Passenger transport in Nigeria: Environmental and economic analysis with policy recommendations

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.12.017

Abstract:

This paper presents the life cycle environmental impacts and economic costs of the passenger transport sector in Nigeria for 2003–2030. Four scenarios are considered: business as usual (BAU); increased use of public transport (buses) at the expense of cars (LOWCAR) and motorcycles (LOWMC), respectively; and high economic growth with increased car ownership and decline of public transport (HICAR). The findings show that for the BAU scenario the life cycle environmental impacts double over the period, despite the assumption of increased fuel and vehicle efficiency of 35% over time. The total fuel costs at the sectoral level increase three times, from US$3.4 billion/yr in 2003 to US$9.7 billion in 2030. Increasing the use of buses would reduce the environmental impacts on average by 15–20% compared to BAU; at the same time, the total fuel costs would be 25–30% lower. If the use of cars grows much faster due to a high economic growth as in HICAR, the environmental impacts and fuel costs would increase by 16% and 26%, respectively. These results demonstrate clearly that future transport policy in Nigeria should promote and incentivise public (bus) transport as a much more environmentally and economically sustainable option than transport by cars and motorcycles.

Highlights

► The life cycle environmental impacts of passenger transport in Nigeria estimated for 2003–2030.
► The tradeoffs between economic costs and environmental impacts discussed.
► Scenarios considered: business as usual; sustainable transport; high economic growth.
► Public transport is more sustainable than transport by cars and motorcycles.
► Ending gas flaring would improve substantially environmental, economic and social impacts.

 

Fig. 3. Global warming potential (GWP) for different scenarios.

 

Fig. 5. Ozone depletion potential (ODP) for different scenarios.

  

Fig. 9. Human toxicity potential (HTP) for different scenarios. [DB—dichlorobenzene].

 

Fig. 10. The effect of gas flaring on the life cycle impacts for the base year 2003.

 

Fig. 11. Fuel costs for different scenarios.

By H. Gujba^a, Y. Mulugetta^b and A. Azapagic^a,  

^a School of Chemical Engineering and Analytical Science, Room C16, The Mill, Sackville Street, The University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1613064363; fax: +44 161 306 9321

^b Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK

Energy Policy via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com

Volume 55, April 2013, Pages 353–361
Keywords: Life cycle assessment; Nigeria; Passenger transport