Sustainability and EU Road Transport Carbon Emissions from Consumption of Diesel and Gasoline in 2000 and 2018†
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This work seems rather a report than a paper. Nonetheless, it can be interesting for publication after correcting the next changes:
- Please update with current discussing policies, available in drafts, that are very important for the understanding of the future paths.
- Please divide Introduction in: 1.1 Background; 1.2 Goal and scope.
- Please include a discussion section in which authors develop a further opinion.
- Please check English grammar, there are many mistakes.
Best of luck.
Author Response
Dear sir/madam,
Thank you for reviewing the paper and providing valuable feedback. I am very grateful for your time and suggestions. I am using your feedback to make improvements and resubmit with revisions for a 15 Aug 21 deadline.
I will send the manuscript for a proofread to improve its quality.
Revision will be along the following lines
- Introduction: To be restructured into subsections 1.1 Background; 1.2 Goal and scope. To substantiate background and scope I will add IPCC WG1 technical summary on carbon budget.
- Section 2 Literature review: To be restructured into two sections, 2.1 is the paper review and 2.2 is the policy review. I will add a discussion on current policy, for future paths to prepare background for a new discussion section, which is provided in section 7. For example, I will add scenarios from: electrification path, Commission’s sustainability mobility strategy, Fit for 55 position paper and emission trading in transport. Also pointing out role of carbon price/ social cost of carbon approach.
- New Section 7: This new discussion outlines main points of future path along the following lines
- Can there be the minimum, optimum and maximum energy input into road transport for 1.5 C and 2 C in EU
- Can there be a targeted policy for specific member states, for example Poland and Netherlands as two cases on opposite sides of spectrum. Pointing out role of Carbon Price and social cost of carbon approach.
Lastly I will revise and update the conclusions and the revised manuscript will contained few new references
I hope the improvement is satisfactory and adequate.
Yours faithfully
Arshad Bhat
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper has as purpose to estimate the premises for achieving the climate change targets regarding policies and sustainability for the road transport sector from the perspective of carbon emissions and energy consumption based on the fact that the use of diesel and gasoline EU is adding carbon. The selected methodology and methods employed are substantiated on the recommendations of the Panel on Climate Change while the conclusions draw attention to the risks of persisting in the current pattern of carbon emissions.
The literature references substantiating this approach about GHG emissions associated with the transport sector inside and outside the EU are rich and emphasize the goals set by the authors in the present paper. Moreover, all mentioned specialized references provide support for the argument of the authors regarding the necessity of the sustainability analysis for gasoline and diesel consumption in the EU transport sector.
The methodological approach is interesting in that it is a reflection of the Integrated Pollution Prevention Control guidelines and methodology which is widely used to estimate GHG emissions from consumption of diesel and motor gasoline by cars, light trucks, heavy duty vehicles, busses and motorcycles. The method employed was validated by other studies as well, and delivers solid arguments for the necessary policy interventions of diminishing these types of consumption.
The results are explicitly and minutely explained by showing that relatively all member-states of the EU have consistent patterns of GHG emissions, and highlights the countries where these emissions of gasoline are highest and lowest. The paper also succeeds in showcasing that between 2000 and 2018 transport carbon emissions increased regarding EU road transport and, moreover, that the energy consumption is not necessarily linked to the size of the economy in the respective countries.
In the critical analysis of the results by including the sustainability approach, the authors highlight that achieving the targets of sustainability and carbon emissions’ reduction is a major economic, societal, political challenge and link the increases of diesel consumption to the nature of the fuel market and the fuel taxation system within the EU. The findings show the intricate links between the behavior of the customers, and how the fuel duty policy in the EU encouraged some unwanted effects in pursuing long-term goals. One of the conclusions is that fuel excise policy is skewed, but warns that the estimates contained by the results do not take into account the number of diesel and gasoline cars in each EU member state, number of miles travelled, or specific economic drivers that lead to emission of greenhouse gases. The authors warn that the final outcome of this skewed policy implies that the EU will fall short of the challenge and targets set based on the Global Carbon Budget and on the Paris Agreement goals. The authors succeed by the selected method and insights to underpin the current conundrum faced by the EU policy makers, and highlight properly also the EU market dimensions in road transport and sustainability, by showing that changes in the patterns of motorization do not imply also improvements in carbon emissions and that, sometimes, the opposite result is obtained.
In discussing the sustainability scenarios, the authors show that more targeted policies are required for combating climate change, by decarbonizing transport and suggest some of the possible solutions, including fiscal incentives for pushing decarbonization of downstream emissions as main pillar of sustainability, and showing that in the long-term, EU could abolish the use of diesel and gasoline ICEs by providing renewable energy powered electric vehicle infrastructure.
The conclusions focus more on the fiscal incomes from the automotive industry and how the fuel excise duty on fuels had a potential role in reducing gasoline consumption, while road carbon emissions have increased, indicating the need for harmonizing the fuel excise duty across the member-states.
The paper is a valuable contribution, and is relevant with respect to the stated goal, as the chosen method of analysis clearly delivers on identifying the relevant issues as regards transports and GHG emissions and the links with the way the fuel taxation, and excise duties operate at EU level and at the level of the member states. Overall, the paper is well-written and provides new insights related to sustainability and reducing the consumption of fuels increasing GHG emissions. The paper is recommended for publishing with (minor) revisions as regards language and clarity of some sentences.
Author Response
Dear sir/madam,
Thank you for reviewing the paper and providing valuable feedback. I am very grateful for your time and suggestions. I am using your feedback to make improvements and resubmit with revisions for a 15 Aug 21 deadline.
I will send the manuscript for a proofread to improve its quality.
Revision will be along the following lines
- Introduction: To be restructured into subsections 1.1 Background; 1.2 Goal and scope. To substantiate background and scope I will add IPCC WG1 technical summary on carbon budget.
- Section 2 Literature review: To be restructured into two sections, 2.1 is the paper review and 2.2 is the policy review. I will add a discussion on current policy, for future paths to prepare background for a new discussion section, which is provided in section 7. For example, I will add scenarios from: electrification path, Commission’s sustainability mobility strategy, Fit for 55 position paper and emission trading in transport. Also pointing out role of carbon price/ social cost of carbon approach.
- New Section 7: This new discussion outlines main points of future path along the following lines
- Can there be the minimum, optimum and maximum energy input into road transport for 1.5 C and 2 C in EU
- Can there be a targeted policy for specific member states, for example Poland and Netherlands as two cases on opposite sides of spectrum. Pointing out role of Carbon Price and social cost of carbon approach.
Lastly I will revise and update the conclusions and the revised manuscript will contained few new references
I hope the improvement is satisfactory and adequate.
Yours faithfully
Arshad Bhat
