci 40: 1 34 Lane 2006 Lane, B. Life Cycle Assessment of Vehicle Fuels and Technologies. Final report. London Borough of Camden. Ecolane Transport Consultancy. March 2006 Campbell 2004 Campbell, J. L. 2004. Institutional Change and Globalisation. Princeton University Press. Cowan and Hulten 1996 Cowan, R and Hulten, S. 1996. Escaping Lock-In. The Case of Electric Vehicle. Technological forecasting and Social Change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 53: 61-79. DST 2008 Danmarks Statistik 2008 Danmarks Statistik. 2008. www.statistikbanken.dk (accessed 20.05.08) Dansk Elbil Komité 2008 Dansk Elbil Komité. 2008. Fransk elbil snart til salg i Danmark. 27. maj 2008. www.danskelbilkomite.dk (accessed 03.06.08) David 1985 David, Paul A. 1985. Clio and the Economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review 75 (2): 332-337. De gule sider 2008. De gule sider. www.degulesider.dk (accessed 02.06.2008) Dell et al. 2001 Dell, R. M., Tullis, C., and Rand, D. A. J., Energy Storage - a key technology for global energy sustainability. Journal of Power Sources 100: 2-17. DMT 2004 Danish Ministry of Transport. 2004. External Costs of Transport. 2nd Report: Marginal external cost matrices for Denmark. Copenhagen. 78

Dong Energy 2008 DONG Energy. 2008. DONG Energy og det californiske Project Better Place får miljørigtige elbiler til Danmark. 27. marts 2008 http://www.dongenergy.com/da/presse/pressemeddelelser/pressemeddelelser/data/dong+energy +og+det+californiske+project+better+place+f%c3%a5r+milj%c3%b8rigtige+elbiler+til+danmark. htm (accessed 02.06.2008) Dong Energy 2008b. www.dongenergy.dk (accessed 01.06.2008) DTU Transport 2007 DTU Transport. 2007. Transportvaneundersøgelsen. http://www.dtu.dk/centre/modelcenter/tu.aspx (accessed 30.05.08) Dyhr et al. 2008 Dyhr, P. O. 2008: B 116 (som fremsat): Forslag til folketingsbeslutning om kommunal adgang til at indføre afgift på kørsel på vejnettet (betalingsring m.v.). Folketinget 2007-08 (2. samling). www.ft.dk (accessed May 13th 2008) DØR 2006 Det Økonomiske Råd 2006. Dansk Økonomi, forår 2006. Copenhagen DØR 2008 De Økonomiske Råd. 2008. Dansk Økonomi, forår 2008. Copenhagen Eisenstein 2007 Eisenstein, P. A. 2007. First Ride: Tesla Roadster. Green Car News. http://www.thecarconnection.com/auto_news/green_car_news/first_ride_tesla_roadster.s196. A13485.html?DID=RSS (accessed 31.05.2008) Energistyrelsen 2007 Energistyrelsen. 2007. Energistatistik 2006. Energistyrelsen 2008 Energistyrelsen. 2008. Alternative drivmidler i transportsektoren. Rapport fra den tværministerielle arbejdsgruppe om alternative drivmidler i transportsektoren. Copenhagen. European Commission 2008 European Commission. 2008. 20 20 by 2020. Europe's climate change opportunity:com/2008/0030 final. Brussels. EVDL 2007 Major, J. 2007. Re: Why doesn t regen work with DC. Electric Vehicle Discussion List http://www.evdl.org/archive/index.html#nabble-p12391827s25542 (accessed 20.05.2008) Folketinget 2008 Folketinget. 2008. Aftale mellem regeringen (Venstre og Det Konservative Folkeparti), Socialdemokraterne, Dansk Folkeparti, Socialistisk Folkeparti, Det Radikale Venstre og Ny Alliance om den danske energipolitik om den danske energipolitik i årene 2008-11. 21. februar 2008. Denmark. Garud and Karnøe 2001 Garud, R. and Karnoe, P. eds. 2001 Path creation as a process of mindful deviation. Path dependence and creation. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 1-38. Gunningham and Grabosky 1998 Gunningham, N. and Grabosky, P. eds. 1998 Smart Regulation. Designing Environmental Policy. Darren Sinclair Hanley 2007 Hanley, N., Shogren, J. F. and White, B. 2007. Environmental Economics in Theory and Practice. Second edition. Hampsire, New York: Palgrave MacMillan. 79

Hodgson 2006 Hodgson, G. M. 2006 What are institutions? Journal of Economic Issues XL (1): 1-25. Horstmann 2005 Horstmann, J. 2005. Elbiler i Danmark. Miljøprojekt 1006 Miljøstyrelsen. Copenhagen. Høyer 2008 Høyer, K. G. 2008 The history of alternative fuels in transportation: The case of electric and hybrid cars. Utilities Policy 16: 63-71. Hughes 1983 Hughes, T. P. 1983. Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society 1880-1930. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Hughes 1987 Hughes, T. P. 1987. The Evolution of Large Technological Systems. In he Social Construction of Technological Systems. Pinch, T., Hughes, T. H. and Bijker, W.E. London: MIT Press. Hull 2008 Hull, A. 2008. Policy integration: What will it take to achieve more sustainable transport solutions in cities? Transport Policy 15: 94 103. Hvelplund 2005 Hvelplund, F. 2005 Erkendelse og forandring: Teorier om adækvat erkendelse og teknologisk forandring, med energieksempler fra 1974-2001. Doktorafhandling, Aalborg Universitet. Infrastrukturkomissionen 2008 Infrastrukturkomissionen. 2008. Danmarks Transportinfrastruktur 2030. Copenhagen. Ingeniøren 2007 Ingeniøren 2007. Regeringen står fast: Ikke en øre i afgiftslettelse til hybridbiler. 19. december 2007 http://ing.dk/artikel/84220 (accessed 02.06.2008) Ingeniørforeningen i Danmark 2006 Ingeniørforeningen i Danmark. 2006. Ingeniørforeningens Energiplan 2030: Hovedrapport. Copenhagen. J. Reed 2007 Reed, J. 2007 Business life: Jump-start in the race to go electric. Financial Times. http://search.ft.com/ftarticle?querytext=willums&y=0&aje=false&x=0&id=071211000051&ct=0 &nclick_check=1 (accessed 07.05.2008) Jamison 2008 Jamison, A. 2008. 5th Lecture: Action and Change-Oriented Research. http://www.lsn.aau.dk/intranet/planogmiljo/em8/bilagtos/slideslecture52008aj.pdf (accessed 02.06.2008) Jørgensen 2008 K. Jørgensen. 2008. Tecnologies for electric, hybrid and hydrogen vehicles: Electricity from renewable energy sources in transport. Utilities Policy 16: 72-79. KFB 2000 KFB - The Swedish Transport and Communications Research Board. Olsson, A. R., ed. 2000. Clean Vehicles With Electric Drive: Final report from the Swedish research, development and demonstration programme on electric and hybrid vehicles, 1993-2000. KFB-Rapport 2000:27. Sweden. 80

Københavns Kommune 2005 Københavns Kommune. 2005. Kørselsafgifter i København. Copenhagen. Københavns Kommune 2007 Københavns Kommune, Center for Miljø. 2007. Redegørelse om renere brændstoffer og teknologi til transport. Copenhagen. Københavns Kommune 2007a Københavns Kommune. 2007. Miljømetropolen: Vores vision CPH 2015. Copenhagen. Københavns Kommune 2007b Københavns Kommune. 2007. Redegørelse om renere brændstoffer og teknologi til transport. Copenhagen Langdal 2008 Langdal, G. 2008. Stockholm a success story. Transportøkonomisk Forening. www.toef.dk (accessed 31.05.08) Litman 1997 Litman, T. 1997. Policy Implications of Full Social Costing. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 553, No. 1, 143-156 Meyer and Schubert (2007) Meyer, U. and Schubert, C. 2007. Integrating path dependency and path creation in a general understanding of path constitution. The role of agency and institutions in the stabilisation of technological innovations. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies 3: 23-44. Mierlo et al. 2006 Mierlo, J. V., Maggetto, G. and Lataire, Ph. 2007. Which energy source for road transport in the future? A comparison of battery, hybrid and fuel cell vehicles. Energy Conversion and Management 47: 748-2760. Miljoezone 2008. Copenhagen Municipality. Miljoezone the particle filter zone in Copenhagen. http://www.miljozone.dk/vognmand_kort.php (accessed 31.05.2008) Miljøstyrelsen 2001 Miljøstyrelsen. 2001. Transportens eksterne omkostninger. Miljøprojekt 619. Copenhagen. Mobility Car Sharing 2008 Mobility Car Sharing. 2008. www.mobility.ch. (accessed 26.05.08) Nørregaard 2008. Nørregaard, K. 2008. Slides from Transportøkonomisk Forenings konference. Transportøkonomisk Forening. www.toef.dk (accessed 31.05.08) North 1990 North, D. 1990 Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press P. Reed 2006 Reed, P. 2007. Review: Who Killed the Electric Car? Urban Legend or Prime Suspect? Edmunds.com http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/advice/fueleconomy/who.killed.t he.electric.car/ev1.funeral.500.jpg (accessed 06.05.2008) Rejseplanen 2008 Rejseplanen. 2008 www.rejseplanen.dk (accessed 02.06.2008) 81

Reuters 2007 Gergely, A. 2007 Lithium batteries power hybrid cars of future: Saft. REUTERS. http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentnews/idusl2055095620070621?sp=true (accessed 20.05.2008) Romm 2006 Romm, J. 2006. The Car and the Fuel of the Future. Energy Policy 34: 2609-2614. Scott 2001 Scott, W. R. 2001 Constructing an Analytic Framework I. In Institutions and Organizations. Scott, W., 47-70. London: Sage. Shaheen, S. et al. 2004 Shaheen, S., Wright, J. and Sperling, D. 2004. California s Zero-Emission Vehicle Mandate. Linking clean fuel cars, carsharing and station car strategies. Transportation research record 1791, Paper no. 02-3857. California. Socialdemokraterne i København 2008 Socialdemokraterne i København. 2008. Stile fra den røde skole. Maj 2008. http://www.roedeskole.dk (accessed 29.05.08) SPC 2008a EV1. Edmunds.com, Photo courtesy of Sony Pictures Classics. http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/advice/fueleconomy/who.killed.t he.electric.car/ev1.f34.500.jpg (accessed 06.05.2008) SPC 2008b EV1. Edmunds.com, Photo courtesy of Sony Pictures Classics. http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/advice/fueleconomy/who.killed.t he.electric.car/ev1.recharging.500.jpg (accessed 06.05.2008) Think 2008 Think. Think car company in Norway. www.think.no (accessed 02.06.08) Think 2008a Willums, J-O. n.d. About Think. Think car company in Norway. http://en.think.no/think/content/view/full/178 (accessed 07.05.2008) Think 2008b Think History. Think car company in Norway. http://en.think.no/think/content/view/full/181 (accessed 07.05.2008) Think 2008c Think Environment. Think car company in Norway. http://en.think.no/think/content/view/full/192 (accessed 07.05.2008) Think 2008d Batteries Think car company in Norway. http://www.think.no/think/content/view/full/264 (accessed 25.05.2008) Think 2008e Think City Photos Think car company in Norway. http://en.think.no/think/press- Pictures/Picture-gallery/Photos/TH!NK-i-city-i (accessed 07.05.2008) Thomsen 2008 Thomsen, B. B. 2008. Slides from Transportøkonomisk Forenings konference. Transportøkonomisk Forening. www.toef.dk (accessed 31.05.08) Trafikudvalget 2007 Trafikudvalget. 2007 2. udkast til betænkning over Forslag til folketingsbeslutning om kommunal adgang til at indføre afgift på kørsel på vejnettet (betalingsring m.v.). Folketinget. www.ft.dk (accessed 26.05.2008) 82

Transport for London 2006 Transport for London. 2006. Central London Congestion Charging. Fourth Annual Monitoring Report. London. Unruh 2006 Unruh, G. C. 2006 Escaping carbon lock-in. Energy Policy XL 30 (1): 317-325. V2G 2007 University of Delaware. 2007. V2G: Vehicle to Grid Power. http://www.udel.edu/v2g/ (accessed 20.05.2008) Vejdirektoratet 2006 Vejdirektoratet. 2006. Det Interaktive Transportbudget. www.transportbudget.dk (accessed 01.06.2008) VE-Net 2008 VE-Net. 2008. NOVELTRA Background Paper. 31.03.2008. VE-Net 2008. http://www.ve-net.eu/_root/media/29554_noveltra%20%20background%20paper.pdf (accessed 02.06.08) WWF 2008 WWF World Wide Fund for Nature, 2008. Plugged In: The End of Oil Age. Summary report. WWF. http://assets.panda.org/downloads/plugged_in_summary.pdf (accessed 22.05.2008) 83

Appendix A Transport Budget 1 Appendix X Transport budget Danish help text for data and result tables from www.transportbudget.dk (accessed 01.06.08) Grøn ejerafgift For alle personbiler, der er registreret første gang efter 1. juli 1997, skal der betales en periodisk ejerafgift afhængig af bilens brændstofforbrug ("grøn ejerafgift"). For personbiler, der er indregistreret første gang før 30. januar 1997 betales i stedet vægtafgift. Er drivmidlet andet end benzin - primært diesel - skal der herudover betales en udligningsafgift. For personbiler, der er indregistreret første gang i perioden 30. januar 1997 til 1. juli 1997 betales enten grøn ejerafgift eller vægtafgift og evt. udligningsafgift. Den årlige ejerafgift for de standardbiler, som indgår i Det Interaktive Transportbudget, varierer fra kr. 160,- (VW Lupo) til kr. 5.780,-. (Volvo V70 D5). For samtlige bilmodeller på det danske marked kan man på Færdselsstyrelsens hjemmeside www.fstyr.dk eller www.hvorlangtpaaliteren.dk finde brændstofforbrug og ejerafgift samt årlig udgift til brændstof (beregnet ud fra 20.000 km pr. år). Vægt- og udligningsafgifterne kan findes på www.skm.dk/tal_statistik/satser_og_beloeb/242.html. Senest opdateret, juni 2006 Cykel, afskrivning Der regnes med en afskrivning på 20 pct. pr. år af en nypris på kr. 3.500,-. Senest opdateret, juni 2006 Vejhjælp, vask og parkering De månedlige udgifter til vejhjælp, vask og parkering er fastsat i 2001 ud fra Forbrugerstyrelsens gennemsnitspriser. Efterfølgende er priserne opdateret ved hjælp af Danmarks Statistiks forbrugerindeks for andre tjenester vedr. personlige transportmidler. Vejhjælp er sat til kr. 55,- pr. måned. Vask og parkering til kr. 193.- pr. måned. Det er naturligvis individuelt, hvad man bruger på disse poster, og hvis du mener, at beløbene vil være anderledes for dig, kan du selv rette tallene i "Se/ret data om biludgifter". Senest opdateret, oktober 2004 Delebil, abonnement Medlemskab af en delebilsklub indebærer et månedligt gebyr, som i modellen er sat til kr. 217,-. Beløbet er ligesom de øvrige delebilspriser beregnet som et vægtet gennemsnit af priserne hos følgende delebiludbydere: Albertslund Delebil, Bryggebilen, Farum Delebil, Hertz Delebilen, Høje Tåstrup Delebil, Københavns Delebiler, Køge Delebil, Lyngby Delebil, Munksøgård Delebilsforening, Silkeborg Delebilklub og Århus Delebilklub (maj 2006). Hertz Delebilen og de fleste private foreninger samarbejder indenfor rammerne af en landsorganisation kaldet Danske Delebiler. Alle klubberne, dog undtagen Hertz Delebilen, opererer med indmeldelsesgebyr, der ligger mellem kr. 1.500,- og kr. 4.000,-. Modellen tager højde for indmeldelsesgebyret ved at afskrive det over 4 år, hvilket indebærer, at der lægges kr. 46,- oveni det månedlige gebyr. Beløbet er ligesom de øvrige delebilspriser beregnet som et vægtet gennemsnit af delebilsklubberne. Senest opdateret, maj 2006 Forsikring Markedet for bilforsikringer er temmelig uoverskueligt. De forskellige selskaber kører med forskellige prisstrukturer og stiller forskellige krav i forbindelse med tegning af forsikring. Dertil kommer, at der ofte kan opnås rabat, hvis man samler flere forsikringer samt evt. finansiering i samme selskab. De fleste selskaber har beregningsmodeller på nettet, og på www.forsikringsluppen.dk er der mulighed for at sammenligne priser på bilforsikringer fra flere forskellige selskaber.

De data omkring bilforsikring, der ligger i Det Interaktive Transportbudget, er det anslåede billigste tilbud på markedet for en ansvars- og kaskoforsikring uden samlerabat eller lignende og med en selvrisiko på ca. 2000 kr. Tallene er baseret på sammenligninger i 2001 af præmierne i 5 forskellige selskaber. Beløbsgrænserne for bilerne jf. nedenfor samt forsikringspræmierne er efterfølgende opdateret frem til oktober 2004 ved hjælp af Danmarks Statistiks forbrugerprisindeks for henholdsvis personbiler og forsikringer i forbindelse med transport. For at gøre beregningerne så realistiske som muligt er de baseret på forventningen om, at jo dyrere en bil er, jo ældre er køberen bl.a. af den grund, at det for en førstegangskøber kan være meget dyrt at få forsikret en helt ny bil. Beregningerne over bilforsikringer i Det Interaktive Transportbudget er baseret på følgende antagelser: * Generelt for alle: Ansvars- og kaskodækning, selvrisiko på ca. 2000 kr., bopæl i Odense. * For biler med en købspris under kr. 175.000,- i 2006 (Ford Ka 2000, Suzuki Alto 2003, Kia Picanto 2006, VW Lupo 2000, VW Lupo 2003, Fiat Panda 2006, Peugeot 206 2000, Skoda Fabia 2003, Hyundai Getz 2006, Toyota Yaris 2003, Peugeot 206 2006, VW Golf 2000, Peugeot 307 (benzin) 2003, Ford Mondeo 2000, Opel Zafira 2000, Citroën Xsara Picasso 2003) tager beregningerne udgangspunkt i en førstegangskøber på 25 år. Præmien er i dette tilfælde sat til kr. 1.600 pr. måned. * For biler med en købspris mellem kr. 175.000,- og kr. 275.000,- kr. i 2006 (Peugeot 307 2006, Peugeot 307 (diesel) 2003, Ford Mondeo 2003, VW Passat 2000, Volvo V70 2000, Citroën Xsara Picasso 2006, Citroën Berlingo 2003) tager beregningerne udgangspunkt i en 30-årig bilist med 5 års skadefri kørsel. Præmien er i dette tilfælde sat til kr. 1.000 pr. måned. * For biler med en købspris over 275.000 kr. i 2006 (Skoda Octavia 2006, Toyota Avensis 2006, VW Passat 2003, VW Passat 2006, Audi A6 2006, Volvo V70 2003 (diesel og benzin), Volvo V70 2006, Renault Scenic 2006) tager beregningerne udgangspunkt i en 40-årig bilist med 10 års skadefri kørsel. Præmien er i dette tilfælde sat til kr. 750,- pr. måned. Opdateret, oktober 2004 og juni 2006 Værditab Det løbende værditab er en meget tung post i de samlede omkostninger ved at holde bil. Det er samtidigt en faktor, som det er særdeles vanskeligt at sige noget generelt om, fordi værdien af en bil afhænger meget af, hvilken model og årgang, der er tale om. Værditabet på en bil er desuden svært at opgøre på forhånd, idet en række markedsbestemte faktorer vil være stærkt bestemmende herfor. Blandt disse faktorer er prisudviklingen på nye biler, forekomsten af nye modeller, udbuddet af den pågældende model på brugtmarkedet, bilens generelle ry samt bilens farve. Værditabet er størst ved køb af en ny bil, hvor du i mange tilfælde må regne med, at bilen taber halvdelen af sin nyværdi efter de første 3-4 år. Køber du en brugt bil, må du også regne med et stort værditab, men her har udgiften til købet af bilen ofte været mindre, hvorfor værditabet ikke vejer helt så tungt i budgettet. Priserne på de brugte biler er kalkuleret ved hjælp af oplysninger fra hjemmesiden www.bilpriser.dk. Denne hjemmeside indeholder aktuelle købs- og salgspriser for en lang række brugte biler. Priserne for de brugte biler fra 2000 og 2003, som du kan vælge i modellen, er således hentet direkte fra hjemmesiden. Den skønnede indbytningspris om fire år er for såvel nye som brugte biler beregnet med udgangspunkt i prisen for den nærmest sammenlignelige model i programmet fire år tidligere. De er naturligvis ingen, der med sikkerhed kan sige, hvad en bil vil kunne indbringe ved salg om fire år, og den valgte metode kan derfor heller ikke siges at udtrykke den endelige sandhed. Men det er et godt bud på, hvad du kan forvente at få for en bil af den pågældende type. Alle priser på brugte biler samt priserne på de nye biler er indhentet i marts 2006. For såvel nye som brugte biler er tillagt leveringsomkostninger i forbindelse med købet på kr. 3.380,- På www.bilpriser.dk er priserne baseret på en række forudsætninger om indehaverens bopæl, bilens stand mv. I modellen her er der regnet med, at bilisten bor i Odense (postnr. 5000) og kører 18.000 km pr. år. Alle bilerne er med almindelig lak (dvs. uden special- eller metallakeringer) og uden ekstraudstyr. Biler under 5 år karakteriseres som over middel stand, mens biler over 5 år karakteriseres som middel stand. Det forudsættes, at bilerne rustbeskyttes én gang i det 6. leveår. Det indebærer, at ingen af de købte biler har fået rustbeskyttelse, mens de to ældste årgange af biler til gengæld har fået én gang rustbeskyttelse før salget efter fire års ejerperiode. Det forudsættes desuden, at bilerne ikke har været skadet, at de ikke tidligere har været omlakeret eller repareret i lakken, at alle serviceeftersyn er overholdt, at kabinen ikke er medtaget (af hund eller rygning), samt at bilen ikke har været synet inden for de seneste 6 måneder før salget. Endelig er det i alle tilfælde forudsat, at salget sker i forbindelse med køb af en ny bil hos en anden forhandler. Senest opdateret, april 2006 Månedlig bruttoydelse og renter af lån Det er vanskeligt at gøre de finansielle omkostninger ved bilhold op på en måde, der er sammenlignelig med udgifterne ved at dække sit transportbehov på anden vis, dvs. med kollektiv trafik, delebil, cykel eller en kombination af disse muligheder. Det skyldes, at prisen for at holde bil dels består af en lang række komplekse faktorer, dels nødvendigvis må ses i en længere tidshorisont. Et billån optages f.eks. som regel over flere år. De reelle omkostninger herved afhænger af de gældende markedsvilkår for renter og lånevilkår i øvrigt samt af de individuelle skatteforhold for den enkelte. For de øvrige transportmidler er brug og udgifter mere direkte forbundet - også i tidsmæssig forstand. Når man stiger op i en bus eller et tog, betaler man for den pågældende rejse, og derefter er omkostningerne ude af verden, indtil man stiger på igen næste gang. Eventuelt har man et månedskort, som fornyes regelmæssigt. Tilsvarende betaler man i en delebilklub et månedligt gebyr, men også her er der en direkte og umiddelbar sammenhæng mellem transportens forbrug og pris. Det Interaktive Transportbudget tilstræber at sammenligne personer i samme udgangssituation. Men bemærk, at man selv kan ændre på beregningsforudsætningerne for billånet ved at skrive egne tal i skemaet "Se/ret data om biludgifter". Hjælp til at finde den korrekte rentesats fås bedst på den uvildige hjemmeside www.mybanker.dk, som også indeholder mange gode råd og informationer om finansielle ydelser. Oplysninger om

renteomkostninger og månedlig ydelse kan fås hos pengeinstitutter og finansieringsselskaber, og på disses hjemmesider er der desuden i mange tilfælde mulighed for at gennemføre låneberegninger. Beregningerne af låneomkostninger i Det Interaktive Transportbudget er baseret på priser fra såvel pegeinstitutter som finansieringsselskaber. Forskellene ved valg af henholdsvis penge- eller finansieringsinstitut synes at være blevet reduceret. I begge tilfælde kan låneudbyderen kræve etablering af et ejerpantebrev, og i så fald vil stiftelsesomkostningerne indeholde tinglysningsomkostninger mv. Forskellen består fortsat i, at pengeinstitutterne anvender gældsbreve, mens finansieringsinstitutterne anvender købekontrakter. De juridiske forskelle på disse to konstruktioner vurderes dog at have begrænset betydning i praksis. Månedlig bruttoydelse Den månedlige bruttoydelse på lånet lagt sammen med de øvrige faste udgifter samt dit brændstofforbrug og andre variable udgifter er alt i alt det beløb, som du skal have op af lommen hver måned. Dette beløb svarer imidlertid ikke til de reelle omkostninger ved at eje en bil. Ikke hele bruttoydelsen er en udgift. Det skyldes, at afdragene på lånet opbygger en friværdi i bilen. Der spares altså penge op i bilen, så længe der betales af på lånet. Til gengæld må der tages højde for, at bilens værdi løbende forringes. Dette værditab er penge, man aldrig ser igen. Den reelle udgift ved at have bil er altså værditabet + renterne + de øvrige faste og variable udgifter. Renter af lån Forudsætningerne for beregningen af lånene til de standardbiler, som indgår i Det Interaktive Transportbudget er følgende: * Fuld lånoptagning, dvs. ingen udbetaling. * Løbetid: 7 år for 2006-modeller, 5 år for 2003-modeller og 4 år for 2000-modeller. * Lånene er inklusive etableringsomkostninger. * En effektiv rentesats før skat på 7,59 pct. p.a. * Omkostningerne ved lånet opgøres efter skat, dvs. efter at der er taget højde for værdien af rentefradraget. Se yderligere beskrivelser af forudsætningerne nedenfor: Uddybning af forudsætninger: Fuld lånoptagning, dvs. ingen udbetaling Ofte vil man selv være i stand til at lægge en udbetaling i forbindelse med køb af en bil og dermed få en lavere rente. Her er der altså tale om nogle penge, som man har i forvejen eller har sparet op. Det Interaktive Transportbudget opererer med fuld lånoptagning. Det skyldes for det første et ønske om at afspejle en realistisk situation for mange førstegangskøbere, der ikke har råd til at lægge en større udbetaling på bordet i forbindelse med et billån. For det andet ville det ikke være korrekt at lægge en udbetaling på f.eks. 20 pct. til grund for sammenligninger med andre måder at dække sit transportbehov på, idet udgangspunktet for beregningerne dermed ville være forskelligt. Hvis man ved beregning af omkostningerne ved bilhold indregnede en forudgående betaling på f.eks. 30.000 kr., burde man også regne med, at en bruger af kollektiv trafik havde 30.000 kr. på forhånd. Det ville indebære, at hun eller han ikke skulle have penge op af lommen til klippe- eller abonnementskort de næste lange tider. Ved fastlæggelsen af den rentesats, som Det Interaktive Transportbudget opererer med, er der dog taget højde for, at de fleste kan få et billån på andre vilkår end dem, der gælder hvis man som fremmed kommer ind i en tilfældig bank og beder om et billån uden udbetaling. Se mere nedenfor. Løbetid: 7 år for 2006-modeller, 5 år for 2003-modeller og 4 år for 2000-modeller Låneperioderne er differentierede med henblik på at afspejle bilens forventede restlevetid for derved at etablere en rimelig grad af overensstemmelse mellem det forventede værditab og afdraget på gælden. Generelt opererer Det Interaktive Transportbudget med en ejerperiode på 4 år altså en kortere periode for de to nyeste bilårgange end lånets løbetid og derfor er der også ved beregningen af værditabet taget udgangspunkt i en indbytningspris efter 4 år for alle de specifikke standardbiler, som kan vælges i modellen. Lånene er inklusive etableringsomkostninger Udover renteudgifterne er der typisk en række andre omkostninger forbundet med et billån. Det gælder ikke mindst etableringsomkostninger af forskellig art. Lånene i Det Interaktive Transportbudget er beregnet inklusive alle etableringsomkostninger. Disse er opgjort med udgangspunkt i oplysningerne på Danske Banks hjemmeside www.danskebank.dk. Det forudsættes, at der etableres et ejerpantebrev, og der skal derfor betales tinglysningsafgifter mv. Det samlede beløb, der skal lånes, er summen af etableringsomkostningerne og bilens pris. Etableringsomkostninger og betingelser vedrørende sikkerhed mv. kan variere fra låneudbyder til låneudbyder. Det kan derfor være en god idé at sammenligne priser og betingelser fra flere udbydere, inden man beslutter sig for et lån. En sådan sammenligning kan foretages med udgangspunkt i de årlige omkostninger i procent (ÅOP), hvor både renter og omkostninger er indregnet. ÅOP beskrives nærmere nedenfor. En effektiv rentesats før skat på 7,59 pct. p.a. Betaler man uden udbetaling - der som redegjort ovenfor er grundlaget for Det Interaktive Transportbudgets standardbiler - betaler man en højere rente end, hvis man kan lægge penge på bordet i forbindelse med lånet. Som nævnt ovenfor tager modellen højde for, at det trods alt er de færreste, der må betale den allerhøjeste rente ved optagelse af et billån. Måske har man i forvejen sparet nogle penge op evt. i form af friværdi i en bil. Dertil kommer, at personer, der har en ejerbolig med friværdi, har mulighed for at belåne denne til f.eks. bilkøb. På www.mybanker.dk oplyses henholdsvis højeste rentesats (den man ofte vil skulle betale for et billån uden udbetaling) og laveste rentesats i en række pengeinstitutter og finansieringsselskaber. Gennemsnittet af disse rentesatser opgjort som effektive renter før skat er beregnet til henholdsvis 5,57 pct. p.a. og 9,62 pct. p.a. (primo oktober 2006). Gennemsnittet heraf er 7,59 pct. pr. år.

Rentesatserne er oplyst af de enkelte pengeinstitutter og finansieringsselskaber. Det er forudsat, at der er tale om et billån til en almindelig privat kunde på kr. 100.000,- over 7 år med variabel rente og med sikkerhed i et ejerpantebrev (hvis banken eller selskabet kræver det). Rentesatsen er således opgjort ud fra nogle standardforudsætninger, som ikke nødvendigvis er opfyldt for de lån, der skal optages ved køb af bilerne i Det Interaktive Transportbudget. Af denne grund og fordi, der under alle omstændigheder er tale om en gennemsnitsbetragtning, skal de månedlige renteudgifter i Det Interaktive Transportbudget alene opfattes som vejledende. I mange tilfælde vil det være muligt at opnå en rentesats, der ligger under den her anvendte sats. Dertil kommer, at man ofte kan få særligt attraktive tilbud, hvis man har været kunde i en bank gennem mange år, har høj kreditværdighed, køber flere finansielle ydelser på en gang (f.eks. bilforsikring samtidig med) osv. Men her er der altså beregnet på en enkeltstående service uden særlige vilkår. Omkostningerne ved lånet opgøres efter skat, dvs. efter at der er taget højde for værdien af rentefradraget Etableringsomkostningerne ved et billån indebærer, at man i virkeligheden skal låne et større beløb end bilens faktiske pris. Ved sammenligning af tilbud fra forskellige pengeinstitutter og finansieringsselskaber bør man tage udgangspunkt i de årlige omkostninger i procent (ÅOP). ÅOP indeholder alle omkostninger ved optagelse af lånet samt løbende renter. Pengeinstitutter og finansieringsselskaber (og andre långivere såsom kreditkortselskaber) har pligt til at oplyse de samlede årlige omkostninger i procent (ÅOP) men kun før skat. Optager man et billån, kan man trække renterne fra i skat. Den reelle omkostning er altså ÅOP minus skattefradrag. Ved sammenligning mellem flere pengeinstitutter og finansieringsselskaber er det således mest reelt at sammenligne ÅOP efter skat. På www.mybanker.dk kan du se ÅOP efter skat for et typisk billån hos størstedelen af danske pengeinstitutter. Følgende procedure er anvendt ved udregningen af de reelle omkostninger ved lånet: 1. Ved hjælp af oplysningerne på www.danskebank.dk er der fastlagt et gennemsnitligt procentvist tillæg til bilens pris, som forudsættes at dække de typiske etableringsomkostninger (tinglysning, stiftelsesprovenu mm.). Herudfra fastlægges det samlede lånebeløb, den månedlige ydelse samt renteudgifterne for hver af de 32 standardbiler med udgangspunkt i deres købspris i 2006. 2. Ved beregningerne forudsættes det, at der er tale om en låntager med negativ kapitalindkomst og et rentefradrag på 33,3 pct. svarende til den gennemsnitlige kommune-, amts- og kirkeskat. De løbende renteudgifter før skat reduceres således med 33,3 pct. De skattemæssige forhold varierer afhængigt af bopæl og indkomst. For låntagere med positiv kapitalindkomst er værdien af rentefradraget større end for låntagere med negativ kapitalindkomst. 3. De samlede renteudgifter efter skat opgøres for de første fire år af lånets løbetid. På baggrund heraf beregnes de gennemsnitlige månedlige renteudgifter efter skat. For lån på fire år indgår således alle renteomkostninger, mens kun en del af renteomkostningerne for de 5- og 7-årige lån indgår i beregningerne. Det skyldes, at ejerperioden for såvel nye som brugte biler er sat til fire år. Beregningen af omkostninger vedrører derfor alene disse fire år. Opdateret, oktober 2004 og juni 2006 Brændstofforbrug Brændstofforbruget afhænger af, hvor mange km biler kører pr. liter. Forbruget for nye biler kan ses i Færdselsstyrelsens pjece Hvor langt på literen?. Brochuren kan bl.a. rekvireres hos bilforhandlere eller hentes på Færdselsstyrelsens hjemmeside www.fstyr.dk. Desuden er brændstofforbruget for biler fra 1997 eller senere samlet på hjemmesiden www.hvorlangtpaaliteren.dk. Hvis du har en bil fra før 1997 eller overvejer at købe en, kan du anslå dens benzinforbrug ved at sammenligne med de standardbiler, der ligger her i modellen. For alle biltyper gælder det, at der over en kortere årrække som regel ikke sker større udsving. Tallene for brændstofforbrug er under alle omstændigheder gennemsnitsbetragtninger. Forbruget afhænger meget af kørselsmønster, om det er byeller motorvejskørsel m.m. Læs mere på Færdselsstyrelsens hjemmesider. Senest opdateret, oktober 2004 Vedligeholdelse Omkostningerne til vedligehold af biler er som udgangspunkt opgjort ud fra prisen på servicekontrakter. For mange privatbilister er servicekontrakter endnu et forholdsvis ukendt begreb, men i dag er det muligt at tegne sådanne kontrakter for de fleste bilmærker og typer. Kontrakterne dækker løbende vedligeholdelse (service) samt evt. reparationer på bilens mekaniske og elektroniske komponenter i en periode på typisk op til fire eller fem år. Prisen for servicekontrakterne er på niveau med prisen for de løbende serviceeftersyn. Servicekontrakterne kan i nogle tilfælde tegnes både med og uden udgifter til dæk. I denne sammenhæng tages der udgangspunkt i priserne uden udgifter til dæk. Dækudgifterne er kalkuleret særskilt for hver af modellens bilklasser, og forudsætningerne for disse beregninger er beskrevet i særskilt hjælpetekst. Priserne på servicekontrakterne er indhentet og opgjort i 2003 for en række af de mest almindelige bilmodeller. Priserne gælder typisk for 3 år og 60.000 km eller 4 år og 120.000 km. Priserne i denne model er korrigeret, så de dækker et årligt kørselsbehov på 18.000 km i 4 år. De enkelte bilmodeller er indplaceret i modellens bilklasser, og i hvert enkelt tilfælde er der beregnet en gennemsnitspris for klassen. Det betyder, at vedligeholdelsesomkostningerne ikke nødvendigvis afspejler den konkrete bilmodel, der er udvalgt i de enkelte klasser. Til gengæld viser det, hvor meget du i gennemsnit må forvente at skulle bruge på vedligehold af en bil i f.eks. miniklassen. Men det beløb, du kommer til at betale, kan i praksis godt blive større eller mindre.

Priserne for de enkelte klasser er efterfølgende opdateret frem til oktober 2004 med indeks fra forbrugerprisindeksets kategori vedrørende drift af personlige transportmidler. Der er anvendt et vægtet gennemsnit af indeksene for reservedele og tilbehør samt vedligeholdelse og reparation af personlige transportmidler. De fremkomne priser er herefter sammenlignet med aktuelle priser på servicekontrakter fra nogle udvalgte importører. Generelt er der god overensstemmelse mellem de opdaterede priser og de aktuelt indsamlede priser. De senest indsamlede priser viser dog en tendens til, at tidligere tiders forskelle mellem omkostningerne for benzin- og dieselbiler er reduceret. Derfor er omkostningerne i de enkelte bilklasser nu ens for benzin- og dieselbiler. Servicekontrakterne er for nye biler. Hvis du vælger at købe en brugt bil, kan du ikke få den samme sikkerhed for vedligeholdelsesomkostningernes størrelse som ved en ny bil. Desuden er vedligeholdelsesomkostningerne generelt højere på en brugt bil, fordi en række af bilens komponenter skal skiftes med tiden (tandrem, kobling, bremsedele, støddæmpere, udstødningssystem og i nogle tilfælde katalysator). Generelt øges vedligeholdelsesbehovet jo ældre bilen er og jo flere kilometer, den har kørt. På ældre biler må du også forudse, at det kan blive nødvendigt med større reparationer såsom motorudskiftning, karrosseriarbejde og lign. Der kan være en del forskel i vedligeholdelsesbehovet for forskellige ældre bilmodeller, og selv identiske biler kan være kørt under forskellige betingelser, så udgifterne til vedligehold kan variere. Men da reservedelspriserne ofte er lavere på de ældre biler, er det ikke nødvendigvis meget dyrere at køre i en lidt ældre bil. I modellen regnes der med, at vedligeholdelsesomkostningerne for biler fra 2000 og 2003 svarer til prisen for en servicekontrakt på en 2006-model med et tillæg på 50 pct. Nedenfor vises de beregnede vedligeholdelsesomkostninger for de forskellige bilklasser dels for en bil fra 2006, dels for brugte biler fra 2000 og 2003. Vedligeholdelsesomkostninger for biler fra 2000, 2003 og 2006. Øre/km. 2006 ekskl. dæk 2000 og 2003 ekskl. dæk Supermini 21,1 31,7 Mini 23,1 34,7 Mellem 1 26,0 39,0 Mellem 2 30,0 45,0 Stor 42,6 63,9 MPV 32,0 48,0 Opdateret, oktober 2004 og juni 2006 Dæk Omkostninger til dæk er en ikke uvæsentlig post i bilbudgettet. Samtidig kan omkostningen være ganske svær at opgøre, idet både prisen på dæk og forbruget af dæk svinger meget fra bilist til bilist. De store prisforskelle på dæk afspejler dels en hård konkurrence på markedet, dels at der på markedet findes en række kvalitetskategorier af dæk, der befinder sig i forskellige prislejer. Det i princippet samme dæk kan derfor svinge ganske meget i pris afhængig dels af, hvor dækket købes, dels af hvilket fabrikat der anvendes. I beregningerne er derfor taget udgangspunkt i et standarddæk af et anerkendt fabrikat købt til en konkurrencedygtig pris. For alle biler er regnet med en levetid på max 35.000 km for et sæt dæk. For supermini- og miniklassen er prisen for 4 dæk ansat til ca. 2.100 kr., svarende til 6,0 øre pr km For mellemklasse 1 og MPV-bilerne er prisen for 4 dæk ansat til ca. 2.800 kr., svarende til 8,0 øre pr km. For mellemklasse 2 og den store klasse er prisen for 4 dæk ansat til ca. 3.700 kr., svarende til 10,6 øre pr km. Der er ikke forudsat skift mellem sommer- og vinterdæk. Færdselsstyrelsen, FDM og Statens bilinspektion har i november 2003 udsendt anbefalinger om brugen af sommer- og vinterdæk. Disse anbefalingerne er som følger: Sommerdæk kan anvendes vinteren igennem hvis: Bilen har dæk med almindelig bredde (f.eks. 185/65 R14 eller smallere) Bilen har forhjulstræk Man kan leve med, at man må lade bilen stå, hvis der en dag kommer meget sne Vinterdæk sikrer fremkommeligheden hvis: Bilen har særligt brede dæk (f.eks. 205/55 R16 eller bredere)

Bilen har baghjulstræk Bilen skal bruges hver eneste dag hele vinteren Ud fra disse retningslinier er det i mange tilfælde tilstrækkeligt og sikkerhedsmæssigt forsvarligt at anvende sommerdæk hele året. Omvendt bør du under visse forudsætninger om bilvalg og kørselsmønster overveje at skifte til vinterdæk i den kolde periode. Er du på udkig efter en større bil, bør du være opmærksom på dækbredden, der meget vel kan være 205 mm eller mere. Tilsvarende gælder, hvis du overvejer en bil med særlig kraftig motor. Desuden kan brugte biler såvel større som mindre der udbydes til salg, være monteret med letmetalfælge og dæk, der er bredere end de oprindeligt monterede. Et skift mellem sommerdæk og vinterdæk vil naturligvis forøge de direkte omkostninger, idet den forlængede levetid på sommerdækkene ikke vil kunne opveje omkostningerne til anskaffelse af et sæt ekstra dæk og fælge, samt to årlige skift af dækkene. En indikation af omkostningsforøgelsen vil kunne opgøres ved at tillægge den anførte omkostning til dæk prisen for 4 fælge, der afskrives eksempelvis over 6 år, samt prisen for 2 årlige skift mellem sommer- og vinterdæk + ca. 15-20 % på selve omkostningen til dæk, som kompensation for merprisen ved køb af vinterdæk. Senest opdateret, oktober 2004 Kollektiv trafik (klippekort/periodekort) Denne post dækker udgifter til rejser med kollektiv trafik. Priserne er baseret på de gældende takster i de amtslige trafikselskaber (ultimo januar 2006). Se priser på de enkelte trafikselskabers hjemmeside, f.eks. HUR trafik (HT) på trafikinfo.hur.dk eller Rutebilerne i Århus Amt på www.businfo.dk. Beregningerne af udgiften ved at benytte kollektiv transport er bestemt dels af det samlede antal ture der gennemføres pr. måned, dels af turenes gennemsnitlige længde samt endelig af, i hvilket amt brugeren bor. Alle priser er baseret på brug af klippekort eller periodekort i bopælsamtet. Med udgangspunkt i de enkelte amters takstsystem beregnes de samlede udgifter ved at benytte kollektiv transport. Udgiften beregnes enten som udgiften ved brug af et periodekort eller et klippekort. Anvendelsen af et periodekort forudsætter i beregningseksemplerne typisk, at der udføres bolig- arbejdsstedsrejser i mindst 16 dage per måned. Rejses der mindre end 16 dage per måned eller udføres der alene fritidsture, benyttes i stedet klippekort til rejserne. Ud fra kendskabet til antallet af rejser og amternes priser på henholdsvis periodekort eller klippekort beregner systemet hvilken form for rejsehjemmel, der er mest økonomisk at anvende for den enkelte kunde. Udføres både bolig arbejdsstedsrejser og fritidsrejser, er det forudsat, at kun en vis del af fritidsrejserne kan gennemføres på periodekortet, hvorfor der i beregningerne tillægges en andel rejser udført på klippekort. Det er i dataskemaet vedrørende kollektiv trafik muligt at angive hvor stor en del af fritidsrejserne, som vil være dækket af et periodekort. For at beregne rejseudgiften sammenholdes rejsens længde med den gennemsnitlige længde af de enkelte amters kollektive takstzoner, hvorefter det er muligt at opgøre, hvor mange takstzoner rejsen strækker sig over. Da en rejse som hovedregel ikke gennemløber begyndelses- og sluttakstzonen helt, idet rejsen eksempelvis påbegyndes eller afsluttes midt i en af zonerne, er det i alle situationer valgt at opgøre udgiften som udgiften til at rejse i det kilometerbestemte antal takstzoner tillagt en ekstra zone. Hvis en rejses længde overskrider den maksimalt angivne for det pågældende amtslige kollektive trafikselskab, antages det, at det ikke er muligt at foretage denne rejse udelukkende med dette trafikselskab. For at finde rejsens reelle pris foretages i stedet et opslag i DSB s priser, der dækker afstande over hele landet. Som hovedregel gælder det, at jo længere en kollektiv rejse er, jo mere falder prisen pr. km og pr. zone. Dette forhold afspejles i beregningerne derved, at systemet ud fra kendskab til rejselængden, zonelængden og prisen pr. km bestemt ud fra det antal zoner rejsen gennemløber, kan fastlægge kilometerprisen for den pågældende rejse. Se mere om vanskelighederne ved at beregne prisen for at anvende kollektiv trafik i Danmark under FAQ om Det Interaktive Transportbudget i funktionen "Om transportbudgettet", som du finder i menubaren til venstre. Senest opdateret, juni 2006 Delebil, lejeudgift Lejeafgiften i modellen er ligesom de øvrige delebilspriser beregnet som et vægtet gennemsnit af priserne hos følgende delebiludbydere: Farum Delebil, Hertz Delebilen, Høje Taastrup Delebil, Lyngby Delebil, Munksøgård Delebilsforening, Silkeborg Delebilklub og Århus Delebilklub (maj 2006). a) Timepris: Kr. 17-. b) Døgnpris: Kr. 141,-. c) Ugepris: Kr. 900,-. Senest opdateret, maj 2006 Delebil, km takst Ved brug af en delebil betales der udover tidsforbruget også for antal kørte km. Km taksten i modellen er kr. 2,23 Taksten er ligesom de øvrige delebilspriser beregnet som et vægtet gennemsnit af priserne hos følgende delebiludbydere: Farum Delebil, Hertz Delebilen, Høje Taastrup Delebil, Lyngby Delebil, Munksøgård Delebilsforening, Silkeborg Delebilklub og Århus Delebilklub (maj 2006).

Senest opdateret, maj 2006 Cykel, km takst De variable udgifter til vedligeholdelse, reparationer, lygter mv. er sat til kr. 0,70 pr. km. Prisen er baseret på opgørelser fra Dansk Cyklist Forbund fra 1999 og opdateret til dagens prisniveau med indeks fra forbrugerprisindeksets kategori vedrørende drift af personlige transportmidler. Der er anvendt et vægtet gennemsnit af indeksene for reservedele og tilbehør samt vedligeholdelse og reparation af personlige transportmidler. Senest opdateret, juni 2006 Baggrund, grundlag og medvirkende Det Interaktive Transportbudget er udviklet af Vejdirektoratet. TetraPlan A/S har forestået databearbejdning og konstruktion af modellens beregningsrutiner. Agency.com har stået for modellens web-tilpasning og design. Det Interaktive Transportbudget bygger på data fra mange kilder, herunder Transportvaneundersøgelserne (TU), FDM, DSB, amtslige trafikselskaber, Færdselsstyrelsen på www.fstyr.dk, Danmarks Statistik på www.dst.dk, Forbrugerstyrelsen på www.forbrugerstyrelsen.dk, Forbrugerrådet på www.fbr.dk, Magasinet "Penge og Privatøkonomi" på www.penge.dk samt Niels Brocks Bilakademi. Bilmodellerne er udvalgt med udgangspunkt i salgstal fra bilimportørernes sammenslutning, De Danske Bilimportører, mens modelvarianterne er udpeget på baggrund af oplysninger fra de enkelte bilimportører om salgstal i hver modelserie. www.bilpriser.dk har været anvendt til at anslå aktuelle købs- og salgspriser. Låneberegningen på www.danskebank.dk har været anvendt til at udregne totale lånebeløb. www.mybanker.dk har bidraget med rådgivning om renteforhold i forbindelse med billån. En særlig tak til Lars Meldgaard fra Niels Brocks Bilakademi, C.E. Orbesen og Søren W. Rasmussen fra FDM, Toke Haunstrup Christensen fra DSB, Niels-Anders Nielsen fra Færdselsstyrelsen, Hans Stokholm Kjer fra "Alternative Transportløsninger" samt Ivan Lund Pedersen fra NOAH-trafik, som hver især på forskellig vis undervejs har bidraget til projektet med hjælp og vejledning. Der er gennemført større opdateringer af Det Interaktive Transportbudget i 2001, 2004 og 2006. I 2006 har HUR bidraget økonomisk til en opdatering af modellen, så alle zonetrin indgår ved beregning af udgiften til kollektiv trafik. Tidligere blev denne udgift beregnet mere skønsmæssigt på basis af zonetaksterne for henholdsvis 3, 6 eller alle zoner. I den nye version af modellen opgøres udgiften til kollektiv trafik således mere præcist.

Appendix B - Transport Budget 2 Appendix x Transport budget Danish help text on assumptions from www.transportbudget.dk (accessed 01.06.08) Forudsætninger - resultatskema Transportbehovet beregnes og opgives for enten en enkelt person eller et par med eller uden børn. Børns kørselsbehov i bil medregnes under de voksnes transportbehov, hvorimod børns eventuelle individuelle ture i tog, bus eller på cykel ikke er med. Modellens beregninger for et par afspejler omkostningerne ved at disse to personer med forskellige transportbehov vælger samme transportløsning, f.eks. egen bil på alle ture. Hvis parret kun har en bil antages det, at bilen bruges på forskellige tidspunkter i det omfang der ikke praktiseres samkørsel. Se også forudsætninger for par under "2 personer". Forudsætninger - transportbehov Dit transportbehov opgives i antal ture pr. måned fordelt på forskellige turlængder. Årsagen til at transportbehovet både defineres ud fra antal ture og antal km. er, at det giver de bedste muligheder for at sammenligne udgifterne ved at benytte henholdsvis bil og kollektiv trafik. Turene er inddelt i henholdsvis arbejde og andre ture. Hvis du ændrer oplysningerne, så må du selv vurdere i hvilken kategori, du placerer indkøb og andre lign. turformål. Antallet af ture på de forskellige længder omsættes til et antal takstzoner afhængig af, hvor i landet du bor. Der er indsamlet takster for kørsel med indenamtslige busser. Disse takster gælder ligeledes for togrejser indenfor et amt, samt for bus og tog i HT området. Rejselængden i kilometer omsættes efterfølgende til et antal zoner og prisen bestemmes. (Se endvidere hjælpeteksten til resultatskemaerne) En fuldstændig korrekt gengivelse af prisen for specifik rejse vil kræve, at det nøjagtige antal zoner optælles samt at man definerer om man benytter et 10-turs klippekort eller et periodekort. Hvorvidt den ene form for rejsehjemmel er økonomisk mere optimal end den anden vil afhænge af rejsefrekvensen og det interaktive transportbudget beregner derfor en pris for arbejdsture både baseret på klippekort og på periodekort, hvorefter den billigste løsning vælges. Hvis det interaktive transportbudget angiver, at periodekort er billigst, vil en del af fritidsturene være dækket af kortet og derfor i princippet være gratis. Det interaktive transportbudget er konstrueret således, at den som udgangspunkt regner alle fritidsture under 5 km som dækket af periodekortet. Men du kan også selv vurdere, hvor stor en del af dine fritidsture, der er dækket af dit periodekort og så bede det interaktive transportbudget tage højde for det. Det sker ved at vælge funktionen se/ret data om kollektiv trafik. Forudsætninger - biludgifter Den månedlige bruttoydelse på lånet lagt sammen med de øvrige faste udgifter samt dit benzinforbrug og andre variable udgifter er alt i alt det beløb, som du skal have op af lommen hver måned. Dette beløb svarer imidlertid ikke til de reelle omkostninger ved at eje en bil. Ikke hele bruttoydelsen er en udgift - i finansiel henseende. Afdragene på lånet opbygger en friværdi i bilen. Der spares altså penge op i bilen, sålænge der betales af på lånet. Til gengæld må der tages højde for, at bilens værdi løbende forringes. Dette værditab er penge, man aldrig ser igen. Den reelle (finansielle) udgift er altså værditabet + renterne + de øvrige faste og variable udgifter. Se også hjælpeteksten om biltyper. Forudsætninger - kollektiv trafik Udgiften til arbejdsture er baseret på oplysninger om antallet af arbejdsdage og afstanden mellem bopæl og arbejde. Ud fra oplysninger om gennemsnitlige zoneafstande og zonetakster i de enkelte amter beregnes en pris enten på et periodekort eller på billetter/klippekort. Modellen vælger den billigste løsning på baggrund af antallet af ture pr. måned. I de situationer, hvor modellen beregner, at et periodekort vil være den billigste løsning, skal der gøres nogle antagelser om, hvor mange fritidsture, som vil være "gratis", fordi man kan bruge sit periodekort. Som udgangspunkt er det antaget, at alle fritidsture med kollektiv trafik under 5 km vil være dækket af periodekortet, uanset hvor mange zoner kortet dækker. I nederste tabel har du mulighed for at angive, hvor stor en del af dine fritidsture, du mener, vil være dækket af et periodekort. Udgiften til øvrige ture beregnes som arbejdsturene med udgangspunkt i forudsætninger om gennemsnitlige zoneafstande. Udgiften til både arbejdsture som fritidsture er således baseret på skøn og rammer måske ikke præcist den udgift, som du vil have ved anvendelse af kollektiv trafik. Se også forudsætninger under "Transportbehov". Af praktiske årsager blev der ikke taget højde for mulighed for at benytte parker-og-rejs ved den oprindelige konstruktion af modellen. Men se www.parkerogrejs.dk Forudsætninger - delebiler/andelsbiler

Anvendelsen af en delebil/andelsbil er kendetegnet ved, at man ikke betaler udgifter til vedligeholdelse, reparation, forsikring, benzin o.s.v. Til gengæld betaler pr. kørt km. og for den tid, man råder over bilen. Selvom du eller din familie ikke i dag er medlem af en delebilklub tager Det Interaktive Transportbudget udgangspunkt i nogle antagelser om din/jeres transportadfærd, hvis du/i havde delebil. Du kan selv rette på de relevante data, så de bedre kommer til at afspejle dit faktiske eller forventede turmønster. For at kunne udregne lejeomkostningerne til delebilen er der gjort antagelser om, hvor længe delebilen bruges i forbindelse med fritidsture indenfor de forskellige afstandskategorier. Følgende simple kriterier er som udgangspunkt lagt til grund for tidsforbruget: Ture <5 km. = 1 times varighed. Ture 5-15 km. = 3 timers varighed. Ture 15-25 km. = 6 timers varighed. Ture 25 km. = døgnpris. Du kan selv justere på turenes varighed, så de bedre kommer til at afspejle dit faktiske eller forventede turmønster. Det sker ved at fordele antallet af ture indenfor de forskellige afstandskategorier på de forskellige tidskategorier. Døgntaksten svarer til 10 gange prisen for 10 timer. Du kan selv justere på fordelingen af disse ture indenfor forskellige tidskategorier. Tallene mellem de to kolloner refererer til antallet af "Andre ture" defineret under dit transportbehov. I den nederste del af tabellen er det muligt at angive, om delebilen anvendes til alle fritidsturene eller kun benyttes til en mindre del af turene. Den andel af fritidsturene, som ikke dækkes af delebilen antages af Det Interaktive Transportbuget at blive foretaget med kollektiv trafik. Det er forudsat, at delebilen ikke anvendes til daglig kørsel til og fra arbejde, da det under alle omstændigheder er en meget dyr transportløsning. Rent faktisk er det meget dyrt at køre i delebil, hvis du bruger delebilen til alle de ture og formål, som er opgivet under transportbehovet. Derfor vil resultatskemaet for valgmuligheden "Bil - kollektiv - delebil" første gang, d.v.s. inden du evt. har været inde og rette baggrundsdata om delebiler, vise udgifter, der ikke afspejler, at din/jeres månedlige transport ved brug af delebil givetvis vil være mindre end en situation, hvor i har egen bil. Se "Er transportmønstret uafhængigt af transportmiddel?" under funktionen "Om transportbudgettet". Modellen tager allerede højde for, at delebilsbrugere ofte anvender kollektiv trafik på de ture, hvor de ellers eller hvor de før brugte bil. Disse tal kan du også justere. Men du har mulighed for at nuancere beregningerne yderligere. Den mest præcise måde at gøre det på er at foretage to seperate beregninger baseret på to opgørelser af transportbehovet og så sammenligne de to resultater. En hurtigere men ikke helt korrekt måde at sammenligne på, kan ske ved at undlade at fordele alle turene i kollonnerne nedenfor og dermed tage højde for, at du/i som delebilist(er) givetvis vil have færre ture i bil, bl.a. fordi du/i i en del tilfælde vælger at gå, cykle eller køre sammen i stedet. Det Interaktive Transportbudget vil herefter lægge tallene opgivet under dit transportbehov til grund for beregningerne af udgifterne ved bilkørsel, mens beregningerne for tidsforbruget i forbindelse med delebil vil benytte de tal, der er defineret nedenfor i kollonnen til højre. Ulempen ved den metode er, at modellen fortsat vil regne med det antal km. for de forskellige turkategorier, som er defineret under transportbehovet. Hvis du under "Se/ret data om databiler" har nedjusteret antal ture under 5 km. fra f.eks. 47 til 25 vil modellen i begge tilfælde regne på 55 km. inden for dén afstandskategori. Det mest korrekte er dog som sagt at foretage 2 seperate beregninger.

Appendix C - Transport Budget 3 Input data for Copenhagen

Appendix D - Transport Budget 4 Transport need in Copenhagen

Appendix E - Transport Budget 5 Car costs in Copenhagen

Appendix F - Transport Budget 6 Public transport in Copenhagen

Appendix G - Transport Budget 7 Car sharing in Copenhagen

Appendix H Transport budget 8 Input data for Jyllinge

Appendix I - Transport Budget 9 Transport need in Jyllinge

Appendix J - Transport Budget 10 Car sosts in Jyllinge

Appendix K - Transport Budget 11 Car sharing in Jyllinge

Appendix L Actor interviews All the interviews were held as open discussions in order to supply background information, about the electric car technology and the possibilities of its implementation into transportation system, for the project. 1. Interview with Per Møller from Dansk Elbilkomité on Thursday 8 th of May in 2008 in Copenhagen 2. Interview with Anders Foosnæs from Dansk Energi on Friday 9 th of May in 2008 in Copenhagen 3. Interview with Bjarke Fonnesbech from Shared Car Association on Friday 9 th of May in 2008 in Copenhagen 4. Interview with Bendt Iversen & Sune Grøntved from Drivegreen on Friday 9 th of May in 2008 in Copenhagen 5. Interview with Anne Vang from Social Democrats, Municipality of Copenhagen, on Friday 9 th of May in 2008 in Copenhagen

Appendix M Abbreviations EV Electric Vehicle BEV Battery Electric Vehicle HEV hybrid electric vehicle PHEV Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicle FCEV Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle ICE Internal Combustion Engine ZEV Zero Emission Vehicle CARB The California Air Resources Board KFB The Swedish Transport & Communication Research Board NOVELTRA Nordic Knowledge Centre for Electric Transport DTU Technical University of Denmark NGO Non-Governmental Organization