Policy makers use incentive-based vehicle scrappage or cash-for-clunker programs to pursue a range of social and economic goals such as decreasing vehicular emissions, preventing vehicle abandonment, lowering consumer spending on gasoline, and stimulating new vehicle sales. However, there are no programs aimed solely at greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction. This study discusses design considerations for such a program. Past and present programs are evaluated to show how regulatory elements in vehicle scrappage programs can be adjusted to maximize GHG savings. It is shown how fuel economy–based eligibility requirements are preferable to age-based requirements and how financial incentives can be properly aligned to balance program cost and participation rate. Finally, a program framework is presented; at a minimum, it ensures that a cash-for-clunker program offsets GHG emissions attributable to vehicle manufacturing and end-of-life disposal with use-phase emission reductions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks:1990–2007. Publication EPA 430-R-09-004. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2009.
2.
Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2007. Publication DOE/EIA-0573-2007. Office of Integrated Analysis and Forecasting, Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy, 2008.
DillJ.Design and Administration of Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Programs in North America and Abroad. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1750, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 32–39.
European Conference of Ministers of Transport.Cleaner Cars: Fleet Renewal and Scrappage Schemes.Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Publications Service, Paris, 1999.
7.
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.Review and Analysis of the Total Clean Cars Program.Colorado Air Quality Control Commission, 1994, pp. 11–15.
8.
Pilot Project for Vehicle Scrapping in Illinois.Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, Springfield, 1993, pp. 1–6.
9.
Requirements and Procedures for Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program. 49 CFR Part 599 [Docket No. NHTSA-2009-0120.] NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2009.
10.
DavisS. C., DiegelS. W., and BoundyR. G.Transportation Energy Data Book, 27th ed.Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn.http://cta.ornl.gov/data/index.shtml. Accessed June 30, 2009.
11.
GlazerA., KleinD. B., and LaveC.Clean on Paper, Dirty on the Road: Troubles with California's Smog Check. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, Vol. 29, 1995, pp. 85–92.
12.
KavalekC., and SetiawanW.An Analysis of Per Mile Pollution Fees for Motor Vehicles in California's South Coast. Transport Policy, Vol. 4, 1997, pp. 267–273.
13.
GuentherP. L., BishopG. A., PetersonJ. E., and StedmanD. H.Emissions from 200,000 Vehicles: A Remote Sensing Study. The Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 146/147, 1994, pp. 297–302.
14.
DixonL. S., and GarberS.Fighting Air Pollution in Southern California by Scrapping Old Vehicles. Publication MR-1256-ICJ/PPIC. Rand Institute, Santa Monica, Calif., 2001.
15.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from a Typical Passenger Vehicle. Publication EPA420-F-05-004. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005.
16.
WangM. Q.GREET 1.5: Transportation Fuel Cycle Model—Volume 2: Appendices of Data and Results. Publication ANL/ESD-39, Vol. 2. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Ill., 1999.
17.
FarrellA. E., PlevinR. J., TurnerB. T., JonesA. D., O'HareM., and KammenD. M.Ethanol Can Contribute to Energy and Environmental Goals. Science, Vol. 311, 2006, pp. 506–508.
18.
HsuS.-L., and SperlingD.Uncertain Air Quality Impacts of Automobile Retirement Programs. In Transportation Research Record 1444, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994, pp. 90–98.
19.
AlberiniA., EdlesteinD., and McConnellV. D.Will Speeding the Retirement of Old Cars Improve Air Quality?Resources, No. 115, 1994, pp. 7–15.
20.
DillJ.Estimating Emissions Reductions from Accelerated Vehicle Retirement Programs. Transportation Research, Vol. 9D, 2004, pp. 87–106.
21.
WangM. Q., SantiniD. J., and WarinnerS. A.Methods of Valuing Air Pollution and Estimated Monetary Values of Air Pollutants in Various U.S. Regions. Publication ANL/ESD-26. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Ill., 1994.
22.
Vehicle Survivability and Travel Mileage Schedules. Publication DOT-HS-809-952. NHTSA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2006.
KimH. C., RossM. H., and KeoleianG. A.Optimal Fleet Conversion Policy from a Life Cycle Perspective. Transportation Research, Vol. 9D, 2004, pp. 229–249.
25.
SullivanJ. L., WilliamsR. S., YesterS., Cobas-FloresE., ChubbsS. T., HentgesS. G., and PomperS. D.Life Cycle Inventory of a Generic U.S. Family Sedan: Overview of Results of USCAR AMP Project. Publication 982160. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, Pa., 1999.
26.
SpitzleyD. V., GrandeD. E., KeoleianG. A., and KimH. C.Life Cycle Optimization of Ownership Costs and Emissions Reduction in U.S. Vehicle Retirement Decisions. Transportation Research, Vol. 10D, 2005, pp. 161–175.
27.
WeeB. V., MollH. C., and DirksJ.Environmental Impact of Scrapping Old Cars. Transportation Research, Vol. 5D, 2000, pp. 137–143.
JohanssonH.Reduced Emissions From Road Traffic but Major Challenges Ahead.Swedish Road Administration, Borlange, 2009.
33.
LarrickR. P., and SollJ.The MPG Illusion. Science, Vol. 320, 2008, pp. 1593–1594.
34.
InnesR.Regulating Automobile Pollution Under Certainty, Competition, and Imperfect Information. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 31, 1996, pp. 219–239.
